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

I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

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

  • #61
    Re: I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

    Originally posted by Eindar View Post
    It's truth telling time:

    There's no such thing as a perfect football team. If there were, it would never reside in Indianapolis. Hard caps make parity, which is a good thing in Indianapolis, otherwise we'd go back to the dynasties of the 80s and 90s.

    Truth is that the Colts have tried to stop the run. That's why they hung on to Bob Sanders and his ridiculous contract longer than what was reasonable. It's cheaper to get a Bob Sanders than it is a Haynesworth. Not to mention that you can't just get one Haynesworth, you need 2, and you also need some linebackers. You are also handcuffed in that with the money spent on offensive weapons for Manning, you can't spend a ton on defense. Doesn't matter how good your QB is if nobody is open, just ask Matt Cassell.

    Bill Polian has been nothing short of miraculous over the last 10+ years. Anyone who complains about him should stop watching football.

    Speaking of Cassell, he's better than Collins at this point by a fairly wide margin, and even the year he started for the Patriots when Brady got injured was a fairly large downgrade in terms of offensive production. You can't replace a Peyton Manning or a Tom Brady.

    The Colts defense is built around speed. The Colts are essentially the SSOL of football. They're looking to force one or two turnovers per game, giving the offense two more possessions than the opposing offense. The theory is if you give Manning two more possessions than the opposing QB, he'll win the game for you. I think it's good game planning, and done cheaply on the defensive end. But when your QB doesn't operate with laser precision, or worse, gives those two extra possessions back to the other team, you end up giving up 34 points in a half, because the defense can't be on the field that much in this system.

    Good luck with the season, the way it looks the Colts will still be better than the Chiefs this year, but bagging on the front office or Kerry Collins is poor form. There was no reason to expect Peyton Manning to miss an entire season, so there should be no expectation for there to have been a contingency plan to replace a Hall of Fame QB who had started every game for the last umpteen years.
    Should stop watching football? Really? because we're calling out Polian for his incompetence in recent years.

    Yes from 1998 to say 2005/6 he's done well but that was then we're talking about now.

    Nobody is saying he was always a bad GM that's false. He is however not as good as he once was and or the GOAT of GM's(if such a thing exists)

    The "GOAT" would realize that building around one player is a bad idea I don't care who it is. Especially in a sport such as football where one hit can end a career. They rode Manning until his neck hurt and now we're in this position. And the let the O-Line erode and the defense is exposed as the undersized pushovers they've always been. This team is very flawed in how its built.

    Also doesn't help the coach doesn't inspire much confidence in being a competent head coach which is what we need now.

    Even the Packers/Pats/Steelers who all have SB winning QB's have decent backups because they know that if something were to happen to their starter the team still needs to be able to win games.

    The Colts dropped the ball on that. Nobody was expecting a future HOFer as backup but someone competent not Curtis Painter who the Colts don't believe in either since they have Collins as the starter. I mean if that's the case why did they draft him in the first place?

    These aren't the things a good GM does.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

      Pllian to me is a lot like donnie walsh. He was a genius for many years, but his time has past.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

        Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
        Should stop watching football? Really? because we're calling out Polian for his incompetence in recent years.

        Yes from 1998 to say 2005/6 he's done well but that was then we're talking about now.

        Nobody is saying he was always a bad GM that's false. He is however not as good as he once was and or the GOAT of GM's(if such a thing exists)

        The "GOAT" would realize that building around one player is a bad idea I don't care who it is. Especially in a sport such as football where one hit can end a career. They rode Manning until his neck hurt and now we're in this position. And the let the O-Line erode and the defense is exposed as the undersized pushovers they've always been. This team is very flawed in how its built.

        Also doesn't help the coach doesn't inspire much confidence in being a competent head coach which is what we need now.

        Even the Packers/Pats/Steelers who all have SB winning QB's have decent backups because they know that if something were to happen to their starter the team still needs to be able to win games.

        The Colts dropped the ball on that. Nobody was expecting a future HOFer as backup but someone competent not Curtis Painter who the Colts don't believe in either since they have Collins as the starter. I mean if that's the case why did they draft him in the first place?

        These aren't the things a good GM does.
        Re-read my post. Every team in the NFL, minus their best player, is flawed. In fact, I'm not sure there is a team in the league right now that isn't flawed. The Ravens crushed the Steelers last week. Clearly the Steelers don't do well against that style of play. Fast forward to week 2, and the Steelers are manhandling the Seahawks, while the previously world-beating Ravens are losing to Tennessee. Whenever there is parity, matchups are going to make the games, and a good front office is going to make a team great. To that end, how long has it been since the Colts have had a losing season? Who else can boast a longer streak? How about you crucify Polian when the team is bad with Manning, or the team has been given 2-3 years to rebuild once he retires with no improvement?

