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

Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

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

  • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

    Originally posted by RWB View Post
    No I would not root for the Colts if they moved to Toronto. I do root for the team because they are from Indy/Indiana. You can imply all you want because I would not be a true fan if they moved. I understood why Baltimore fans hated the Indy Colts team and if the Pacers moved to Vegas then I would hate the Pacers. Chuck Person was one of my all time favorite Pacers. Was traded and I personally thought it was a bad idea, but I didn't give up on the team.
    I understood Baltimore fans as well until they did the same thing to the Browns.

    I've debated this myself if the Colts left Indy would I still be a fan? I think I would but then again the fact they were a team in Indiana(unlike the Bears) was a large part of why I'm a fan to begin with.

    Comment


    • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

      Originally posted by CreekShow View Post
      You cant honestly sit there and say Colts EVER looked for a decent backup QB while Peyton was playing. Thats why Polians lost their job!!! Its pointless with some of you. I get that. I just cant wait until they let out some real info on PM status

      And RWB sorry I must of hit a sore spot with you somehow. Here are the facts. I barely remember the team without Peyton Manning. I remember some of Jim Harbaugh but before him I just dont. I was only 5 years old. I grew up watching Peyton. I was in Anderson for training camp when he was a rookie. I grew up watching one of the greatest QBs ever make Football the staple pro sport in Indiana. He is why the Indianapolis Colts are who they are today. I just dont wanna see him get snubbed IF he can play. Sue Me


      That wasn't the only reason I think foisting Chris into a position he clearly was never qualified for was why the Polians were out the door(and probably wanted to give up on Manning and Irsay doesn't) that and they pretty much screwed everyone over that worked for the Colts. It became a toxic place.

      Look if Manning were healthy we wouldn't be having this discussion because we wouldn't be in this situation but we are and he isn't healthy and I really do not think $28 million is a good investment on an aging QB who's had 3 neck surgeries I don't care who he is.

      That $$$ can be used to fill other needs. That's what people around here are saying when it comes to taking Luck.

      He's probably not going to be the second coming but he doesn't need to be if you have a good all around TEAM being good is enough.

      One day Manning will not be a Colt and that could easily be next season the Colts have to be able to thrive without him and this is the best step to do so.

      Comment


      • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

        Originally posted by CreekShow View Post

        And RWB sorry I must of hit a sore spot with you somehow. Here are the facts. I barely remember the team without Peyton Manning. I remember some of Jim Harbaugh but before him I just dont. I was only 5 years old. I grew up watching Peyton. I was in Anderson for training camp when he was a rookie. I grew up watching one of the greatest QBs ever make Football the staple pro sport in Indiana. He is why the Indianapolis Colts are who they are today. I just dont wanna see him get snubbed IF he can play. Sue Me
        Sorry Creek, I apologize, and believe me I understand the Peyton hero worship. There is a reason I have a certain picture posted, but as others have pointed out his time will come to an end. Trust me Peyton is all business and IK'm sure he understands how complex this situation is... On a side note we have something in common. We've both been to training camps with Peyton.
        Last edited by RWB; 01-11-2012, 10:40 PM.
        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


        • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

          I like luck and all but I hope he doesn't turn into Jeff George. I don't think he will be a bust, but we have to take it slowly with Luck. I definitely like the kids attitude and I think he will pan out, but I still would listen to any offers from other teams. I like RG III in this draft, but Luck is clearly the number one guy and I would be glad if we just draft luck. Hopefully we use some of our higher round picks on defensive side of the ball especially with corners and defensive tackles with real size.

          Comment


          • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

            Originally posted by RWB View Post
            No I would not root for the Colts if they moved to Toronto. I do root for the team because they are from Indy/Indiana. You can imply all you want because I would not be a true fan if they moved. I understood why Baltimore fans hated the Indy Colts team and if the Pacers moved to Vegas then I would hate the Pacers. Chuck Person was one of my all time favorite Pacers. Was traded and I personally thought it was a bad idea, but I didn't give up on the team.
            I'm glad you're here to dictate the terms of everyone else's fandom, then.
            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

            Comment


            • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

              You're welcome Soup and I'm done p!ssing in everyone's cornflakes. I thought you wanted me to answer your question so I did.
              Last edited by RWB; 01-12-2012, 08:50 AM.
              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


              • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

                It's not "outsmarting yourself."

                It's about acknowledging that the Colts have had the best QB in the entire NFL for the past 10+ years and they have a whole bunch of records with only one SB ring. Yes, I know that I sound crazy complaining about one ring, but when you look at the fact that NE has 3 Pitt has 2, and they got every single one of those while the Colts had Peyton Manning, it's a pretty big disappointment.

                Why does NE and Pitt have more rings in the same amount of time?

                Not because they have superior QB play. But because they had superior TEAM play.


                A lesser individual QB with more weapons, and a better defense, has a lot better shot at winning than Andrew Luck does by himself.

