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

  • #61
    Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

    Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
    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."

    I'm NOT saying that Caldwell will be a good coach, first and foremost, BUT......

    There is a saying about college sports that holds very true.

    "It's not about the X's and O's, it's about the Jimmy's and the Joe's." You can have the smartest coach in play calling and such, and if he can't get the athletes to come to his school, it's a waste. College programs are built on recruiting.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

      Knowing the power that Manning likely holds, why does he not demand changes that we can all see are what are just killing the Colts year end and year out?

      AFAIK, he's a Dungy supporter and a Caldwell supporter. Why? What does he see that we don't and even if he does support them that still doesn't mean he couldn't call for changes in philosophy.... It's not like things are getting better. It is "same ol', same ol".

      -Bball
      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


      • #63
        Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        I'm NOT saying that Caldwell will be a good coach, first and foremost, BUT......

        There is a saying about college sports that holds very true.

        "It's not about the X's and O's, it's about the Jimmy's and the Joe's." You can have the smartest coach in play calling and such, and if he can't get the athletes to come to his school, it's a waste. College programs are built on recruiting.
        You're definitely right about that. And if Caldwell's successor would have come in and had some lousy records then I think you could pin Caldwell's losing on recruiting issues. But instead, Caldwell's successor has done just fine at Wake. He has gone 54-44 in his 8 seasons since taking over for Caldwell. Like I said in an above post, they went 11-2 and made the Orange Bowl 2 seasons ago. That is a HUGE turn around, and is very alarming IMO.

        Caldwell went 2-9 in 2000, which was his last season. Then in 2001 Jim Grobe went 6-5 with them.

        http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/2...standings.html

        I have never once followed Wake Forest. But the 01 team's roster was probably fairly close to the 00 teams roster unless they got some huge recruit in between there.

        That sort of turnaround is a HUGE red flag to me. Atleast SOME of that has to be pinned on coaching. One coach doesn't go 26-63 for 8 years with his successor going 54-44 in the next 8 unless there are some different coaching philosophies. And as soon as Grobe succeeded Caldwell, there was a 4 game turn around. You could maybe pin it on recruiting if Grobe would have had a lousy first season with Caldwell's old team before finally getting some big recruits. But that just isn't the case.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

          Could it be that Caldwell was using mainly freshman and sophomores his last year, and when the next guy stepped in they were that much more ready to enter in the season? OOC scheduling comes into play, along with it looking like 01-02 was a down year overall for the ACC, which allows bottom teams a better shot at beating the middle and upper tier teams. In 01-02 an ACC power like Clemson went 4-4 in the conference.

          All those things could have happened, or none of them, I don't know. I'm just saying that in college sports when players are there a maximum of 5 years, is hard to judge just by looking at numbers. You can go from a young team struggling to learn how to win games, into a undefeated team going into the conference championship. (I'm specifically talking about Ball St. which was 7-6 but two possessions away from going 5-8, then came into this year and is sitting at 12-1. We even lost our best offensive weapon 4 games into the season.) Teams can make huge strides, or fall off, in just one short year depending on who they have returning and who graduated.


          I say this as I've talked to several of my friends, which are on the team, who are absolutely estatic that Stan Parrish is our new head coach, and say he's better than Brady Hoke. Stan is a coach who led Kansas State to a 2-30-1 record over 3 years. I'm trying to convince myself he will be as good as they say he is.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

            Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
            (I can't think of people's names this AM, sorry)

            I'm curious, how has Dungy's replacement in Tampa done since his SB win with what was Dungy's team? And can we learn anything from that?
            It was more than playing with Dungy's team. It was playing against the coach's former team that was still using the playbook from when Gruden was the head coach. Even I could have beat them if I knew what plays they were going to call.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              Could it be that Caldwell was using mainly freshman and sophomores his last year, and when the next guy stepped in they were that much more ready to enter in the season? OOC scheduling comes into play, along with it looking like 01-02 was a down year overall for the ACC, which allows bottom teams a better shot at beating the middle and upper tier teams. In 01-02 an ACC power like Clemson went 4-4 in the conference.

              All those things could have happened, or none of them, I don't know. I'm just saying that in college sports when players are there a maximum of 5 years, is hard to judge just by looking at numbers. You can go from a young team struggling to learn how to win games, into a undefeated team going into the conference championship. (I'm specifically talking about Ball St. which was 7-6 but two possessions away from going 5-8, then came into this year and is sitting at 12-1. We even lost our best offensive weapon 4 games into the season.) Teams can make huge strides, or fall off, in just one short year depending on who they have returning and who graduated.


              I say this as I've talked to several of my friends, which are on the team, who are absolutely estatic that Stan Parrish is our new head coach, and say he's better than Brady Hoke. Stan is a coach who led Kansas State to a 2-30-1 record over 3 years. I'm trying to convince myself he will be as good as they say he is.
              You're right, we just don't know. I doubt there are any die hard Wake fans on the forum, so it's unlikely that we're going to find any legitimate analysis on Caldwell's coaching on PD. That being said, I still don't think you can find that much good out of a 26-63 record over 8 years. That's basically 2 complete cycles of players.

              My whole point is that I don't think we can afford the risk. Caldwell might be a damn good NFL coach, but then he might very well suck. Manning will be 33 years old by the time the season starts. It would be awful if we wasted 2 years of Manning's prime on a Caldwell who wasn't cut out to be an NFL coach. Again, I'm not saying Caldwell won't be any good because I sure as hell don't know one way or another. I'm just saying we can't afford the risk of not knowing.

