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

Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

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

  • #61
    Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

    What happens when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
    Assuming Manning's neck heals and he will be ready for the season next year, I would keep both QBs and have Luck start the game and Manning take over in the 2nd half unless Luck is on fire or something. I think having both on one team might greatly benefit Luck's development and put us in a better position a few years down the road. Luck would have one hell of a pedigree learning from #18.

    It would take a lot of patience as we would be pretty bad at first due to how crappy our defense is, but I consider both QBs too rare to trade. Manning deserves to retire here, plus I don't want to have to face him if we trade him. Trading luck is perhaps even more out of the question. We can't live in the past but nor should we forget what Peyton has meant to Indiana. The big move I would want to make would be switching Caldwell for an upgrade at the head coach position, and trying to bolster the rest of the team and develop a running game. Also If Peyton's neck is ok I see him being around for a couple more years. He is an iron man and he still has some records to set.
    Last edited by Oliver; 11-15-2011, 12:12 PM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

      It's just a shame it has to come to this in this way. Missed picks, an over-reliance on Peyton to carry the team, questionable leadership and ability from the head coaching position, an unwillingness and maybe even an arrogant refusal to address flaws and weaknesses with team design.... all culminating into this winless season.

      And yeah, the thing you do is acknowledge that no matter what Peyton is closer to retirement than his prime and now you have the chance to draft another franchise QB. Of course there are no guarantees but it is what it is. Loyalty is nice and all and this isn't the way the Manning era should end. But reality is what reality is.

      I really hope someone (Irsay) can take an objective look back at the Manning era to date and ask if his underlings maximized the Manning era to this point. That probably should've happened already before this last contract in particular, let alone waiting on an injury to force this look back. But if Luck is as good as advertised do the Colts want his career path with the team to be handled in the same way?

      I hope that whoever is next season's QB (Manning, Luck, Painter, UncleBuck) finally has a real NFL defense and isn't forced into a position of thinking 'score' on every play and not worried that the defense can't get the other team off the field and they might not see the ball again.
      Last edited by Bball; 11-15-2011, 12:14 PM.
      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: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

        Whether the Colts cut Peyton or trade him its going to hurt everyone involved. IF you keep him its a big risk and I think Peyton would agree that its a risk that could hurt the franchise for years if they don't have a legit starting Qb on the sidlines.

        The best case for the team is draft Luck. THe best case for Manning is to trade the pick and get everything you can from it.

        I think Manning would be ok with a trade as long as it was to a team of his choosing. Maybe the niners or any of the contenders that have mediocre QB's. IF the Colts pay alot of Mannings guaranteed salary and trade him then that would give the COlts a pretty big return on picks which would save them money over 4 years. It would hurt the cap in short term but as far as rebuilding for the future it would be benefical IMO.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

          The absolute best case scenario we can hope for: We draft Luck, Manning sticks around for one year, isn't exactly himself anymore, feels like his long-term health is more important than playing football an extra year or two, decides to retire, on his own terms, at which point Luck has had a year to learn under the smartest football player to ever play the game, and then he takes over. I know that sounds a little macabre as a "dream scenario", but it is about as good as we can realistically hope for.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

            Hell yes cdash, and then to finish the dream would be Peyton deciding he would like to be the quarterback's coach for a few years (of course for the Colts).
            You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

              Where does Reggie Wayne currently stand as far as contract?

              I can't imagine he's going to want to remain with the Colts during a long rebuilding process.

              He'll probably go to the Patriots or something if he doesn't remain a Colt.
              In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

                Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                Where does Reggie Wayne currently stand as far as contract?

                I can't imagine he's going to want to remain with the Colts during a long rebuilding process.

                He'll probably go to the Patriots or something if he doesn't remain a Colt.
                He's an FA after this season.. but his value took a hit this year obviously.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  That's not really his motivation here. Peyton said about a week ago that he signed a 1 year contract with a 4 year extension, because they weren't really sure what was going to happen.

