Tweet
Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis
View Post
Prove me wrong #7.
The Rules of Pacers Digest
Hello everyone,
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"
"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?"
In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*""Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?
"In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less
-
And this is a contract year for him. If he's EVER going to take that next step - this would certainly be the time to do it. But something tells me he's simply a good backup to have on the roster.
Prove me wrong #7. -
Dan Dakich (a huge blowhard, admittedly), was on the Dan Patrick show this morning. He said that the narrative about Luck taking a beating all of these years has to be tempered by the fact (he claims, anyway) that Luck's shoulder injury, that injury caused him to miss a season and was a big part of this 4 year cycle of pain and rehab, was caused by a snowboarding accident. Dan said this was common knowledge in Indy. First I have ever heard of it. If true, does that change anything?
I respect Luck and don't begrudge anybody the right to step away, millions in your pocket, with your wits about you and the possibility of decent health in the rest of your life. That goes for 29-year-old Gronk retiring or 29-year-old Luck. And the timing was likely delayed by the Colts, not by Luck, trying to convince him to stay and trying to sell season tickets.
I also think that Jacoby Brissett has more than enough ability, class, character, and worth ethic to be a solid starter. Pro bowler? No. scrub? No. Smart competitor who accepts coaching? Yes. Would I rather have him than a healthy Luck? No. Would I rather have him than Dak Prescott? I say YES. Similar attributes, IMO.
I am biased, since Jacoby grew up in my neighborhood and I have known him since he was a 9 year old Cub Scout, but I am pulling for him to succeed. like crazy. And that's coming from a Patriots fan.The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).Comment
-
Of course the Colts were going to try to convince their 29 year old QB to not retire. Who wouldn’t? But at the end of the day, Luck could have announced this at any time on his own, so he was complicit in the timing.Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
JMV had an awesome show yesterday that I’ve listed to in bits and pieces. The podcast is on 1070’s page. He’s very objective. Acknowledges that it’s Luck’s decision and that none of us know how he feels, but also said that we can’t ignore the horrible timing and shocking nature of the decision which has let down a lot of people (teammates, coaches, the franchise, advertisers, fans, etc).
Kevin Bowen (Colts reporter) was on one of the segments. Said it’s just jaw dropping how Luck got taped up on Aug 17 and threw balls (after doing some leg drills - this video is on the the PatsFootballTalk article from August 17), then at the start of the week he’s all of the sudden in retirement mode. Bowen said he knew something was up when Luck was back to not doing anything on Tuesday after throwing on Saturday at the stadium. He just questioned why in the world he’d be getting taped up and throwing in front of thousands of people when he’s already made the mental decision that he’s going to retire because of the physical toll of the sport. I agree - so bizarre.
It wasn’t really a good look for Luck to talk about the enjoyment of throwing balls a week ago at Lucas Oil one more time - as if it was a child’s game of catch - in the same press conference where he is retiring because of the physical drain.
I get that throwing the ball around the field isn’t the same as playing a 16 week season, but this was caught on video and Luck’s legs looked pretty fluid. It just leads to a giant “WTF?” reaction from fans.
(The Peter King article this morning which PatsFootballTalk linked to said Luck told Irsay/Reich/Ballard on Monday)
I’m already tired of the holier-than-thou national media who have gone with the narrative of “it’s his life, don’t question any of it and shut up”. Golic and Wingo were incredibly obnoxious this morning. Also, The overreaction to the booing has jumped the shark. For starters, it was at most a couple thousand people (I think less than that even) near the tunnel. It’s getting painted out to be the entire stadium of 65,000 people pelting Luck with trash as he left the field. Furthermore, this was a totally shocking and unprecedented way for a retirement news to break....and fans were frustrated at all the BS they’ve been fed. Florio’s column on this was spot on.Last edited by Sollozzo; 08-26-2019, 04:29 PM.Comment
-
I don't think it ever was officially revealed, but it's definitely at least been rumored that the shoulder injury either was initially from snowboarding or he suffered a setback with it from snowboarding that then led to the surgery when surgery wasn't initially on the table.Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View PostNuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.
------
"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."
-John WoodenComment
-
I don't think it's wrong for fans to be upset. I do think the timing really sucked, because the fans didn't have time to process and they let out their frustrations on the one person they could see while he was walking off. This is a jarring situation. I'd like to believe given a chance to sit on it that they'd not boo, because it's a poor look. And I do think it's only a few fans that have done that.
Luck is entitled to do what he feels is best. To suggest he was going to retire in March is silly because I don't think he was close to planning that. But once this leg injury persisted, I think it came back to did he want to go through the rehab he suffered through in 2017, and the answer turned out to be a definite no. I don't think he wanted to retire and I think he loves football. But Luck is wired differently than other football players - he doesn't need it like the rest. He's a smart man who has the skills to be successful outside of football. Why suffer longterm damage?Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.Comment
-
Luck actually made a passing comment about it once in effect saying he was not going to do that again. The other part of this weird situation is the taping up and showing everyoneOriginally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
he could still function pretty well. That is really strange. What was the purpose? It sure fooled all the fans and most everyone else.
Bottom line he is not mentally into football and so time to step away.
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
The problem is that the Colts and Luck communicate next to nothing to the fans about this situation for months (coming on the heels of poor communication in prior years)......then WHAMO, it breaks during the middle of the game.
From the fans' perspective, they saw Luck have the best season of his career last year with a complete team. He played every game and we had a great line with a strong head coach/GM combo. Then he plays the pro bowl after the season. All seems well until we hear about the calf issue. Of course we really don't know a single thing about it (when did it happen, what's the latest prognosis, etc), so fans' minds start to wonder. It lingered all off-season and into training camp and pretty much all we ever got from the team and Luck was a bunch of gibberish. I get that there are medical privacy issues, but most players/teams are more forthright in releasing details of an injury, treatments, and timetables. How did the injury happen? What have the doctors been saying? When was the last time a doctor looked at it? What is the prognosis? Could he suit up if he really wanted to? No one knows any of this, so people start jumping to conclusions. Human nature.
