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

Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

    From today's Star... I haven't read this all yet myself. It's been updated considerably from the blip I saw earlier-

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2012...kup-plan-Colts

    Bill Polian made one big mistake in Indianapolis: Not having an adequate backup for Peyton Manning.

    It cost the Colts vice chairman and his son their jobs.

    On Wednesday, Polian told The Associated Press that not grooming a replacement for the injured Manning was the primary reason the Colts collapsed this season, going from Super Bowl contender to the league's worst record.

    "I've always told the staff that our approach should be to hope for the best but plan for the worst, and I didn't do an adequate enough job of planning for the circumstances we were in," Polian said in a phone interview. "It led to this catastrophe."

    When asked if he was referring specifically to finding a backup for Manning, Polian said: "Yes."

    It's the first time Polian has commented since he and his son, general manager Chris Polian, were fired Monday.

    The longtime NFL executive revived the Colts' brand name in two seasons, turning a moribund organization into one of the league's model franchises. During Polian's 14-year tenure, the Colts won 143 regular-season games, eight division titles, two AFC crowns and the first Super Bowl championship in the Indianapolis era.

    Even all that couldn't save Polian after a 2-14 record gave Indy the No. 1 draft pick.

    "I understand what the dynamics are. So when you have the kind of season we had, there's always some accountability and that includes me," Polian said. "Was I surprised? No. The timing of it was a bit surprising, but not the end result."

    Manning's neck injury changed everything.

    The four-time league MVP never played after undergoing surgery Sept. 8, his third and most invasive procedure in 19 months. With Manning out, the Polians scrambled.

    First, they brought 17-year veteran Kerry Collins, who Polian originally drafted in Carolina, out of retirement for $4 million. Collins didn't last a month. Curtis Painter, Manning's backup the previous two seasons, replaced Collins as the starter in Week 4 but struggled.

    Still winless heading into December, the Colts finally turned to seven-year NFL veteran Dan Orlovsky, who ended a nine-game personal losing streak with two wins in five days just before Christmas.

    But more could have and should have been done, Polian said.

    "We probably could have straightened out the defensive situation a little earlier than we did, but that wasn't critical," Polian said, referring to the November firing of defensive coordinator Larry Coyer. "We needed to have a guy in place if Peyton had gone down and we didn't. It wouldn't have been a playoff season, I don't believe, if we had. But I didn't do it."

    The outside perception was that other factors played into Jim Irsay's decision.

    Some suspected the August acquisition of Collins didn't go over well within the organization.

    Others questioned Polian's recent drafts, which produced little impact from former first-round picks Anthony Gonzalez, Donald Brown or Jerry Hughes until Brown's late-season surge in 2011.

    There was even a rumored rift between Polian and Manning, something Polian called "completely untrue."

    "He was the first person into the office after it happened," Polian said. "There's no rift at all. None."

    In fact, Polian said, the two were speaking in the training room about Manning's offseason rehab plan when Irsay called him into the office. The two Polians then met separately with Irsay, and afterward, Bill Polian said, he and Manning talked for another 45 minutes. Polian declined to provide details of that discussion, calling it private.

    Does Polian believe Manning will play again in 2012?

    "I don't know. I can't answer that," he said. "I recognize that's been a frustration for fans, for you people in the media, and I wish I could have given you more concrete answers, but I just don't know. I hope for his sake if he wants to play and the situation is right for him, that he can play."

    Polian's influence hasn't just been felt in Indy.

    He laid the foundation Buffalo's four straight Super Bowl teams. He took Carolina to the NFC championship in the Panthers second season. He helped devise the NFL's salary cap, and has been a key player in reshaping many of the league's playing rules.

    Six times, he was chosen The Sporting News executive of the year.

    Yet Indy was the only place Polian ever won a Super Bowl and, strangely enough, it was the worst season of his tenure that produced the proudest moment and biggest regret.

    "You might think I'm proudest of the Super Bowls and all the playoffs, the division championships, but I'm really proud of the way the guys handled this season," Polian said. "Regrets? I don't have any regrets other than a 2-14 season."

    Colts fans might contend there should be one more regret on the list -- not playing for the perfect season in 2009.

    Polian disagrees.

    "We just should have recovered the onside kick and not had the interception," he said, referring to two plays in the Super Bowl loss.

    He said he has no hard feelings about Irsay, and credited the Colts owner with giving him everything he needed to win. The two have been friends for three decades, and Polian said he would welcome Irsay attending the Pro Football Hall of Fame induction ceremony if he makes it.

    For Polian, the hardest part wasn't getting fired. It was seeing his son lose his job.

    "The family part of it is the hardest part, whether it's Chris or any of the people that are close to me," he said. "Saying goodbye to people is the hardest part. When you've been here 14 years, you've built up a lot of relationships. I've told the players for years and years to prepare for life after football because this is a terminal profession for all of us and that's true. But I've been far, far luckier than the vast majority of people. I've worked for a great person, a great owner in Jim."

