Announcement

Collapse

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.
See more
See less

Colts 2021 Season thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by BornIndy View Post
    Please don't choke Colts
    Like a $5 hooker. . . . . .

    Comment


    • Originally posted by PaulGeorgeForPresident View Post
      Colts won't win a SB with Reich and Wentz. Time to move on from both.

      And for the love of god, replace the defensive coordinator that doesn't always run a prevent zone scheme.
      Probably not but Wentz hasn't played a full season I wouldn't get rid of a QB so easily he's capable but I think Taylor needs to be the focal point of the offense.

      I don't get why the Colts don't use a run first approach they need to let the QB or bust approach go it has only resulted in 1 SB.

      You will extend the life of your QB too if so.

      Reich? I'd be open to getting rid of him at this point.

      Comment


      • The Colts could use a healthy TY Hilton. But that doesn't exist. Especially a healthy and durable TY Hilton.
        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 Wooden

        Comment


        • The second INT was just moronic. Throw into triple coverage? Pure bumbassery. I'll give a pass on the 1st one b/c it was dumbassery on the part of Reich on the play call. Not to mention the vaunted o-line's pass protection 2nd half was garbage.

          Agree that the run/pass ratio was way too out of whack and Taylor needs more touches. But the ultimate dumbassery was the going for it on 4th and 3 after we'd opened the 14-3 lead.

          D had turned them over, we had great momentum, crowd was on fire. Pin them deep and give the D another shot at them while up 14. That momentum shift was the most significant in the game.

          Listening to post-game on drive home sounded like one dumbass protecting another (Reich for Wentz). Overall, team played really hard and competed. Overcame some tough plays, calls, injuries. The leaders (Reich/Wentz) have to be better for them.
          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

          -Emiliano Zapata

          Comment


          • This is a league where a few plays here and there really make all the difference in the world. We could absolutely be 5-3, but we blew the games against Baltimore and Tennessee. So we are 3-5 and things look bleak because there are still several tough games to finish the season. The bottom line is that we just haven’t been able to beat good teams this year even when the opportunities were right there. You are what your record says you are. Good teams don’t lose games at home like this.

            We will probably climb to 5-5 after the games against the Jets and Jaguars, then get dealt a dose of reality with Buffalo and Tampa right after that.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
              This is a league where a few plays here and there really make all the difference in the world. We could absolutely be 5-3, but we blew the games against Baltimore and Tennessee. So we are 3-5 and things look bleak because there are still several tough games to finish the season. The bottom line is that we just haven’t been able to beat good teams this year even when the opportunities were right there. You are what your record says you are. Good teams don’t lose games at home like this.

              We will probably climb to 5-5 after the games against the Jets and Jaguars, then get dealt a dose of reality with Buffalo and Tampa right after that.
              A few plays can make a huge difference, and there are so few games that each game can almost be a must win game. You can't count on other teams helping you out.

              But yes, the record is what the record is. Even if the Colts are the best 3-5 team in the NFL, it's still a losing record. And no signature wins either. That and a dollar will get you a Coke at McDonalds.
              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 Wooden

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Bball View Post

                A few plays can make a huge difference, and there are so few games that each game can almost be a must win game. You can't count on other teams helping you out.

                But yes, the record is what the record is. Even if the Colts are the best 3-5 team in the NFL, it's still a losing record. And no signature wins either. That and a dollar will get you a Coke at McDonalds.
                I’ve really wanted to believe that this year can be salvaged, but they come up short every time they have a chance to really get a signature win. Like I said, I fully expect them to climb to 5-5 (they are really bad if they can’t win the next w), then go right to 5-7 after the following 2 games.

                Comment


                • Who ends the month of November with more wins ?? Colts or Pacers ??

                  Comment


                  • I’ve been wanting to like Wentz all season as I watch him make mistakes and occasional boneheaded plays. I understand people defending the pick 6 yesterday as an attempt to avoid a safety but to me it is indefensible. Yesterday also saw him try to hit Dulin in triple coverage. The fumble in SF *was* a pick and an extraordinarily stupid play. A penalty saved him from a fumble in week 1. The OT puck was triple coverage. He tries to live off PI calls like his receivers are jump ball masters.

                    He isn’t helped by having a coaching staff that is squandering the best RB they’ve had since James.


                    Name-calling signature removed

                    Comment


                    • If I was an opposing coach I'd be telling my guys to soften that deep ball coverage to avoid penalties and let the Colts prove they can actually catch those balls that they're getting PI calls on... The Colts are making a lot of hay on those without having to do much.

                      Maybe Reich is good for Wentz in a lot of ways, but maybe Reich's streak of being a Madden video game play caller isn't one of them. Take what the defense is giving you. Live to play another down. Hit the check down.

                      Take the FG on 4th and 2 at the goal line... Punt and play the field position game when you're just out of FG range on 4th down and in "no-man's land".