                  It would be awful of him to have signed a big front loaded contract, like everyone else does in the NFL, because if it turned out the exact way it did turn out, the Colts would be on the hook for a lot of money to a player that doesn't play, and that wouldn't be right.

                  So they took a smaller chunk now, and then would have time to wait and see and then make a decision further down the road at where he is phsyically.


                  Peyton did that to help the Colts, not to help himself, which is why I would be extremely pissed if the Colts decided to trade Peyton, without his consent.

                  Peyton has done more than he needed to for the Colts, and for the city/state.

                  I hate to have the derogatory tone and call him "a good little soldier," but that's exactly what he has been. He could have demanded more money in the past, and didn't. He could have demanded more money now, and didn't. He could have structured his deal like the other 99% of the NFL, and didn't. At the same time, he's given money away to charities and hospitals like it's his job.

                  You don't reward years and years of loyalty with a big "**** off, we don't need you anymore so cya later." That would be horrible, even if it was good business.


                  It will be a sad, sad day when the Colts and #18 part ways. It will be even sadder if they push him out the door, and it will be something that would take me a loooooong time to get over. It's just not how you treat people, business or not.
                  But that's how it works in professional sports especially in the NFL when contracts aren't guaranteed.

                  If Montana and Favre can be tossed aside(although Favre had his stupid will he won't he retire spiel) for the sake of the organization's future.

                  Manning is no different he really isn't. And while I hate to quote Kravitz he's right if Marvin Harrison etc can be dumped like yesterday's garbage Manning is no different in the end even if he was the face of the franchise.

                  Its just we actually care about him compared to others who have been tossed aside for the next younger star.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

                    Just reading some of the initial post to this thread, I do not know where you guys are getting your insider information about Luck not willing to sit/learn whatever you call it behind Manning.

                    I really think there is a lot that comes along with being the Colts QB, not only will he get to learn behind Manning(hopefully he soaks some in), but he will play for a team that showed it is committed to using its top draft picks to surround you with as many weapons as you would like.

                    I have no idea what he would do but I would not rule out anything.

                    I will say that given Peyton's iffy track record lately with injuries, and the play of our backups drafting Luck would not be a bad decision no matter how you look at it. We could get a Kings ransom for him, maybe, it all depends on what teams are willing to offer. Even then unless then if we do trade for a 1st pick this year, the next and the next we have no idea what position we will be drafting in. I would not trade the opportunity to draft Luck for a 8th, 17th, and 25th pick.

                    In a league where QB's dominate, I would rather take a chance on Luck than hoping that my future pick allows me to draft another Franchise"like" QB.

                    Only negative with Luck is the money aspect, but I do not think that is as big as it may seem, Peyton will most likely restructure his contract. I doubt Wayne will be resigned if so not for that much, Mathis will most likely leave, and I can see the Colts dropping Addai with the play of Carter and Brown this year.
                    Why so SERIOUS

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      That's not really his motivation here. Peyton said about a week ago that he signed a 1 year contract with a 4 year extension, because they weren't really sure what was going to happen.

                      It would be awful of him to have signed a big front loaded contract, like everyone else does in the NFL, because if it turned out the exact way it did turn out, the Colts would be on the hook for a lot of money to a player that doesn't play, and that wouldn't be right.

                      So they took a smaller chunk now, and then would have time to wait and see and then make a decision further down the road at where he is phsyically.


                      Peyton did that to help the Colts, not to help himself, which is why I would be extremely pissed if the Colts decided to trade Peyton, without his consent.

                      Peyton has done more than he needed to for the Colts, and for the city/state.

                      I hate to have the derogatory tone and call him "a good little soldier," but that's exactly what he has been. He could have demanded more money in the past, and didn't. He could have demanded more money now, and didn't. He could have structured his deal like the other 99% of the NFL, and didn't. At the same time, he's given money away to charities and hospitals like it's his job.