    Polian said he hasn't considered whether he will return to football, though he will try to help his son and others land new jobs.
    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
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

    Alright... Let's take stock.... How long has Painter been Peyton's backup? How long have fans, you know... the people that aren't football people and know nothing about the game.... been saying that Painter was not an adequate backup?

    How many people felt DanO was the better QB yet he was the one that was cut in training camp?

    I don't even know what to say about the Kerry Collins fiasco.

    But really, Polian talks about waiting too late to address the defense THIS season??? Really???

    The defense has mostly been a joke for several years. The Colts play the perfect defense to give opposing teams the openings they need to beat the Colts. The best way to beat a QB centered, high power offense is to keep that QB on the sidelines. Minimize possessions for him and put extra pressure on him and his offense to perform in their limited opportunities. And the best way to do that is to run, run, run and play the short passing game. And what does the Colts undersized, Tampa 2 defense give up? ...Rushing yards by the bushel and little dink and dunk passes. And with the defense being undersized, you get a RB out in the open and he can plow over the defender.

    Then, as if that isn't enough, the philosophy of attacking the QB with the ends is all well and good except teams learned to use it against the Colts with delayed handoffs. Just let the ends spin their way right out of position and then run where they used to be.

    It wouldn't be so bad if teams hadn't figured this out and were continually trying to get into some scoring battle with the Colts. But the truth is, most of the good teams (playoff teams) knew it all along and the lesser teams quickly figured it out. How many backup RB's did the Colts make look like the second coming of Jim Brown? Yet nothing changed with the Colts' defensive philosophy. And without Manning sustaining drives and orchestrating scores the team was toast because they couldn't get a team off the field. Which is really nothing new except that undersized defense now found itself ran into the ground and pounded into submission because the team's offense was not able to give them a breather.

    IMO Not only would a better, playoff style defense helped Manning's Colts to a better playoff record... but it would've helped the team at least be respectable in a disaster scenario if Manning was lost for the season.

    Polian's failure to address THAT is the real reason he's no longer employed, and the reason he should've been unemployed long before now.... IMO....
    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

    • #3
      Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

      Blaming a lack of backup QB for getting fired? Seriously Bill? How about the lack of talent all over the field and you being rude and disrespectful to almost everybody in the organization including fans. Just a guess.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

        Originally posted by Bill Polian
        I recognize that's been a frustration for fans, for you people in the media....

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

          Originally posted by presto123 View Post
          Blaming a lack of backup QB for getting fired? Seriously Bill? How about the lack of talent all over the field and you being rude and disrespectful to almost everybody in the organization including fans. Just a guess.


          Its partly true but really its to save face for the fact his son was the one that was fired and Bill joined him in solidarity.


          Bill foisting Chris to take over this organization with his lack of experience was what got him fired everything else was just a buildup to it.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

            Polian regrets not addressing the back up QB position? Everybody and their mother saw how awful Painter was and was saying that he could do nothing with this team. Even when we had Sorgi everyone knew he was not an adequate back up. Almost every year Sorgi would get out played in the preseason by the likes of Shaun King only to see them cut and Sorgi stay. This happened this year with Painter as well. Dan outplayed Painter, but Painter stayed and Dan got cut. Yet, here was Dan leading us to two wins and almost a third.

            I am not saying Dan would have made us a playoff team given how crappy our defense is, but he sure as hell would have beat teams like the Browns.

            All this season did was prove to me how invaluable Peyton is and how overrated everyone else is on this team and front office. Without Manning there is no Colts in Indy.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

              No comment.


              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

                I don't know why NaPolian even bothers explaining such high minded football concepts that are obviously well beyond the grasp of us little people...
                Last edited by travmil; 01-05-2012, 12:08 PM.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

                  How many times people asked about not having a backup QB just in case? I remember interviews after interviews and he would never answer the question, even the fans on the radio show would ask him about this same thing and he would talk and say nothing
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

                    The fact that Polian thinks the backup QB position is the reason for the team's failure is all the evidence I need to be glad he is gone. Tom Brady could have been our backup, and we still don't hit .500 this season. Sure the lack of a decent sub was a problem, but it was nowhere near the top of the issues facing the team.

                    Scary thing is, if Peyton would have been healthy this year we are probably looking at another 1st round loss in the playoffs with all the know nothing talking heads in the media placing the blame on Manning's inability to get it done.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

                      He is pretty delusional. The Colts lack younger talent all over the field on both offense and defense. That is the main reason he was fired.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Polian Regrets Not Having a Backup (QB) Plan for Colts

                        Originally posted by Moses View Post
                        He is pretty delusional. The Colts lack younger talent all over the field on both offense and defense. That is the main reason he was fired.
                        Yes, he's lost it. He was a great personnel guy at one point and the wheels kind of fell off.

                        He's also a person who, if he's not producing, he becomes kind of a drag. I've never liked his inability to take responsibility for his mistakes. This is just another backhanded way of doing it.

                        Comment

                        Previous template Next
                        Working...
                        X