        You claim the Packers/Pats/Steelers have great contingency plans. Aaron Rodger's backup is Matt Flynn. Tom Brady's backup is either Brian Hoyer or a rookie. Rothlisberger's backup is Charlie Batch, who is capable of leading a team to a .500 record, and nothing more. Face it, if you lose your starting QB, no matter what the team is, you're not competing for a title, and you're likely not going any further than the first round of the playoffs.

        If you're thinking that the GM should have a contingency plan to replace the likes of Peyton Manning, yes, you should stop watching football. Or at least, you should start watching college football, where you can support a team that will have 20+ great years in a row.

        Caldwell isn't a competent head coach? Who coached the team to the Super Bowl against the Saints? Oh, ignore that, it would totally derail your delusional ranting, and I'd hate to spoil your pity party.

        I don't even know why I try. I knew a certain percentage of the fan base wouldn't be able to handle a little losing, but I'm still trying to explain what should be obvious. Oh well, at least I can take solace in knowing if the Pacers have a good year this year, Conseco will be full of Pacers "fans" again.
        Last edited by Eindar; 09-18-2011, 05:46 PM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

          Originally posted by Eindar View Post
          Re-read my post. Every team in the NFL, minus their best player, is flawed. In fact, I'm not sure there is a team in the league right now that isn't flawed. The Ravens crushed the Steelers last week. Clearly the Steelers don't do well against that style of play. Fast forward to week 2, and the Steelers are manhandling the Seahawks, while the previously world-beating Ravens are losing to Tennessee. Whenever there is parity, matchups are going to make the games, and a good front office is going to make a team great. To that end, how long has it been since the Colts have had a losing season? Who else can boast a longer streak? How about you crucify Polian when the team is bad with Manning, or the team has been given 2-3 years to rebuild once he retires with no improvement?

          You claim the Packers/Pats/Steelers have great contingency plans. Aaron Rodger's backup is Matt Flynn. Tom Brady's backup is either Brian Hoyer or a rookie. Rothlisberger's backup is Charlie Batch, who is capable of leading a team to a .500 record, and nothing more. Face it, if you lose your starting QB, no matter what the team is, you're not competing for a title, and you're likely not going any further than the first round of the playoffs.

          If you're thinking that the GM should have a contingency plan to replace the likes of Peyton Manning, yes, you should stop watching football. Or at least, you should start watching college football, where you can support a team that will have 20+ great years in a row.

          Caldwell isn't a competent head coach? Who coached the team to the Super Bowl against the Saints? Oh, ignore that, it would totally derail your delusional ranting, and I'd hate to spoil your pity party.

          I don't even know why I try. I knew a certain percentage of the fan base wouldn't be able to handle a little losing, but I'm still trying to explain what should be obvious. Oh well, at least I can take solace in knowing if the Pacers have a good year this year, Conseco will be full of Pacers "fans" again.
          The Pats were 11-5 without Brady and the only reason they didn't make the playoffs was because the Dolphins owned the tiebreaker that year.

          Of course every team has flaws but at least .500 is better than what the Colts will end up being at the end of this season. I don't think they can even win a game at this rate. So yes every team should prepare for losing their QB even the Colts despite Manning lasting as long as he did because he is human and one hit can end a career in this game. Why wouldn't you plan for that? A smart GM would.

          Its one thing to lose an important player and fall off a bit its another to completely fall apart and look like the worst team in the NFL by losing one player.

          Which is what the Colts exactly look like right now. That's unacceptable I don't care who was injured. It makes one wonder how the Colts could look so incompetent after losing one player.

          And no Caldwell is a completely worthless head coach Bill Callahan took a team to the SB and we know how that ended. Jimbo is no different. In fact he's worse to me.

          Its one thing for the Colts to lose I've seen 1-15 seasons before and even those teams seem to look a lot more competent than this one. Its another to look like they have no clue with what they are doing and it shows.

          Unless they're like you and choose to live in denial over how bad this team really is sans Manning. So yes Polian deserves to be trashed for not building a good O-Line, a defense worth a damn, and not hiring a coach that actually can coach. Now everyone sees what a joke the Colts are without their most important player.

          Now they can't behind Manning anymore nobody in this organization can.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

            Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
            The Pats were 11-5 without Brady and the only reason they didn't make the playoffs was because the Dolphins owned the tiebreaker that year.

            Of course every team has flaws but at least .500 is better than what the Colts will end up being at the end of this season. I don't think they can even win a game at this rate. So yes every team should prepare for losing their QB even the Colts despite Manning lasting as long as he did because he is human and one hit can end a career in this game. Why wouldn't you plan for that? A smart GM would.

            Its one thing to lose an important player and fall off a bit its another to completely fall apart and look like the worst team in the NFL by losing one player.

            Which is what the Colts exactly look like right now. That's unacceptable I don't care who was injured. It makes one wonder how the Colts could look so incompetent after losing one player.

            And no Caldwell is a completely worthless head coach Bill Callahan took a team to the SB and we know how that ended. Jimbo is no different. In fact he's worse to me.