              I think it would be awful to ignore the plethora of solid coaches on the market (Cowher, Shanahan, Holmgren). I think you have to at least TRY to get one of them. I think we would have a great chance at landing Shanahan if we wanted him. He knows how to coach a HOF quarterback. Manning killed his Broncos 2 straight years in the playoffs, so I'm sure he respects the hell out of him. Not to mention we have one of the most beautiful stadiums in the entire NFL.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                Originally posted by grace View Post
                It was more than playing with Dungy's team. It was playing against the coach's former team that was still using the playbook from when Gruden was the head coach. Even I could have beat them if I knew what plays they were going to call.

                Good point, but they still had to go through the NFC before they could play Oakland.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                  Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
                  Would Cowher be open to passing as often as a team w/ Manning should?
                  The question is, how does Manning feel about the "I" formation? With a tight end that will be used for blocking much more than receiving?

                  Also, I don't see Cowher taking over a team that is not close to being ready to run a 3-4 defense. Everyone but Sanders would be gone. That defense was conceived from Cowher's aggressive personality and LeBeau's ball pressure schemes.

                  And Cowher, who reportedly wants significant influence on personnel matters, won't like having so much salary cap locked up in the QB and WRs to prevent him from bringing in the LBs and DEs that he would want to get.
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                    If we're going to bring in another coach, I would hope they would look at Shannahan. His zone run blocking schemes would sure be nice.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      If we're going to bring in another coach, I would hope they would look at Shannahan. His zone run blocking schemes would sure be nice.
                      That's your best candidate.

                      Cowher would need to dismantle the team and have them rebuilt to fit his personality. He was nearly-perfect in his hometown because everything fit together. No guarantee he ever duplicates that somewhere other than Pittsburgh if he coaches again, and I think that is part of his decision process.

                      While I nitpick about his inability to win AFC Title games at home, he had to deal with Brady and Elway in three of the four losses. The competition was legit.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                        Originally posted by Bball View Post
                        Knowing the power that Manning likely holds, why does he not demand changes that we can all see are what are just killing the Colts year end and year out?

                        AFAIK, he's a Dungy supporter and a Caldwell supporter. Why? What does he see that we don't and even if he does support them that still doesn't mean he couldn't call for changes in philosophy.... It's not like things are getting better. It is "same ol', same ol".

                        -Bball
                        I don't think it is same'ol, same'ol.

                        Last year you got beat because after Freeney went down you had no pass rush - absolutely no QB pressure. But you ran the ball last year.

                        The Pitt year you lost because the team basically had a month off and the offense didn't remember how to play until the middle of the 3rd.

                        This year you lost because of a combination of things but number 1 was special teams - SD out special-teamed you in a large way. Having a run game sure would have helped but it isn't the first reason.
                        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                          Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                          I don't think it is same'ol, same'ol.

                          Last year you got beat because after Freeney went down you had no pass rush - absolutely no QB pressure. But you ran the ball last year.

                          The Pitt year you lost because the team basically had a month off and the offense didn't remember how to play until the middle of the 3rd.

                          This year you lost because of a combination of things but number 1 was special teams - SD out special-teamed you in a large way. Having a run game sure would have helped but it isn't the first reason.
                          Your points are spot on, but it's always something with this group. The weather in New England. The Patriot defenders harassing our receivers. The layoff against Pittsburgh. Freeney going down last year....

                          Now it's the punter, or in some very extreme cases (not here on PD), the refs....

                          At the end of the day, this team just hasn't been cut out for the playoffs over the past 7 years, with the exception of one magical year.
                          Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-05-2009, 04:16 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                            We cannot control the line of scrimmage on the defensive end. Teams can run on us at will. That problem has been around for a while although teams simply are exploiting it more and more.

                            If you cannot stop the run you have a hard time getting an offense OFF the field... let alone getting your own offense ON the field. If you cannot run the ball yourself you compound the problem because even when you do get on the field, you're not necessarily there for long.

                            And outside of Vinateiri I cannot remember our ST's looking good in a long 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


                            • #74
                              Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                              You didn't stop the run during your SB year as much as your opponents didn't take advantage of the opportunity to run it down your throats. When giving an honest assessment of your team's defense this decade, don't confuse the two. You got the results you needed during the SB run, but it was not sustainable beyond that stretch.

                              Cowher has said repeatedly in Pittsburgh and on CBS that the key to beating the Colts is a willingness to stick with the running game, even if you are trailing. Because most coaches "panic" when they get behind, especially to a high octane offense. The Chargers had 34 rushing plays and 36 pass attempts, so they kept it well balanced even though they trailed on the scoreboard most of the second half.
                              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                              And life itself, rushing over me
                              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Bball's Post Season and Game Thread

                                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                                We cannot control the line of scrimmage on the defensive end. Teams can run on us at will. That problem has been around for a while although teams simply are exploiting it more and more.

                                If you cannot stop the run you have a hard time getting an offense OFF the field... let alone getting your own offense ON the field. If you cannot run the ball yourself you compound the problem because even when you do get on the field, you're not necessarily there for long.

                                And outside of Vinateiri I cannot remember our ST's looking good in a long time.
                                Last year your run D was fine - the Pitt year it was too. The SB year it totally blew until the playoffs and it wasn't good this year though SD really didn't hurt you too bad until the OT - keep in mind until then the only SD scores came when they had a short field.

                                It definitely hasn't been the same problem every season.
                                The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X