                The Colts lack some serious talent, and it's because they've whiffed on their early picks for the last 5 years or so. You cannot do that in the NFL. Teams who do turn out like the Bengals and the Lions. Routinely at the top, and they stay there because they draft 3 WRs in a row (Lions) or they draft busts like Kijana Carter (Bengals).

                The Colts can add a LOT of talent in a matter of two or three years. We talk about not having a backup for PM, well what happens if Luck gets hurt? If he's looked at to be the savior of the Colts, and he goes down with an ACL or something, you now have a QB-less team without any talent anywhere else.

                The Colts would be in a much better position, having a balanced team, where they could overcome other areas.

                Big Ben won his first SB, not by being the Big Ben we all know today, but by managing his team. He used to only throw the ball about 20 times a game, while the defense shut down their opponents, and their running game chewed up clock.




                And Bball, it's not that you have a different opinion. It's how all of you guys have reacted to a different opinion for the last 4 months. I've basically been told I'm an idiot by every single one of you, because I don't share your opinion, and I'm just tired of it.

                You read 50/50 and in your mind you have a valid opinion because you see 50/50. I point out the definition of 50/50 and my opinion isn't valid, because it's 50/50. That's why I've said you ignore the other half of the discussion.

                If it's valid supporting evidence for you, at 50/50, then it's just as valid supporting evidence for my opinion, considering it is 50/50.

                But yet, you guys are so smart that you put more faith into your 50 than I should have in my 50.

                Seriously, you've already told me that the Colts shouldn't plan on PM returning, because he might not. Someone looking at the situation with a rational perspective would plan on both scenarios. You know, kind of like I've been saying this entire time.....
                Last edited by Since86; 01-12-2012, 09:32 AM.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

                  I do think it's pretty comical how some unnamed Jets players are lobbying for Peyton when the guy is still a freaking Colt. Even worse is how the media is latching onto it as if it's some realistic possibility right now.

                  http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...icle-1.1004395

                  And say he were to leave, would he really want to go steal his brother's thunder in New York? Doubt it.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    I do think it's pretty comical how some unnamed Jets players are lobbying for Peyton when the guy is still a freaking Colt. Even worse is how the media is latching onto it as if it's some realistic possibility right now.

                    http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...icle-1.1004395

                    And say he were to leave, would he really want to go steal his brother's thunder in New York? Doubt it.
                    If it means winning a super bowl ya I think PM when go to NY plus Tom Moore is there. I think the underrated team IMO to get PM would be the Cowboys if they feel Romo cant win the big one they have a great offense and the defense is much improved.

                    If I was PM I would probably try for the Texans. They are easily a SB team with PM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

                      I think what some of us do is see 50-50 as not very good odds which then means plenty of weight needs to be put into the scenario that Manning doesn't return, or doesn't return 100%, or doesn't stay at 100% due to a recurrence. None of that says you don't consider the 50% chance he does come back. It just means you have to seriously look at the other side.

                      I'm just using the 50-50 odds you tossed out as an example so don't be arguing "who says it's 50-50 anyway?". My opinion is the odds are not swaying anywhere near 100% (and I'm certainly not alone on that) that Manning can return, return healthy, and sustain that health for too many more years. I don't know what the betting line in Vegas is and I don't care.

                      As for the idea of a total team.... I totally agree with you. That's why I think instead of Polian's name in the ring of honor he should instead be hanged in effigy from it.
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        It's not "outsmarting yourself."

                        It's about acknowledging that the Colts have had the best QB in the entire NFL for the past 10+ years and they have a whole bunch of records with only one SB ring. Yes, I know that I sound crazy complaining about one ring, but when you look at the fact that NE has 3 Pitt has 2, and they got every single one of those while the Colts had Peyton Manning, it's a pretty big disappointment.

                        Why does NE and Pitt have more rings in the same amount of time?

                        Not because they have superior QB play. But because they had superior TEAM play.


                        A lesser individual QB with more weapons, and a better defense, has a lot better shot at winning than Andrew Luck does by himself.

                        The Colts lack some serious talent, and it's because they've whiffed on their early picks for the last 5 years or so. You cannot do that in the NFL. Teams who do turn out like the Bengals and the Lions. Routinely at the top, and they stay there because they draft 3 WRs in a row (Lions) or they draft busts like Kijana Carter (Bengals).

                        The Colts can add a LOT of talent in a matter of two or three years. We talk about not having a backup for PM, well what happens if Luck gets hurt? If he's looked at to be the savior of the Colts, and he goes down with an ACL or something, you now have a QB-less team without any talent anywhere else.

                        The Colts would be in a much better position, having a balanced team, where they could overcome other areas.

                        Big Ben won his first SB, not by being the Big Ben we all know today, but by managing his team. He used to only throw the ball about 20 times a game, while the defense shut down their opponents, and their running game chewed up clock.




                        And Bball, it's not that you have a different opinion. It's how all of you guys have reacted to a different opinion for the last 4 months. I've basically been told I'm an idiot by every single one of you, because I don't share your opinion, and I'm just tired of it.