Then just a week after getting taped up and throwing some balls around on film (with his legs moving fluidly), he retires. And he talks about how he knew at the time that it was probably his last time throwing at LOS. So he gets captured looking physically fine on video and talks about how enjoyable that was, as if it was a friendly came of backyard catch....then proceeds to talk about how he's retiring for physical reasons. WTF? But we still really don't have any specifics at all as to what happened. Not that we are necessarily owed any, because as you say, it is his decision. But it's just human nature for people's minds to wander.
This isn't just any quarterback either. We freaking cut Peyton Manning for this guy. This highly disappointing ending after just 7 years is what we cut Peyton Manning for? This is what we get for cutting Manning so that he could appear in a couple of Super Bowls and win an MVP elsewhere? Cutting Manning now goes down as one of the worst NFL decisions of all time and I'm sure no one is more aware of that than Irsay. So not only are we losing a franchise QB, but we're losing the QB who we cut one of the top 3 all time QB's for. Haunting.
I'm also sick and tired of the national media acting like the Colts are some garabge NFL franchise who ruined Luck. Yes, Luck came here to a weak roster. Yes, Grigson was terrible. But all of that was finally fixed. He played every game last year behind a solid offensive line. Even though the Colts got a lot of positive press last year for their improved roster, now its fun to go with the narrative that Luck was leaving a franchise that is just total trash and did nothing to surround him with anything. And while the line was awful early on, let's not act like Luck doesn't deserve some blame for not learning early on how to make quick releases or throw the ball away.
Luck is the main reason Luck retired. Wish obnoxious talking heads would stop acting like all would be fine if he played anywhere but Indy.
I had PTI on for a few seconds earlier and Kornheiser was going on some pious holier-than-thou rant about how he won't consider Indy if he was an NFL FA because of the booing. What a load of absolute crap. As I said, this was a couple thousand MAX (and maybe more in the hundreds if you really listen to it), and these were fans who had just received retirement news in the most shocking setting ever, AFTER being fed a load of crap by the team and Luck for months about all of this. It was a human reaction by hundreds of people that's being treated as if 65,000 fans were throwing beer and popcorn at Luck like Detroit fans did to the Pacers' players when they were leaving the floor after the brawl.
I do feel bad for Reich and Ballard. I think they've had to be on pins and needles with what they've been able to say to the media because of what Luck's camp wanted out there.Last edited by Sollozzo; 08-26-2019, 06:18 PM.Comment
-
Given your support/defense of Luck throughout - something I never disagree with, although nor was I 100% convinced of either - this is a really heartfelt post. It honestly sums up my ambivalence about the Luck situation/announcement quite nicely. I think highly of him as a person an a player. I recognize and respect that he has a unique outlook compared to the average football player. But I can't help but wonder what could've been and why he wouldn't want to ride it out for a chance at a level of success he has never achieved as a professional player and we have never achieved as a franchise outside 2006.Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View PostI'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.
-Emiliano ZapataComment
-
Honestly, it's really too bad Luck got booed. Clearly, you don't want that for him despite the disappointment and the far from ideal timing of the leak that he was set to retire. But anyone anywhere who's trying to spin this as the classless Indy fans or organization are full of ****. Luck made a decision that was the right thing for him, but also would massively disappoint and shock an entire fan base. If he and/or the media can't accept it would engender some (limited) negative emotions/feedback, then they need a reality check. I wouldn't have booed him personally, but it is what it is. He's a big boy. It's not fair, but you have to hope a grown man knows life isn't always fair.
EDIT: And I have great respect for Luck the person. He was composed, professional, intelligent. I was proud to have him as a person represent the team and the city. Ideally, he doesn't deserve the booing. But it's far from unheard of in these sports situation. Burning LeBron jerseys in Cleveland comes to mind.Last edited by D-BONE; 08-26-2019, 06:43 PM.I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.
-Emiliano ZapataComment
-
Hmmm... I get the feeling I'm like Sollozzo with this... It's actually making me angrier/frustrated... I can't really think of the proper word... as this settles in.
I was so skeptical of the way this injury was being handled/reported officially that I felt SOMETHING was amiss, but I was expecting 50/50 he suits up and plays game 1 rusty but looking OK otherwise, or ultimately misses games and has a surgery he could've/should've had weeks/months ago that would've allowed him to play game 1 if he would've.
Not retirement. Though ultimately, even that would've eventually been more understandable if he would've missed the opener and subsequent games setting up a better idea that all was not progressing normally with this "injury".
But I'm also left wondering if there really is an injury. At least one of any note... and whether this as all been a smokescreen for mulling retirement all along.Last edited by Bball; 08-26-2019, 09:40 PM.Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.
------
"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."
-John WoodenComment
-
-
Washington, DC sports fans would love to have a chat.Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View PostComment
-
Cowherd said it best today: He said the media needed to give the fans a break and made the point that people name their pets after players, they wear jerseys of other grown men.....so of course booing like Saturday night is what you’re going to get after you pump 3 beers into people.
Comment
-
Not going to watch any sports debate shows talking about Luck's retirement. Still sad af. That super bowl was coming!
If Luck were to come back, will he be a FA?Comment
-
Why the hell was Luck doing drills before the Cleveland game if he had decided to retire? This whole situation was weird. I am glad the drama is over. Go fart around in Amsterdam, Luck.Comment
Comment