| 0 |
Subject: Forum idea
Posted by: Pacers Rule
- Donor [910311210] Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 11:50
I had an idea that I don't know how others, esp. Guru would think.
I was wondering what if team pages were set up on the site for each individual team, and players knowledgable about their teams would make specific posts about injury status, pt issues, fantasy forecasts, etc. for their team only on that team's thread or page or whatever. Kind of like ESPN's fantasy correspondent page except that all of us users could post info and have team-specific discussions. Perhaps it would work best by having a separate forum page for all team threads/discussions, kind of like the Leagues & Standings page.
I suppose that could be accomplished now within the existing structure but I'm not sure it would be great to have the team threads mixed in will all the other threads, or you could pretty much have a whole page of team threads (or have them buried two pages deep, depending on the last post to that team's thread.
I think that could be a fun way for guys to talk about their teams and help those of us less familiar with a particular team to get up to speed on what's going on internally or with less familiar players.
Thoughts/opinions?
-PR |
| 1 | MadDOG
ID: 2210112822
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 12:12
|
Not enough people on these boards to do this.
|
| 2 | Logan47474
ID: 508412712
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 12:23
|
I think that's a great idea, if it's possible to do efficiently without overwhelming the normal basketball forum discussions. I can't count the number of times I post on this forum asking local fans for input without any response (except from Memphis Fan and Pacers Rule, of course).
|
| 3 | KnicksFan
Donor
ID: 30815418
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 12:29
|
You'll have a few teams with lots of posts (Pacers, Warriors, Knicks, Bucks), and then 20 teams with very few. I just think it would be inefficient.
|
| 4 | Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 12:35
|
I agree KF. If a thread is thrown up about a player----say Tinsley-----it will attract Pacers Rule, Ref, etc, who are local. It will also attract people that read the sheets, people that hold Tinsley, etc..
Logan----quite possibly the reason you didn't get responses was because you asked if anyone had any "local info" and no one did. The Web is very good at allowing everyone to access local info these days via the local papers. Occasionally someone hears something on TV or radio, but not that often. My 2 cents.
|
| 5 | Perm Dude
Dude
ID: 030792616
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 12:36
|
I think it's a great idea. While there are some managers here who would only post in single team threads, most of the managers here are more interested in players rather than teams, and would be able to post information on a number of those threads.
|
| 6 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 12:47
|
I'm certainly receptive to the idea. Would it warrant a separate forum, however? I realize that 30 team threads in this forum would be a lot, but if many are not very active, it might be tolerable.
There are 50 threads listed on page 1 of this forum, and the oldest of those has been dormant for a week. So there may be room here.
If we did it at this forum, it would probably make sense to standardize the title, so that they would be easy to find (via the filter function). For example, they could each be titled "Team Talk: Indiana Pacers", etc.
Let's get more feedback before we decide on a process.
|
| 7 | Piccolos
Donor
ID: 24933916
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 12:52
|
I'd be a fan of this Guru. I'd recommend a seperate forum tho. I think the threads would get cluttered in this forum.
|
| 8 | KTx
ID: 29112617
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 13:03
|
I think it's a better idea to keep it in this forum, because I think very people would go ahead and click into a separate forum to find "Team Notes." However,I do agree that it could clutter up the forum with 30 threads. I propose that Each thread would contain 5 teams (the entire division).
For example: "Team Talk: Knicks, Raptors, Nets, Sixers, Celtics"
|
| 9 | MadDOG
ID: 2210112822
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 13:16
|
This is a total waste of time IMHO.
How many guys actually make posts about the teams they follow? I can think of 1 or 2 including the guy who made this thread.
I realize that this guy likes to make posts about the Pacers, but he's the only guy on these boards who does it.
This is a complete waste of time and resources.
Name 3 more people who make posts the way PacersRules does and I'll agree with you that this is a good idea.
|
| 10 | Addicted
Dude
ID: 4611592518
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 13:32
|
Maybe not as complete as PacersRules,
But Dave R, keeps us up to date on the Nets.
jedman on the Warriors...
