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.
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
-
Bye bye NCAA tournament. Make that a three year absence. It’s sickening how far this program has fallen. A joke. -
The Indystar has an article about Romeo's falling draft stock. I had the link called up but accidentally closed it before I copied it.
The gist of it is, he's fallen out of the preseason top 5 NBA pick area into the teens on some mocks.
Blame went to both player and coach, with issues being Romeo's poor shooting from outside and lack of being a Type A personality and not leading/communicating more (defense was mentioned here as well).
I didn't see or don't recall anything specific about how coaching is hurting him other than just the claim it was.
Some are now legitimately saying he could use an extra year to shore up and improve his draft stock.
The recent IU tailspin has hurt. The remaining games could help it said... but that should be obvious.
So basically, it's saying his stock has fallen to a point it's no longer a foregone conclusion he won't return next year. Not that it's likely he'll return, just that he's on a trajectory that he could get some advice that he'd be better off working on his game and trying to restore his draft stock if things don't change these last few games. A former UofL player that stayed for 2 years and fixed his outside shot was given as an example.
But IMO.... Another way to look at it is if he's played his stock down from top 5 to top 15, even though that is a few million dollars in difference, is it worth the gamble he won't drop from 15 to 29th with another year?
The more you play... the more the scouting book is written on you.Leave a comment:
-
One thing I've wondered about is Archie rewarding players that stayed and worked hard after Crean's firing. Obviously, Morgan has worked hard and Archie has built a lot around him.Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
But dovetailed with that, somewhere in this thread (I think it was here) I asked if Miller had a clean slate, all his own players, everything by his plans, would Morgan even be a player he'd pick for the team in the first place?
I'm not knocking Morgan when I say that, I'm just wondering if Miller is morphing what he'd prefer to do with what having Morgan requires him to do?Leave a comment:
-
Post play in college basketball is overrated and often bogs down your play. You just need to be able to rebound well and defend dribble penetration.Originally posted by clownskull View PostLeave a comment:
-
Well, i think we'll get a better idea when iowa comrs to town. Morgan is one of the few guys who can bring us anything on the interior. Now davis did pick it up in his absence but, i don't know if he & the rest of the guys can do it full time.Originally posted by Trader Joe View PostLeave a comment:
-
Did anyone else get some JBJ getting hurt vibes wtih the way the team played, paced and spaced once MOrgan went out? I know Romeo has taken much of the criticism since being a one and done he is an easy target for that, but man...Leave a comment:
-
It's amazing how much better the offense looks when they can hit a few threes.Leave a comment:
-
That was one of the most unexpected outcomes I have ever seen in sports. That is why they play games I suppose. Huge win. I hope Keion Brooks was watching.Leave a comment:
-
Even when we have a really good team, we never win at Michigan State. So now we win there when they're #6 and we're coming off of a 7-game losing streak?
Sports, man.Leave a comment:
-
Ok... I'm definitely thinking that piece is onto something. Why would IU go to Langford down the stretch like that. He's not a 'give him the ball and let him go to work' player.
It worked out the play before in regulation, barely, and it was an abysmal failure on the final possession.Leave a comment:
-
The above piece makes a lot of sense from the outside looking in. Thinking back, I remember being surprised the final play in the Butler game was drawn up for Romeo since he'd really done nothing special in the game.
This team is not playing like an Archie Miller team. Maybe this piece is onto something, or part of it anyway?
I don't think it can be discounted how the depleted bench has to hurt not only games, but practices. Maybe even a reason why Romeo's development has been rather disappointing from the standpoint of expectations of a one and doner who could've turned pro out of HS if the rules allowed it.Leave a comment:
-
Indiana Basketball: Is There a Locker Room Chasm on This Hoosier Team?
February 1, 2019 Mike Schumann IUBB 1
April 30, 2018.
At the time it felt like a day that significantly changed the direction of the Indiana University basketball program. When Romeo Langford pump faked towards the Vanderbilt hat and then chose the cream and crimson IU trident, it is beyond debate that change occurred.
Sitting here nine months later, it is the nature of what changed on that day that is still being examined — and may be for years to come.“If you have one one-and-done your team is done.”That’s what former Virginia Tech head coach and ESPN college basketball analyst Seth Greenberg said on his “Courtside” podcast yesterday with co-host Dan Dakich.
From the outside looking in, it is clear that something is wrong with this team. Every conceivable angle has been examined to this point. Dakich summarized the issues as “disinterested, disorganized, unathletic, can’t shoot and doesn’t like each other.”
That’s a lot to digest, but it’s that last point that hasn’t been discussed enough with this team. Is there a chemistry issue in the locker room? Greenberg certainly thinks so.“It goes back to the Ben Simmons philosophy. You’ve got a guy that is a one-and-done, and his team is almost playing against him because they are tired of hearing about it.”You shouldn’t read this incorrectly. This isn’t a diva situation.
Langford isn’t the type of young man that wants everything to be about him. Nothing that he is outwardly doing is creating a chasm in this locker room — but that doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. And it doesn’t have to go so far as players not liking each other as Dakich suggested.