                      You don't reward years and years of loyalty with a big "**** off, we don't need you anymore so cya later." That would be horrible, even if it was good business.


                      It will be a sad, sad day when the Colts and #18 part ways. It will be even sadder if they push him out the door, and it will be something that would take me a loooooong time to get over. It's just not how you treat people, business or not.


                      It would also take a long time to get over picking Manning over Luck only for Peyton to get hurt again or only play 1-2 more years while Luck goes on to have a fantastic 15 career somewhere else when he could have had it here. How would it feel watching Luck have a tremendous career while our franchise was in the gutter for a while?

                      I love Peyton, he's my favorite athlete ever. The Colts love Peyton. We all love Peyton. But we are in a wild scenario that no one could have ever predicted. Our HOF QB has suffered a bizarre neck injury in a year that happens to feature the most hyped QB since Manning himself. Since our team is damn pitiful without Peyton, we are in prime position to have the number 1 pick. Aside from our team being awful without Peyton, that is one unpredictable scenario. Who could have dreamed that Peyton would get hurt in a year that features a phenom like Luck?

                      We have to make a decision on March 8 (I think that's the date, give or take a couple days) if we are going to pick up the option on Peyton. If you really are going to part with something as precious as the Luck pick, you better know darn well that Peyton can play for a few more years. But will that even be possible to know? When he gave that interview a couple weeks ago, his neck hadn't even fused yet. So first that has to happen, then he has to get in shape again, and then he has to show that he can play in a game. All of this has to happen by March 8. The only way you can justify getting rid of the Luck pick is if you think Peyton will be good to go for several years and it might be impossible for us and Peyton to know that in a mere 3 and a half months. If that's the case, then I think Peyton would make it easy for us and would chose to walk away.

                      Are you really going to give up a guy who will likely anchor the franchise for 15 years because you want to roll the dice on a 36 year old who has had 3 neck surgeries in 18 months? I know he is Peyton, but we still have to make the logical decision. As much as it saddens me to say this, I think it's very likely that taking Luck will be the logical decision at the end of the day. But we'll see.

                      It's great that Peyton had the Colts in mind when he signed that contract, but he clearly knew that there was a big risk he wouldn't be able to play this year. So it would have looked kind of bad on his part if he didn't structure it that way while knowing full well that he was in bad health and might not even play.

                      Yeah, everyone signs big front-loaded contracts in the NFL, but how many guys sign a contract when they are having nagging neck injuries that could keep them out for a significant period of time, if not their career? Not any that I can think of. You can't compare what Manning did to other NFL players because hardly anyone ever signs a contract right before they have to undergo a massive surgery that keeps them out for the season. This is just a freakishly bizarre situation on all levels.
                      Last edited by Sollozzo; 11-15-2011, 11:10 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

                        Originally posted by Really? View Post
                        Just reading some of the initial post to this thread, I do not know where you guys are getting your insider information about Luck not willing to sit/learn whatever you call it behind Manning.

                        I really think there is a lot that comes along with being the Colts QB, not only will he get to learn behind Manning(hopefully he soaks some in), but he will play for a team that showed it is committed to using its top draft picks to surround you with as many weapons as you would like.

                        I have no idea what he would do but I would not rule out anything.

                        I will say that given Peyton's iffy track record lately with injuries, and the play of our backups drafting Luck would not be a bad decision no matter how you look at it. We could get a Kings ransom for him, maybe, it all depends on what teams are willing to offer. Even then unless then if we do trade for a 1st pick this year, the next and the next we have no idea what position we will be drafting in. I would not trade the opportunity to draft Luck for a 8th, 17th, and 25th pick.

                        In a league where QB's dominate, I would rather take a chance on Luck than hoping that my future pick allows me to draft another Franchise"like" QB.

                        Only negative with Luck is the money aspect, but I do not think that is as big as it may seem, Peyton will most likely restructure his contract. I doubt Wayne will be resigned if so not for that much, Mathis will most likely leave, and I can see the Colts dropping Addai with the play of Carter and Brown this year.