                        You read 50/50 and in your mind you have a valid opinion because you see 50/50. I point out the definition of 50/50 and my opinion isn't valid, because it's 50/50. That's why I've said you ignore the other half of the discussion.

                        If it's valid supporting evidence for you, at 50/50, then it's just as valid supporting evidence for my opinion, considering it is 50/50.

                        But yet, you guys are so smart that you put more faith into your 50 than I should have in my 50.

                        Seriously, you've already told me that the Colts shouldn't plan on PM returning, because he might not. Someone looking at the situation with a rational perspective would plan on both scenarios. You know, kind of like I've been saying this entire time.....
                        Man, I disagree with a lot of this.

                        1) What's this stuff that the Colts all of a sudden lack talent? I've been hearing htis all year, and it's a crock of *****. This team went to the playoffs last year. Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Saturday, Freeney, Mathis, Brackett, Vinatieri.... I can go on. This team has a lot of veteran talent as well as some decent young mostly unheralded guys.
                        2) Whiffing in the draft? The Colts consistently draft around 28th. They've gotten use out of a lot of those guys despite low draft priority. This is how the Colts draft --- smart picks low in the order. The big names on this team were drafted higher. I don't agree that we've "whiffed".

                        They lost ONE guy... and went in the tank. That's a coaching thing to me. That's poor planning by a GM to have a backup plan. This team has also been absolutely ravaged by injuries to many key guys. This cannot be overstated.

                        That's why this team was not good this year. I also believe if we keep a lot of guys around, we'll likely be back in the playoffs next year, assuming Manning is healthy or Luck is as good as advertised. I do not believe that this 2-14 record is indicative of the team we have here. It was absolutely an aberration.
                        There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

                          Gonzo
                          No pick
                          Donald Brown
                          Jerry Hughes

                          Those were the last four picks, prior to last years draft. Who out of those four hasn't been a whiff? Donald Brown played nice this season, but before this season he couldn't stay healthy for two consecutive weeks.

                          Gonzo doesn't even play. Obviously no pick can't play. Jerry Hughes doesn't play all that much and when he does it's completely unnoticeable.

                          While I agree with you about Reggie, Jeff, Mathis, Freeney, etc, those guys are at the end of their careers. They're not "talent" because they won't be around in 3 seasons. Me and gamble talked about whether or not the Colts will re-sign them, which isn't a given.


                          I think they do, because I think they try to win with PM, but they still have to be replaced either through the draft or through FA.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

                            The no pick was really Tony Ugoh. The Colts traded their first in 08 to take Ugoh in the second round of the 07 draft.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              Gonzo
                              No pick
                              Donald Brown
                              Jerry Hughes

                              Those were the last four picks, prior to last years draft. Who out of those four hasn't been a whiff? Donald Brown played nice this season, but before this season he couldn't stay healthy for two consecutive weeks.

                              Gonzo doesn't even play. Obviously no pick can't play. Jerry Hughes doesn't play all that much and when he does it's completely unnoticeable.

                              While I agree with you about Reggie, Jeff, Mathis, Freeney, etc, those guys are at the end of their careers. They're not "talent" because they won't be around in 3 seasons. Me and gamble talked about whether or not the Colts will re-sign them, which isn't a given.


                              I think they do, because I think they try to win with PM, but they still have to be replaced either through the draft or through FA.
                              But those weren't the only 4 draft picks we had! In general, draft pick success isn't generally high. Brown has been serviceable. Again, we're picking lower in the 1st, not a top 10 pick. After 10-15, draft picks become a crap shoot. You're upset about something that is just status quo across the NFL, the Colts aren't the only ones with failed draft picks, every team has them. I'd say that to the contrary, the Colts are one of the better drafting teams in the league in terms of finding under-rated guys who fit our schemes and still staying competitive every year.

                              The 2009 draft was loaded with guys that we use regularly --- the 2006 draft produced a bunch of starters for us --- 2008 had some contributors. Even in the other years that didn't produce a plethora of contributors, there were still 1-2 guys. It's not a true claim that we've been whiffing in the draft in the past few years. No we haven't drafted a Manning or Edge or Freeney, but we also haven't had a top-10 selection, so what are ya gonna do?

                              Polian made some mistakes this past year, but evaluating talent has never been a weak spot of his, he might be the best in the entire league, it's why we had so many 10+ win seasons and made the playoffs for however many straight years.
                              Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-12-2012, 12:26 PM.
                              There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Colts plan to draft Luck, sources say

                                But you can't let the failed draft picks collect. If you mess up one round it affects what you do in subsequent rounds. IOW if you pick up a desired player in round 1 then you look to other team positions in subsequent picks.

                                Then if that first rounder was a whiff it affects your plans for subsequent years too. It all has the potential to snowball.

                                And if you're continually picking late and have whiffed too much, you should at least know what your holes are so you need to cut your losses on one hand and look to trades and FA on the other.

                                And if you think you're picking fine but it's the coaching staff letting you down, then you need to do something about that too.

                                You can't just ride the mistakes on thru or else eventually a domino falls and you're staring at an 0-16 season up ahead.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X