-
They would have still started out 0-3 regardless. The Seahawks, Rams, and Titans were all better than the Colts when we played them. This was before the Seahawks were decimated with injuries. -
wow critiquing the guy for this even though he never throws any interceptions??? Wow.
Lol.
Seriously though it's wild how many colts fans on twitter just absolutely slurp up this franchise. Still plenty of people saying just wait til Wentz proves everyone wrong next year.Leave a comment:
-
-
They would not have started 0-3 if the team was better vaccinated. The end of season with the way omicron is affecting everyone maybe it wouldn't have mattered, but they would probably have picked up a win or two in those first three games if the entire offensive line not been out for basiclaly all of preseason practice due to covid.Leave a comment:
-
-
Last week was the TY overthrow... this week Wentz adjusted for that and threw it in front of him and into the ground...
Leave a comment:
-
I thought they would have played the Bengals ?? Either way - they didn't deserve a shot in the playoffs. Kind of glad it's all over - now we'll see if anything changes.
Or is Indy sports the RUN IT BACK city ??Leave a comment:
-
So would we have played Kansas City like Pittsburgh is if we had been able to sneak in? Lol that would have been a massacre. I’m really glad that we were spared from watching that atrocity.Leave a comment:
-
Here's something else to chew on vis a vis Wentz. One of the critiques leveled at the roster is the lack of a true #1 or #2 WR. But how good would Pittman be right now if you had a good QB? And TY, while injury prone and beyond his prime, looked ready, willing, and able to contribute substantially the last few games. Recall again the overthrow of him in the Raiders game. That is 100% a Wentz misfire and emblematic of our plight with him as starter.
Ballard of course deserves to be under the microscope in all this. But the # 1 indicator of his responsibility is agreeing to take on Wentz. And a significant 2nd is the Fischer acquisition. Those say to me two attempts to build a contender on the cheap. Except that Wentz's performance relative to what we gave up ends up being way more expensive than it should ever have been.
That said, if there's one legit argument in Wentz's defense, it's that he sometimes got too leaky protection from the OL. So that doubles down on Ballard's decision making/moves. Poor QB and questionable protection. The pressure tended to come most frequently from the left side.Leave a comment:
-
I am going to say my truth and leave it at that. I think they get into the playoffs if the team was vaccinated like the owner wanted from the start. They all have their reasons I am sure and maybe one of them has a legit reason but they brought it on themselves.
Lastly I think Chris Ballard has to rethink this drafting and signing injuried players thing. We will have so many holes to fill and many of the holes on the defense or offense were risky FA signings or draftees.
Leave a comment:
-
Don't disagree that the D didn't contribute to the implosion last two. However, again while there can still be important tweaks to improve it, I don't buy that it can't play better. There are playoff temas that have imperfect/inconsistent defenses just like there are playoff teams that have imperfect/inconsistent skill position groups.
Additionally, there's a lot of talent and money invested on this D. For it to play that way also signals coaching - both HC and coordinator. While they did surrender opening TDs in both games, that's in part coming out flat two weeks in a row. And, in the Raiders game at home they turned around and produced two TOs (at least one of which was in plus field position) and the offense didn't take advantage. Realistically, in today's game, you can't expect your D to consistently hold people to 20 point or less. But that's what it would take to win consistently with this passing game.
I mean let's not forgot the overthrow of a wide open TD to TY in the Raider game. Certainly this is far from a perfect team. Yes it needs targeted improvements well beyond the QB position (what team doesnt?). But Wentz at QB means you can't count on pass game. Thus every other area of your team requires both perfect game script and perfect play to win consistently.
To win with Wentz, you have to overcome Wentz. It's an exercise in futility. Hell, maybe Reich deserves coach of the year after all for just guiding a Wentz-led team to (essentially) a .500 season and playoff contention. Except - and I repeat for emphasis - Wentz IS HIS GUY. Upgrade the other key areas, but FFS upgrade QB too or it will all be for naught.
Last edited by D-BONE; 01-10-2022, 09:01 AM.Leave a comment:
-
Don’t forget the defense. After all the hype, they allowed both LV and Jax to immediately set the tone. Any defense that allows Trevor Lawrence to look like Tom Brady when the season is on the line are complete pretenders.
Wentz being so abysmal overshadowed just how short the defense came up these last couple games.
I don’t think Reich and Wentz can recover from this in Indy. There are certain losses/meltdowns that haunt players/coaches forever. Atlanta blowing that Super Bowl completely ruined that team for the last 5 years. I think that this meltdown will haunt Reich and Wentz as long as they are in Indy.Leave a comment:
-
It may be true Reich and Wentz will both be back. And not having continuity at QB has been a legit misfortune Reich has suffered. That said, if both are back, be prepared for more underachievement. When I watch teams like the Raiders and Chargers, I don't see major differences in quality compared to us other than at QB.
7 Pro Bowlers. I repeat: 7 Pro Bowlers and could not make the playoffs needing a win against two mediocre to poor teams (following wins over AZ, NE, Buffalo, and "come from ahead" losses against TN, TB, etc.)
Sure, the Colts could use some niche improvements on the roster, but the essential difference between us and the vast majority of other playoff teams is two blatantly obvious things.
1-Wentz is neither a starting caliber nor a playoff caliber QB. We got jobbed on that trade. There's no way he's worth a first in any universe. If you were going to trade for a QB and give up a 1st plus for the likes of Wentz, you should have just ponied up the draft capital to go after Stafford or the like. You get what you pay for. And we still got taken. Pure and simple.
2-Reich did not have the team ready to play in two consecutive games even with the playoffs on the line. He's the offensive guy and that side of the ball was atrocious both times. Overall the team came out flat and played uninspired football twice. How do you justify that with two win and in games? And how do you totally let the momentum from the 4-1 stretch immediately before totally evaporate? That's pitiful coaching. (And, surprise, a major factor was the team losing faith having to watch Wentz make mistake after mistake - and Wentz IS Reich's guy).
Guess I'll start preparing for another mind numbing disappointment next season.
Last edited by D-BONE; 01-10-2022, 07:40 AM.Leave a comment:
-
- If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
- 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:
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6And I would put the pasted article in quotes like this.
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.
all rights reserved Nije Dei Ltd
Powered by vBulletin® Version 6.0.7
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin. All rights reserved.
All times are GMT-5. This page was generated at 06:37 AM.
Leave a comment: