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

Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

    Originally posted by Robertmto View Post
    why would u call a play that would get stopped in the backfield everytime?

    that was actually GOOD COACHING by Meeks.

    Don't get me wrong... I wasn't calling for it. I didn't mean it was just missing from this game, I don't recall it much this season at all. I've just heard for several years now how that is their bread and butter play and how so much is based off of it. To start the year it was said they had to do pitches to the RB's because Manning couldn't cover the ground needed in the time he had because of his knee. Then his knee got better but I don't recall seeing the stretch play this season much at all....nor do I recall the pitches too much after the early part of the season.

    I was just curious what had changed for them to mothball it or at least minimize it.
    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


    • #32
      Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

      This team seemed promising after finishing the season the way they did, and Manning being crowned MVP again. But, it's aparent it had as many holes as swiss cheese or Jimmy Hoffa.

      No running game.

      No defense for the running game.

      Special Teams has not been good for years (kickers aside).

      Absolutely hopeless in short yardage.

      O-line in shambles.

      The solutions aren't too difficult. Nothing is really simple in the NFL, but this shouldn't be too hard for a team that has been notoriously good at scouting and finding the "diamond in the rough" for quite some time now.

      If we could somehow manage to steal Haynesworth from Tennessee, it would be a HUGE first step. HUGE.

      Whether the O-line getting healthy fixes the issue, or we have to draft/sign some players, we obviously need help there. Maybe the short yardage issues is purely scheme. I think it's partially size, but also our team seems to lack the intensity up front to simply push a defensive front. Maybe it's just the running back--Rhodes seems to do better than Addai.

      Special Teams is simply coaching. Our coverage sucks. Has for years. Probably will until we fire the ST coach. Every team in the NFL uses backups & scrubs for ST and most of them do a much better job than the Colts. It's simply coaching.

      Obviously we're a team that can continuously make the playoffs, but obviously we have trouble going anywhere after that. It's not going to take much to get this team where it needs to be, but until we do those things, we'll be out in the first round every year.

      --pizza
      It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

        This team had been playing with fire all season and it caught up with them - even with Manning at some point the other team was gonna make the last second plays and win the game. I could point to coaching but I think I'm allergic to thinking anyone could be out-coached by Norv Turner. Special teams coaching now . . .

        If I'm a Colts fan this 1st rd loss wouldn't bother me as much as some others have because this team had so many holes.

        That said, the number 1 priority has to be the offensive line. Run blocking has been pathetic. You can blame it on backs if you want but on probably 30% of your run plays the back's hit before he gets to the line of scrimmage. Other than Barry Sanders, nobody in NFL history has been able to gain yards that way.

        I'm sure there will be disagreements with this but IMO the coach to go after (I think Dungy's done) is Shanahan. Until recently his teams have had great balance with run/pass and in the past he's had very good defenses with the same philosophy as the Colts - quick, gap-filling LB's to stop the run and good cover guys - the Colts DB's actually played better this year from a cover perspective than I can remember. Shanahan fits your personnel very well and he knows how to coach elite QB's. You could also switch to a 3-4 and use Mathis as a pass rushing LB.

        Unfortunately, you already have your coach picked.

        EDIT: Something I want to return to on the run game. I've thought for probably the last 6 weeks that the Colts should move to a 2-back backfield, probably with Robinson back there with Addai/Rhodes. I was wondering why the Colts never went to that except in very short yardage situations. If your O-Line can't block, it seems to me you add another blocker - and if you pass out of that set you just send one or both of the backs out, depending on the defensive rush/blitz packages.
        Last edited by DisplacedKnick; 01-04-2009, 10:31 AM.
        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

          This was really the only game I watched all season, and when I do watch the Colts I fel like I bring a very objective viewpoint. Chargers clearly outplayed the Colts, as Matt Millen said after the game Chargers should have won much easier

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

            Originally posted by Indy View Post
            Oh BTW until the NFL fixes their beyond stupid overtime system, I won't be interested in it as a professional sports league. It's just stupid.
            Yep. That, and a couple of other things is why it goes:

            NBA
            College Basketball
            MLS
            College Football
            MLB
            NFL

            for me.

            I can't explain why but the NFL overtime rule irritates me more than anything else. It irritates me more than baseball steroids. It irritates me more than the damn BCS. It irritates me more than my favorite college basketball team getting screwed in tournament seeding two years in a row. For the love of God my NCAA team lost to the LONGWOOD LANCERS last night and I still will continue to follow them.

            It would be like, in an old Pacers-Knicks game, Starks going down and drilling an 18 footer and then the game being over. No chance for Reggie to hit a three, no chance for Smits to hit a hook shot, nothing, it's over. It's the most ****ed up system in sports but since most of America loves the NFL for what it is that **** is never going to be ****ing changed.

            That and a couple of other things destroyed the NFL for me, my interest has been declining since 2007. It's not that I can't handle the Colts being mediocre or bad (I root for the Pacers, for God's sake), I followed the Colts religiously from 1993-2006 and there were some bad years then but some of the rules are just ridiculously bad or annoying.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

              We need more of Rhodes tonight.
              Originally posted by Bball View Post
              That confused me a little as well.
              Agreed. Other than the trick play with Clark. Rhodes was the only Colt who ran for a first on 3rd and 1. I guarantee he would've gotten a first on our final series had he been in their on 1st-3rd down. Why Addai who runs into the pack vs. finding a hole, runs out of bounds a yard short on the 1st drive of the 2nd half causing us to miss on 3rd and 4th and 1....is even in the game is beyond comprehension.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                EDIT: Something I want to return to on the run game. I've thought for probably the last 6 weeks that the Colts should move to a 2-back backfield, probably with Robinson back there with Addai/Rhodes. I was wondering why the Colts never went to that except in very short yardage situations. If your O-Line can't block, it seems to me you add another blocker - and if you pass out of that set you just send one or both of the backs out, depending on the defensive rush/blitz packages.
                Yep, totally agree. The Colts are one of the few teams to win a superbowl with a 1 back offense. All the greats....Steelers, 49'ers, Dolphins etc. had two back offenses. A full back is there to create holes and hit the LB filling the gap on the run.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                  Here's a little food for thought, and something I had no clue of until last night. Jim Caldwell's record in 8 seasons at Wake Forest was 26-63! That is a Huge Red Flag, IMO

                  http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/...in252331.shtml

                  "Caldwell was 26-63 in eight seasons at Wake Forest, including 1-10 in 1995. The Demon Deacons won more than three games just twice under Caldwell."

                  That's plenty to scare me away.

                  Why we named Caldwell as Dungy's successor so quickly is beyond me. Maybe that was one of Dungy's stipulations for returning this season? We are well into the second half of Manning's career at this point. I don't think we can afford to gamble on Caldwell being a good coach. It's possible that he could be like Mike Tomlin and do a fine job right off the bat. But his abysmal record at Wake is enough to scare me away from wanting him as HC as the Colts. I don't think we can afford the risk with one of the greatest QB's ever turning 33 next season.
                  Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-04-2009, 01:10 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                    The Colts honestly to me, haven't had great leadership for the past two seasons (front office and sidelines), they have been winning on talent alone.

                    So yeah I really think DUngy should probably call it quits, and I really think we should skip giving Caldwell the head coaching job.


                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                      ...and odds are Caldwell keeps Meeks too.

                      We don't need continuity, we need a new approach to break this cycle of one and done. While reaching the SB every year is unrealistic, to think this team has faltered in the 1st game in 6 out of the last 10 years is not good enough.

                      How many of those have had the Colts favored as well? We hired a coach with a reputation of underachieving in the playoffs and he's done exactly that more times than not with a team good enough to have been a multiple SB winner at this point.

                      ...And at some point we're going to turn this thing over to a coach whose main qualification is that he will maintain continuity????

                      You have names like Cowher, Shanahan, Holmgren all available as well as a team that several people would love to have a shot coaching. We should have our pick of coaches. A 26-63 college coach promising continuity to what we've had isn't the direction we need right now.

                      Being overly loyal about buried the Pacers and the Colts need to learn from that lesson. They've been very good at avoiding other pitfalls that have troubled the Pacers, now is NOT the time to suddenly copy the Pacers. I hope TPTB are paying attention and that some respected voices are saying "Maybe Dungy returning is not a good idea, and maybe Caldwell isn't the best option we have"
                      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


                      • #41
                        Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                        Originally posted by Bball View Post
                        ...and odds are Caldwell keeps Meeks too.

                        We don't need continuity, we need a new approach to break this cycle of one and done. While reaching the SB every year is unrealistic, to think this team has faltered in the 1st game in 6 out of the last 10 years is not good enough.

                        How many of those have had the Colts favored as well? We hired a coach with a reputation of underachieving in the playoffs and he's done exactly that more times than not with a team good enough to have been a multiple SB winner at this point.

                        ...And at some point we're going to turn this thing over to a coach whose main qualification is that he will maintain continuity????

                        You have names like Cowher, Shanahan, Holmgren all available as well as a team that several people would love to have a shot coaching. We should have our pick of coaches. A 26-63 college coach promising continuity to what we've had isn't the direction we need right now.

                        Being overly loyal about buried the Pacers and the Colts need to learn from that lesson. They've been very good at avoiding other pitfalls that have troubled the Pacers, now is NOT the time to suddenly copy the Pacers. I hope TPTB are paying attention and that some respected voices are saying "Maybe Dungy returning is not a good idea, and maybe Caldwell isn't the best option we have"
                        I couldn't agree more with this.

                        We have now lost our first playoff game in 4 of Dungy's 7 years here, or in the MAJORITY of them.

                        If you underachieve one year then it's probably not coaching. If you underachieve 2 years then it still might not be coaching. But when you underachieve YEAR AFTER YEAR, then you have to look at coaching.

                        I hate the Patriots and BB, but no one is more prepared than that guy. The Patriots have NEVER lost a home playoff game in the Belichick/Brady era, and only failed to reach the AFCCG in one of the years that they missed the playoffs (the Denver year). Then this year, they lose Brady and have a billion injuries, yet still finish 11-5, winning 4 straight. I think they would have been extremely dangerous in the playoffs, and there's no doubt in my mind now that they would have made it further than we did.

                        That's a team that's coached to succeed in the playoffs. Ours is not. As has been said, the SB year was the exception, not the rule (much like the Pacers 03-04 season).

                        Manning will be 33 years old next year. He's certainly no Spring Chicken. Say we don't even try to get Cowher, Shanahan, or Holmgren. And say that Caldwell is very mediocre in his first 2 seasons here. Then you all of the sudden have a 35 year old Peyton Manning and 2 wasted seasons. If that ends up being the case (which I think is very possible), then you have one of the biggest management blunders in NFL history. At that point, not making a run at those 3 coaches would become completely inexcusable.

                        We don't have time to gamble on someone who went 26-63 as a College HC at a decent program. If he had a lousy record over say 3 seasons, then I could say "well, maybe a couple of other things were at play there." But EIGHT seasons is plenty to fairly judge a HC on. I don't want a 26-63 college HC stepping in during these precious prime years of Manning. If Manning was retiring and the team was being scrapped, then I would say what the heck with bringing Caldwell in. But this isn't a rebuilding project. We need a proven coach and we need to win NOW.

                        But the decision has more than likely be made. Dungy has probably told Irsay time and time again that Caldwell is the man to go with. And since Irsay thinks Dungy walks on water, Caldwell will be our guy.

                        Maybe Caldwell does a great job, but it's just not worth the gamble in my opinion. Manning is getting older every year and cannot do this forever. If we waste 2 prime years of Manning on a mediocre head coach, while ignoring 3 spectacular coaches on the market, then it will be totally unforgivable.
                        Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-04-2009, 01:51 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                          No power on either our offensive or defensive lines did us in again this year. We need size and strength in the middle on both sides of the ball, with speed reserved for the remaining positions of both the offense and defense. Dungyball predicated on speed relies too much on flawless execution and the element of surprise to be effective in the long term. That is why we have only won one title depite having one of the best passing games of all time.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                            Vince Lombardi wouldn't have won more than 30 at Wake Forest.
                            Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                              Originally posted by Knucklehead Warrior View Post
                              Vince Lombardi wouldn't have won more than 30 at Wake Forest.
                              Then tell me why Jim Grobe has gone 54-44 since succeeding Caldwell in 2001. Come on, he even went 11-2 with them 2 seasons ago and made the Orange Bowl.

                              Caldwell goes 26-63 in 8 seasons, then his successor goes 54-44 the next 8. You're telling me that you don't attribute at least SOME of that to coaching? Come on.

                              If his successor would have come in and sucked too, then maybe I would agree with you that something was wrong with the program. But his successor has done a fine job. That is very alarming and is something that I'm very worried about.
                              Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-04-2009, 04:45 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                                ...and odds are Caldwell keeps Meeks too.

                                We don't need continuity, we need a new approach to break this cycle of one and done. While reaching the SB every year is unrealistic, to think this team has faltered in the 1st game in 6 out of the last 10 years is not good enough.

                                How many of those have had the Colts favored as well? We hired a coach with a reputation of underachieving in the playoffs and he's done exactly that more times than not with a team good enough to have been a multiple SB winner at this point.

                                ...And at some point we're going to turn this thing over to a coach whose main qualification is that he will maintain continuity????

                                You have names like Cowher, Shanahan, Holmgren all available as well as a team that several people would love to have a shot coaching. We should have our pick of coaches. A 26-63 college coach promising continuity to what we've had isn't the direction we need right now.

                                Being overly loyal about buried the Pacers and the Colts need to learn from that lesson. They've been very good at avoiding other pitfalls that have troubled the Pacers, now is NOT the time to suddenly copy the Pacers. I hope TPTB are paying attention and that some respected voices are saying "Maybe Dungy returning is not a good idea, and maybe Caldwell isn't the best option we have"
                                It's rare that I say this, but I agree with you 100%, Bball.

                                Caldwell isn't good enough. With some tweaks and the right coach, I believe this team could win 1-2 more Super Bowls.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X