                        Because QBs taken #1 are expected to play and I'm going on a limb and assuming that wherever Luck is drafted he'll expect to play. And I think he's earned that right being the #1 draft pick.

                        I mean that's what we did with Peyton while Harbaugh was shown the door(of course Harbaugh was never as meaningful as Peyton ended up being today)

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

                          Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                          Because QBs taken #1 are expected to play and I'm going on a limb and assuming that wherever Luck is drafted he'll expect to play. And I think he's earned that right being the #1 draft pick.

                          I mean that's what we did with Peyton while Harbaugh was shown the door(of course Harbaugh was never as meaningful as Peyton ended up being today)
                          What if the Patriots had drafted him? He wouldn't start over Brady, at least not right away. He is the #1 pick but he still has to earn his keep and that means no cutting in line of the more established veterans. Luck is no doubt an incredible talent but at this moment he is not the equal of a healthy Manning.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

                            As much as it pains me to say this, the Patriots are a better ran franchise than the Colts. They are better constructed and balanced... and coached...

                            When Brady went down for a season the team didn't fold like a cheap suit nor did they appear to be in disarray. They actually put together a fairly good season and while they didn't make the playoffs it wasn't because of an abysmal record. IIRC they were 11-5. That's better than the Colts last year with Manning. And a far cry from 0-10 and staring down 0-16 like we are now.

                            So, no... the Patriots won't have to worry about drafting Luck and what to do about Brady if they did.
                            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: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

                              Originally posted by Oliver View Post
                              What if the Patriots had drafted him? He wouldn't start over Brady, at least not right away. He is the #1 pick but he still has to earn his keep and that means no cutting in line of the more established veterans. Luck is no doubt an incredible talent but at this moment he is not the equal of a healthy Manning.

                              Of course he wouldn't start over Brady. Brady is healthy, under contract, and looks to have several quality years left. You obviously aren't benching Brady for anyone.

                              You clearly wouldn't take him over a healthy Manning either. If Manning was healthy and looked like he easily had several strong years left, then you'd obviously continue to roll with Manning and let him play as long as he wanted. Of course, if Manning were healthy then this wouldn't even be a discussion as we'd be looking at the playoffs right now. The problem is that we have to make a decision on Peyton in early March. Given that his neck hasn't even "fused" yet, will we be able to be confident enough in his health to justify giving up one of the best prospects ever?

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Manning vs. Luck - What would you do?

                                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                                Of course he wouldn't start over Brady. Brady is healthy, under contract, and looks to have several quality years left. You obviously aren't benching Brady for anyone.

                                You clearly wouldn't take him over a healthy Manning either. If Manning was healthy and looked like he easily had several strong years left, then you'd obviously continue to roll with Manning and let him play as long as he wanted. Of course, if Manning were healthy then this wouldn't even be a discussion as we'd be looking at the playoffs right now. The problem is that we have to make a decision on Peyton in early March. Given that his neck hasn't even "fused" yet, will we be able to be confident enough in his health to justify giving up one of the best prospects ever?
                                Im glad its us thats in this situation and not them.. We have first dibs on likely the next top franchise QB, its just up to us on if we take him or what we do with him. We are in a great spot to get a fresh start on how we do things, at a turning point for who runs the offense on the field, and who coaches it on the sidelines. I also am one of the supporters for Bill's son on his ability to pick players in the draft. This years draft has worked out much better than most in recent years, even though they have been injured, its shown they have talent to stay in the league as contributors for years to come. You can't really scout how injury prone a guy may or may not be when he gets to the pros. But i for one don't really mind the position were in.. What goes up must come down, what better time to come down than when there is a dominant QB coming in from college and also get to drop your oblivious coach.

                                "Fresh start. They should call us the febreeze brothers. Cuz its feelin so fresh right now."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X