            Its one thing for the Colts to lose I've seen 1-15 seasons before and even those teams seem to look a lot more competent than this one. Its another to look like they have no clue with what they are doing and it shows.

            Unless they're like you and choose to live in denial over how bad this team really is sans Manning. So yes Polian deserves to be trashed for not building a good O-Line, a defense worth a damn, and not hiring a coach that actually can coach. Now everyone sees what a joke the Colts are without their most important player.

            Now they can't behind Manning anymore nobody in this organization can.
            Having Matt Cassell waiting in the wings wasn't great planning, it was quite a bit of luck. Keep in mind that prior to Brady going down, the last game that Cassell had started was in High School. They just happened to get lucky in that their scrub untested backup QB happened to be talented. Not to mention that Bellichick is notorious for doing frustrating things on draft day, trading down constantly to pick up more and more picks to fill out the easily filled positions, and relying on being in Boston and having Brady to fill the rest of the skill positions. For the record, the Patriots are hands-down the best run organization in football the last 8 years. But even with Bellichick being an evil genius, they didn't make the playoffs with their backup.

            Also, explain to me how 8-8 is better than 3-13. There's no lottery in the NFL. If you're going to miss the playoffs, in particular if you are going to miss the playoffs due to an injury to a key player, you want to be as bad as possible to get the most talented player you can, or to trade that pick for more picks to fill holes on your team. When you are pretty sure it's a one year bump in the road, you really do want to be as bad as possible in the NFL if you aren't going to make the playoffs. Small changes make big differences in the league. If the Colts get a top 4 pick and Manning is healthy next year, the team will be much improved over two years ago. If the team limps to 8-8 and Manning is healthy next year, you can look forward to another 10-6 season.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
              I am talking about Collins I am shocked he past Joe. And Joe isnt dead did I miss a joke?
              Yes.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

                Originally posted by Eindar View Post
                Every team in the NFL, minus their best player, is flawed. In fact, I'm not sure there is a team in the league right now that isn't flawed.
                I think everyone knows that there are varying degrees of flawed football teams. The Colts are more flawed than the Packers/Pats/Steelers with Manning let alone without.


                Originally posted by Eindar View Post
                You claim the Packers/Pats/Steelers have great contingency plans. Aaron Rodger's backup is Matt Flynn. Tom Brady's backup is either Brian Hoyer or a rookie. Rothlisberger's backup is Charlie Batch, who is capable of leading a team to a .500 record, and nothing more. Face it, if you lose your starting QB, no matter what the team is, you're not competing for a title, and you're likely not going any further than the first round of the playoffs.
                The fact is you can win with a rookie Quarterback or a backup in the NFL if your team is balanced...(see Big Ben and Brady) so lets not act like its never been done before.

                The real issue a lot of people have is that contingency plans are put in place for when they are needed and most teams won't be given an ample warning like the Colts were. I mean Manning had neck issues well before the draft and lockout ended and the FA market opened up. Are you going to tell everyone here that signing Collins 2 weeks before the NFL regular season was a smart move by Polain. IMO it was a last resort move that could have and should have been done a long time ago.

                Concerning other teams Qb backups let me just say this. Matt Flynn competed against the Patriots last year which is more than can be said about Painter or Collins.

                Batch held up the Steelers possibility of actually making the post season let alone making it to the superbowl which may be what the 2011 Colts would have needed if Manning could have come back in December. Now we all know that this will never happen for the Colts becuase the team is flawed much more than the Steelers were in 2010.

                About the only thing I agree with you is that we might as well move on and lose big. There's no reason to think we will be like the Steelers in 2010 so we might as well get the BPA which would be Andrew Luck if we had the first overall pick.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

                  Time to put out the sell order on Kerry Collins. I thought he had a chance to be servicable, but I was dead wrong.
                  The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

                    I just feel like Painter is hungry and has something to prove and Collins has neither.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: I'm not selling on Kerry Collins yet

                      Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post
                      I just feel like Painter is hungry and has something to prove and Collins has neither.

                      I'll say this for Painter... NOW the pressure is off. The 0-2 start has significantly lowered the bar. He wouldn't be coming in to try and maintain an unbeaten season on the way to the SB or anything of the sort... The only pressure he'd really be under now is to be better than Kerry Collins. And that isn't exactly a tall mountain to climb.

                      I'm not convinced he can be better than Kerry Collins but it might be worth giving him the chance.

                      Of course this is assuming Peyton Manning can return this season in sufficient time, and with sufficient ability (and lack of rust), to put the Colts back in the playoff picture if they could manage a 2-4, 3-5, 4-5 or something without him. But both of those things are extremely optimistic. The more likely thing is it won't matter who starts or what record they can muster because Manning won't be back this season in sufficient shape or time, if at all, to make a difference (like running the table or something close to it with a razor thin margin of error).... and Painter or Collins neither one are likely to have the team anywhere near .500 at any point anyway. IMHO...

                      And it doesn't matter who the QB is if the defense can't stop the run or get a team off the field.
                      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, thatís teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X