--Addicted--
|
| 11 | samuli
ID: 81110311
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 13:34
|
#9 Yes but maybe specific threads would encourage more people to chip in their $0,02 worth on the teams they follow. I agree with #8, divisional threads would be better than one thread per team.
|
| 12 | KTx
ID: 29112617
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 13:37
|
In response to #9 and #11, if there was a thread that had the Bulls labeled on it, I would be mor einclined to talk about Tyson Chandler and Eddy Curry. Without a thread, I see no reason why I would make comment in regards to them, because most people could care less if there are trade rumors of Curry going to the Clippers.
|
| 13 | Heather
Donor
ID: 171027126
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 13:37
|
I realize that I don't post that often on these boards. But, I would be willing to provide local information on the Heat if a specific format was created for this purpose. I don't always watch the games in their entirety, but I do see at least part of most games including pregame and halftime reports. I would also be willing to answer questions and provide insight similar to what Pacers Rule does for Indiana from time to time.
If others are willing to do this for other teams, it could be a very valuble resource on these boards.
|
| 14 | biliruben
ID: 3110231016
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 14:01
|
I'll tell you more than you want to know about Danny Fortson. ;)
|
| 15 | Logan47474
ID: 508412712
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 14:23
|
Re: #12,
Not only that, but sometimes people get annoyed if there are posts in the general basketball forum with titles like "Eddy Curry: Man or Marshmallow?", i.e. specifically dedicated to one or two players. But if there were a page dedicated to the Bulls, people could post major OR minor things there about Bulls players or team philosophy without feeling like they're muddying up the basketball forum with trivia.
|
| 16 | Micheal
ID: 25381417
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 14:43
|
They do it in the baseball forum. There are threads on the Dodgers, Phillies and a few other teams.
|
| 17 | Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 14:46
|
But not many. Certainly not all the teams, as you pointed out. Not a big deal to me either way. I usually throw Sixers' comments in wherever they are warranted, wheter it be an injury thread, an action thread, a thread about a player, etc.....
|
| 18 | Pacers Rule
Donor
ID: 910311210
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 20:05
|
Re #9: Not that it deserves a response, but for future reference, I think you can safely take the "H" out of "IMHO"
#3 & #4 KF & MD, not to be argumentative, but I'm not sure how a potentially less than fully utilized feature is 'inefficient.' If it turns out no one much cares about the Raptors, and not too many people post much info in there, how does that diminish the value of the other, more utilized threads to team fans and also to fantasy players in general?
I think several posters (#11, #5, #13, #12) have mentioned (which I was going to as well) that more people would post if there was an specific place to do it. My guess is that particularly in basketball there are lots of lurkers who do not post in part because of how quickly fire and brimstone falls on the heads of those who dare to deviate from the established patterns and structures (joking in the injury thread, trade info in the action thread, new threads about items not felt worthy of discussing, reading, etc.) I remember last year I was catching a lot of crap from certain individuals for posting "too much" information on the Pacers that some people apparently didn't feel was relevant to their next trade decision in ultimate hoops.
Consequently, I think if you create a format for people to post their team information, you might be surprised how many amateur sports journalists we have out there- who are now ENCOURAGED to post team information. Who knows? This could even generate some additional revenue for the site depending on how many new users & posters it generates who like to have that little "donor" under their name to show their appreciation of the excellent site. Potentially, these pages could prove far more useful than the ESPN correspondent pages because they could be updated more often and by a wider- and in some cases- more knowledgable group. If word got out around the net that there was invaluble team-specific up to gametime current fantasy information you could only get at this site, imagine if that might generate some more readership....
I thought it was a good post in #15 indicating that this new structure could solve more than one "problem." Now more of you could have grounds to tell me "Hey, take it over to the Pacers' thread!" :-)
With regard to #8, #11, #12, I think it would be a big mistake to have a common thread for all teams in each division for several reasons. First, the discussion would get too convoluted with 5 conversations going on simultaneously in the same thread. Second, there would be more of a tendency for posters to be reprimanded for posting their team's info in their division thread if there was less interest in their team ("Hey, shut up about the Pacers already, nobody in the whole world cares about them but YOU!" or "The Bulls are 2-11. Get a life!") That would further squelch appropriate team discussion by more timid posters who are intimidated by such cyberaggression. Third, it would be a lot harder for some people to find out info about a specific team if you first had to remember what division they were in. Someone from Boston who wants to look up some info about Baron Davis's return timetable now has to remember, "Oh yeah, NO moved into the West this year, and oh yeah, they're a member of the Southwest division" or "The Heat aren't in the Atlantic Division anymore. They're in that new one...oh yeah, the SouthEast Division". Then, once you found the correct thread, you'd have to read down through all the irrelevant stuff to find info about the team of interest.
I'm all about user-friendly and accessibility, so I agree with post #8 that indicates the concern if some people would even know to look on a separate page. I'm also concerned that 30 separate threads would unduly clutter up the main forum page, or place less active team threads so far down the list (or on back pages) that they would get even less attention/recognition/use. I'm also not absolutely opposed (of course, it ultimately only matters what Guru thinks anyway) to some kind of organization with divisions being put into place. I wonder if a workable solution would be to place a link or multiple links to the team discussion page or pages on the main basketball forum page. This would accomplish (1) increasing visibility and (2) minimize dominating the main bb forum page with all team threads. Guru, I don't know if it would work with the way you have the site setup, but what if there was an active link on the hoops forum page that looked just like any other discussion thread and was also updated by most recent post in terms of position on the thread listings, just like on the "Index of Forum Topics" page, where any post in that forum pushes that forum page up to the top of the list. The link/thread could either be something covering them all like "Team Specific Threads" or could be organized by division to satisfy that desire by some. Still, that might make it harder for some to find their teams that way. When you click on the thread/link it would take you to either the entire list of teams (if the thread/link represented them all) or to a page with only the Eastern Conference Teams, or SouthEast Division teams, however it was decided to be organized. The pages would either have 30, 15, or 5 team threads on them depending on if they were all together, or broken down by conference or division.
The same concept could actually be employed with the existing hoops "leagues and standings page", with a link/thread listed in the main hoops forum page threads, and clicking on it takes you over to the leagues & standings page. Conversely, a thread/link in the leagues and standings page could be in place to take you back to the main forum page or the individual team discussion page. Simply an easier, intuitive way to navigate, without having to activate the drop down menu, and scroll to find the page you want. For new users, it would probably be even more helpful than for us who know where to find it but just would rather point and click than go through the menu. Just a convenience feature, really.
Well, sorry for the mammoth post. I'm glad to see there's some interest here and also nice to see that people are open to new ideas and change. I hope this goes. I would look forward to finding out who are some closet fans of my team or people that know things about them that didn't feel comfortable posting general comments in other formats. Thanks for the consideration, Guru.
|
| 19 | Candyman
ID: 151120719
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 20:23
|
PR You have too much time on your hands!!
|
| 20 | Pacers Rule
Donor
ID: 910311210
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 20:44
|
Hey, fantasy sports rock and this is my fav. place to howl about it....but yeah, you might be right on this post anyway!
|
| 21 | Addicted
Dude
ID: 4611592518
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 20:56
|
PR,
Have you been over to RealGM?
They have essentially the same thing.
(That's were I go when I'm looking for current info). And yes, some teams have more posts than others. Also there's a lot of "good-natured" team cross-posting.
I don't know what's the best way to do this. As I think 30 seperate team threads would clutter the Basketball forum, but also having it in a seperate area may split information away from where I would look first.
I'm sure there's a way to have a good balance.
Is there a way to "feed" the active threads from another forum onto this forum?
--Addicted--
|
| 22 | Candyman
ID: 151120719
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 20:58
|
only meant as a joke...
|
| 23 | KTx
ID: 29112617
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 21:15
|
Re 18:
First, the discussion would get too convoluted with 5 conversations going on simultaneously in the same thread
-I really dont think it will be as active as you imagine it to be.
Second, there would be more of a tendency for posters to be reprimanded for posting their team's info in their division thread if there was less interest in their team
-That's just a lack of maturity if one poster bashes another one for reasons as you had stated previously.
Third, it would be a lot harder for some people to find out info about a specific team if you first had to remember what division they were in
-What I stated earlier was "Team Talk: Raptors, Knicks, Nets, Sixers, Celtics" - you dont even need to know what division that really is. The teams are listed.
|
| 24 | Pacers Rule
Donor
ID: 910311210
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 21:34
|
That's just a lack of maturity if one poster bashes another one for reasons as you had stated previously
KTx, well, it happens all the time. We have a few trolls around here and even some regulars can be pretty rude at times. Why do think there are so many lurkers who don't post? It happens a lot. I'm not sure how to correct it either. I just figured this was a way to prevent it.
And I hope it would be pretty active with regards to the type of caliber fans/posters we have on this site. You go to a lot of these other message forums and they are mostly a bunch of jerks seeing how rude they can be. There is something different about this site.
Addicted- no I wasn't aware of this feature. I went to the site and tried to find what you were talking about and what I found was forums dedicated to the particular teams. Each forum had multiple threads about a variety of topics, much of them not very fantasy related at all. Is this what you were talking about or is there another place on the site that is more of a single thread concept and/or more focused on fantasy sports?
Nonetheless, thanks for the tip. I will spend a little more time on that site. I had never really used it except for the trade checker function.
|
| 25 | gibby88
ID: 1511521219
Tue, Dec 07, 2004, 21:37
|
Sounds like a nice idea PF....of course the Pacer's forum will see light "howling"....
In all seriousness I would definitely visit the sites.
Maybe we should compile how many teams are covered by "local" fans?
I could help cover the Blazers (a team that has very little fantasy value currently even with the heavy sked starting Thurs)
|
| 26 | perugoon
ID: 31923116
Wed, Dec 08, 2004, 01:05
|
Here's something else I thought about, but Guru's 2 cents would definitely be required. It seems to me that people are always looking for places to discuss their favorite teams for fantasy purposes or otherwise. Forums like this might have the added benefit of attracting more users to this site. I know I haven't come across a good place to talk about the Knicks since SportsTalk.com was bought by ESPN.
Anyway, this could be a positive thing as new visitors would likely learn about the Ultimate Hoops game. More players equals better competition, bigger prizes, etc. Some of these new users might even donate to RotoGuru.com.
Obviously I'm in favor of the idea. I think grouping the teams together by division is a pretty solid idea. This creates a natural conversation about playoff positioning which should be entertaining. Anyway, ring me up as a yes in this debate...
|
| 27 | angryCHAIR
ID: 98192416
Thu, Dec 09, 2004, 17:47
|
Has this been shelved for now? Guru?
|
| 28 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Dec 10, 2004, 12:30
|
Sorry for the delay. It's a busy month.
I think it's worth a try, but let's start simply and see how it goes. If needed, we can expand or reformat after we have some experience that justifies the need.
Shortly, I'll set up six separate "Team Talk" threads, each devoted to one NBA division, with the five teams listed in the thread title. If you have some news to post in one of these threads, please indicate the team at the beginning of your post, e.g. "Pacers: yada, yada, yada." While I sympathesize with the concern over interlaced conversations, I think this is still the best compromise to deal with some of the other issues discussed above.
|
| 29 | Pacers Rule
Donor
ID: 910311210
Mon, Dec 13, 2004, 16:34
|
Guru,
thanks for a response on this. Not sure if this format will generate the kind of dialogue I was envisioning but time will tell. I see there has been some limited response so far.
-PR
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|