                      Reich might be better suited as an OC where a HC can overrule him, or give him concepts to work within, rather than the entire playbook at any time.
                      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 Wooden

                      Comment


                      • The consistent theme from the last couple of years is that we pretty much always seem to lose the big games against tough opponents when we really have a chance to make a mark. There was the collapse against the Steelers last year, and then the brutal Buffalo playoff loss. Now this year we’ve added the hideous losses against Baltimore and Tennessee .

                        A big part of it is the gimmicky Madden-like coaching from Reich. The decision making really is like watching a 15 year old play Madden - tons of throws, going for it on 4th down, going for 2, etc. It’s fun to watch when we are able to outdo teams with less talent like Houston or San Francisco, but this slop always seems to catch up with us when we play the top teams.

                        Comment


                        • Derrick Henry: Broken foot. Getting surgery. Out for the foreseeable future.
                          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 Wooden

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                            The consistent theme from the last couple of years is that we pretty much always seem to lose the big games against tough opponents when we really have a chance to make a mark. There was the collapse against the Steelers last year, and then the brutal Buffalo playoff loss. Now this year we’ve added the hideous losses against Baltimore and Tennessee .

                            A big part of it is the gimmicky Madden-like coaching from Reich. The decision making really is like watching a 15 year old play Madden - tons of throws, going for it on 4th down, going for 2, etc. It’s fun to watch when we are able to outdo teams with less talent like Houston or San Francisco, but this slop always seems to catch up with us when we play the top teams.
                            Good point. I was ready to post same idea when I got to your post. The losses against TN and Ravens are very similar to the two you identify from last season. Picture perfect opportunities to get a win against a good team that will legitimately push you to another level. And you lay an egg despite the opponent leaving the door open time and again.

                            So, we've changed QBs and purportedly upgraded personnel (to an extent), yet we're getting similar results. So what's holding us back? Coaching? QB play? Lack of talent? All of the above? What needs to be done to try and take the next step beyond that?

                            While injuries have challenged certain position groups (particularly WR and DB), every team deals with them and (on paper) I think there's enough talent on the roster to expect it to win some of these signature game opportunities. The only possible exceptions I see are QB play and our now several-season's long inability (for whatever reason) not to generate some semblance of consistent pass rush from the front 4.

                            P.S. - I suppose OL has underachieved somewhat this year. And injuries have hampered us somewhat. The pass protection particularly looks iffy at times. Even since some of our projected starters have returned. Not terribly bad in run game though.
                            Last edited by D-BONE; 11-01-2021, 05:50 PM.
                            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                            -Emiliano Zapata

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Banta View Post
                              I’ve been wanting to like Wentz all season as I watch him make mistakes and occasional boneheaded plays. I understand people defending the pick 6 yesterday as an attempt to avoid a safety but to me it is indefensible. Yesterday also saw him try to hit Dulin in triple coverage. The fumble in SF *was* a pick and an extraordinarily stupid play. A penalty saved him from a fumble in week 1. The OT puck was triple coverage. He tries to live off PI calls like his receivers are jump ball masters.

                              He isn’t helped by having a coaching staff that is squandering the best RB they’ve had since James.
                              The thing on the safety vs. pick six yesterday is - is there any possible way he could have thrown it up for grabs knowing that the TD was advantageous given the time remaining and the possession issue? I find it hard to believe he made that decision in the moment. Unless he went into the play thinking, if they swarm me in the end zone, I'm better off just chucking it wherever. But then it would only emphasize the lunacy of the call in the situation (and also seems unlikely).

                              Then you look at this gunslinger mentality with the desperation pitches and penchant for throwing into coverage and it's impossible to deny it was just another ill-advised decision. The coincidence of avoiding the safety was literally dumb luck.

                              I like Wentz's arm and his mobility. I'm okay with calculated risks. But too many of these (near) turnovers could be avoided with smarter QB play and living to play another down. Reich appears to be enabling this crap too.

                              EDIT: And it's one thing to throw a back shoulder or come-back adjustment ball on a deep route into opponent's territory. The strategy may have been particularly effective in SF given the conditions. It's another thing all together to force into triple coverage on your half of the field in OT when there are check down alternatives.
                              Last edited by D-BONE; 11-01-2021, 06:00 PM.
                              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                              -Emiliano Zapata

                              Comment


                              • I see via the interwebs and videos that my thought that Taylor was wide open on that interception play were spot on. I didn't want to go back and look at it on my TV, but I've seen several videos circulating showing exactly what I saw was correct. Taylor was wide open. Would he have gotten a first down? Hard to say, but I like his chances in that scenario. Taylor, already in the open field with the ball... sounds like a good play to me. And he wasn't just running and not looking... he was in a hole looking back for the ball.

                                Some people are saying he would've easily had the first down, if not a TD.... I don't know about that. Had the ball went his way, the defenders would've turned their attention his way. But you still have Taylor in the open field, assuming he catches the ball, easily getting a good chunk of yardage, first down or not. That sounds better than a covered up Pittman and an easy pick for the defense.

                                It's not like it was desperation time.
                                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 Wooden

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X