No, this is more about the broader challenges of creating team chemistry in the one-and-done era, and specifically what happens when you have just one such player.
Every player on this Indiana roster believes that they are an elite basketball talent — and to varying degrees, they are. The veterans on the team have been waiting for their opportunity to shine. Their friends and family have been pumping them full of hype for years.
In fact, the father of one player on this Indiana team took to Twitter to express his frustration (in a since deleted Tweet) that in essence, the offense was too focused on the superstars. Meanwhile, the inner-circle of the mega-star starts to grumble that the offense isn’t focused enough on the soon-to-be lottery pick.
Credit – IU Athletics
We didn’t see it coming in April, but now it makes more sense. In comes Mr. Five-Star NBA Draft Lottery stealing the spotlight — that he doesn’t even really want. Does it have an impact on the team? With the benefit of hindsight — of course it does.
It would be an incomplete analysis to not mention the other major variable impacting this team right now. The Hoosiers have played the majority of the season with their top five reserves injured. No team in the country could come out of that unscathed. Practices are unproductive, and player development cannot happen when players cannot play.
The players coming off the bench right now for Indiana were never envisioned to play this season, and you can see why — they are producing next to nothing during this seven game losing streak.
But Greenberg has been watching less talented Archie Miller teams going back to his Dayton days. Those teams were known for their togetherness, and giving opponents a 40 minute dog fight. Now?“I never thought that I would see an Archie Miller team this uninspired, this unorganized, this non-competitive, Greenberg said.”There is more to it than just injuries. And Archie Miller didn’t forget how to coach. Something is clearly sucking the passion out of this team. From a harsh critic like Dakich all the way to a biased friend like radio voice Don Fischer, the one consistent criticism is a lack of passion.
What could be causing a group of 18 to 22 year old elite athletes with an amazing opportunity in front of them to be giving it less than their all?
Juwan Morgan came back to this team to to build his NBA resume. Now? He’s passing up late game shots to try to get the ball to Langford. Morgan should be the senior leader of this program, but the shadow evidently looms large.
The challenges extend off the court to the optics of the situation as well. How many times have you seen or heard Archie Miller make an example of Langford? Send him to the bench for poor play?
Again, this isn’t really about Miller or Langford — it’s about the realities of college basketball right now. If Miller goes overboard with Langford, the next one-and-done five-star, and his family, will be taking notes.
Greenberg put it this way —“You don’t have everyone on the same page, because the one guy that is the one-and-done has a different set of rules in a lot of ways than everyone else. It happened with Markelle Fultz, it happened with Ben Simmons, and now we are seeing it happen with Romeo Langford.”Maybe we should have seen it coming. Of course there are the Fultz and Simmons examples, but we’ve been down this road at Indiana.
It got somewhat lost in the chaos of the Kelvin Sampson debacle, but there was a major chasm on the 2007-08 Indiana team that featured IU’s last one-and-done megastar Eric Gordon. While much of the team was reportedly losing its way with drugs, Gordon was on an island just trying to steer clear of it all for a few months before the NBA Draft. Collectively, well, there was no collectively.
While the long term outlook is certainly better than it was in 2008, don’t expect some dramatic reversal of fortunes for Indiana here in February. At least not according to Greenberg —“You can’t fix something like that. When you have guys that don’t like each other and don’t play for each other, you can have all the team meetings you want. Those team meetings don’t resolve anything.”WIth De’Ron Davis, Zach McRoberts, Devonte Green and Race Thompson all expected to play this month and six of the final nine games at home, Greenberg’s theory will be tested.
But if Greenberg is right, the story of this Indiana team has already been written — and you just read it.
You can follow us on Twitter: @daily_hoosier
Find us on Facebook: thedailyhoosier
The Daily Hoosier –“Where Indiana fans assemble when they’re not at Assembly”
https://www.thedailyhoosier.com/indi...lRaCk0_qdmAeIg
Leave a comment:
-
I agree, we have some of the best sports fans on the planet. For 25 years, the program has underdelivered. We last won a title in 1987 and our consistent blue blood results ended in 1993. So you have to be 40 to have any clear memory of IU being an elite program. More like 45 to be old enough to have appreciated it. I’m in my early 30’s and all I know is disappointment. My earliest memories are of Knight being a past-his-prime bully who couldn’t win tournament games. It’s all gone mostly downhill from there.Originally posted by LuckSwagger View Post
Yet every year the fans come flocking back for Hoosier Hysteria with their IU merch and their kids. And almost every year the program underdelivers.....yet the fans always keep coming out. It’s amazing . Like Hoosierguy said, Lexington would be burned down if their program sucked for as long as IU’s has.
IU has so many loyal fans across the state who didn’t even go to school at IU. The program has meant so much to the state for so many years and is ingrained in the culture here. So it’s just really really sad to see what’s come of it.
You can argue that IU’s basketball and football program’s combined are the biggest disappointment in the country given IU’s status as a flagship state school. It’s embarrassing.Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-31-2019, 08:53 PM.Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: