What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

What Makes You More Likely To Answer In Assistant Coach Forum? (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Hey Guys,

I posted this in the AC forum

For 2017, one of the things we're going to try and do is make the Assistant Coach (AC) more useful. Listening to feedback from you guys, making the AC a subforum of the Shark Pool is how we're going to do that. 

Some thoughts:

  • Do some work yourself. Tell us which way you're leaning and what you see as the Pros and Cons of the deal / trade / move. If you're asking for someone to spend time helping you, show that you're invested too. Do as much background checking and research on the question as possible. Google is your friend. Don't expect others to do research for you here.
  • It's a two way street. Nobody likes anyone that always takes and never gives. If you're asking for help, do as much as you can to give back in ways you can. Maybe you're not as knowledgeable as you like and you can't give back with advice. But give back pointing users to helpful news articles about a player in question or just generally helping however you can. It's human nature to want to help the people that are seen as good folks.
  • Be as detailed as possible when asking the question. Every single question is almost entirely dependent on the context of your team, scoring system, league, situation, playing style and more. Give as much as you can. 
  • Polls are your friend. The Poll feature is by far the best way to get quick and easy feedback from others. 
For your best shot at having questions answered, do this:

1. State the offer / trade / question clearly.

2. Give clear and concise details about your league and situation. Let us know your scoring system, league info, roster and more. Enough to make a good decision, but don't overload.

3. Give the Pros and Cons of each player involved in the deal. Give past history. Give us the current situation with the players. 

4. Tell us which way you're leaning based on the Pros and Cons of #3.

5. Be appreciative of the feedback.

I get it, there are tons of questions and people asking for help. There are FAR more people with questions than there are people who have the time to help and answer. There will be lots of questions that are unanswered. But if you do these things, you'll increase the odds of having someone help. And very likely may come to a better understanding yourself as you work through the problem. 




4




 


What other things would you add? 

In other words, as someone who might answer an Assistant Coach question, what kinds of things make you more likely to answer?

J

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If the assets in the post involve impactful players.

I likely won't spend much time if it's a Kapri Bibbs for Eric Decker trade offer the poster wants evaluated.

 
I feel there can be a fine line between having enough detailed information and too much.  I want there to be enough info that I can understand the their question and make an informed suggestion.  I will admit though that I will avoid some posts that are just too long.  I don't want to spend 5 minutes reading and trying to interpret how your league works.

Needs to be somewhat quick and precise.  Need to know the league type, size and rules along with what your question is.

 
Exactly as Hawkeye states, quick and precise.....which kind of goes against your suggestions #3 and #4. 

In fairness to the owners, i always skip IDPs as I dont play in them. 

 
Exactly as Hawkeye states, quick and precise.....which kind of goes against your suggestions #3 and #4. 

In fairness to the owners, i always skip IDPs as I dont play in them. 
I also skip IDPs and most dynasty questions as I just don't care enough about them.  That's all personal opinion though.

 
Thanks Guys. That's a good point about not giving TOO much information that it becomes a chore. I'll modify it for something about clear and concise. 

And for sure, people will skip over questions they don't care about like with minor impact players or IDP if they don't play IDP. That's a given. Thanks.

J

 
Changed to:

1. State the offer / trade / question clearly.

2. Give clear and concise details about your league and situation. Let us know your scoring system, league info, roster and more. Enough to make a good decision, but don't overload.

3. Give the Pros and Cons of each player involved in the deal. Give past history. Give us the current situation with the players. 

4. Tell us which way you're leaning based on the Pros and Cons of #3.

5. Be appreciative of the feedback.




 

 
I think there are a couple of things I loom at. 1-Is the question they are asking written in a manner that you can understand what they are asking? 2-Do I have a clear opinion?  I think many times someone is asking do I trade this for that and the responses are limited because not many have a strong preference for one side or the other.

 
I think there are a couple of things I loom at. 1-Is the question they are asking written in a manner that you can understand what they are asking? 2-Do I have a clear opinion?  I think many times someone is asking do I trade this for that and the responses are limited because not many have a strong preference for one side or the other.




 
That's a good point. I think for lots of trades, it's true where it's fair for both sides and your opinion is that it's even. For the person asking the question, that's good information though. It's helpful for them to hear folks like you guys see it as pretty even. In other words, any feedback is good. Even if it's "meh".

J

 
And if an OP contains "answer mine and I'll answer yours", I'm gone.  Really bugs me when I see that.

 
If it is a totally obvious answer I tend not to get involved.  If everyone is going to answer the same way and there isn't anything to add I usually won't answer.  I am more inclined to get involved if there can be thoughtful debate on both sides of the equation.  I like to play devil's advocate as well so if there are quite a few comments on one side but I can see the other side I might put in a response to try and provide a different perspective if it is something that can be discussed.

 
1. Clearly laid out question - We shouldn't have to go back and ask for details of the team or league scoring. Spell that out at the beginning.

2. The question gets right to the point - Don't want to read a book when the response will likely be one word

3. Involves bigger name players - Like a previous poster said, no one is really concerned about random end of bench players

 
I am not sure I can answer the "more likely to answer" part, but I can certainly provide perspective on "less likely to answer" side.

Over the years, I have provided answers in the ACF with a full breakdown of the positives and negatives of the situation (who to start, who to draft, who to trade, etc.). So far so good.

Based on that, many times that would lead me to recommend something that was against what the OP was leaning towards or wanted to read, or was against what the huge majority was suggesting.

On several occasions, people would resort to name calling or question my fantasy knowledge to suggest something so ridiculous as a proposed solution. That happened enough times where I sort of lost interest in posting in the ACF. It wasn't worth the effort to research answers or solutions for OTHER PEOPLE's fantasy teams only to get an attitude from people.

IMO, posting an ACF thread on "PLAYER X, PLAYER Y, or PLAYER Z" and having people post nothing more than PLAYER Y doesn't do much good and really doesn't help all that much. Maybe I am in the minority in that regard . . . I want to know WHY people are picking the answer they pick . . . not just the name of the player.

 
Sort of re-hashing above posts, but short is for sure the key.  The shorter the better (as long as it includes scoring and other relevant info. 

I will quite often skip posts that are too long, or simply ones that have crazy weird scoring systems as it takes too long to figure out and adjust.  Posters can't exactly change their scoring rules for the sake of a post, so you ccan't really omit posters in these leagues, but out of the ordinary scoring systems I usually skip responding to.

 
I want a response or like from the OP if I respond. Some AC questions will get a bunch of replies and the OP either chooses one person to start arguing with or the one person who most clearly says what they wanted to hear. And a "thanks everyone" post doesn't really work because it means you have to go back to thread just to sees it.

 
It's a fine line for sure. Discussion on the advice given is good. Arguing or not liking the answer seems unappreciative. 

I think one thing to keep at the forefront is ask questions more when you don't agree or understand vs telling people they're wrong. If someone asks a question and someone gives advice that you think is wrong, instead of arguing or accusing them of not knowing, a MUCH better response is "help me understand why you think that's the right answer". Way better.

J

 
Joe Bryant said:
That's a good point. I think for lots of trades, it's true where it's fair for both sides and your opinion is that it's even. For the person asking the question, that's good information though. It's helpful for them to hear folks like you guys see it as pretty even. In other words, any feedback is good. Even if it's "meh".

J
Knowing that folks think a trade is fairly balance is important info!  I would suggest making polls with 3 options: Team A, Team B, Even Trade.

 
To veer off topic for a minute, my personal ACF fave is when someone asks if they should propose a trade of Darren McFadden, Ted Ginn, Vernon Davis, and Sam Bradford for Odell Beckham. Is it even worth the time to respond? As if someone is going to trade a Top 5 WR for flotsam and jetsam that has bounced around the waiver wire all season.

 
To veer off topic for a minute, my personal ACF fave is when someone asks if they should propose a trade of Darren McFadden, Ted Ginn, Vernon Davis, and Sam Bradford for Odell Beckham. Is it even worth the time to respond? As if someone is going to trade a Top 5 WR for flotsam and jetsam that has bounced around the waiver wire all season.




 
Assuming it's an honest question, I'd say yes, it's worth letting folks know what you think. It does take patience and tons of people don't have time, but there is some good in helping people understand things like 5 scrubs don't equal one star. But I hear you. It takes patience. 

J

 
you're not really asking this, and you've already made the decision of making the ACF a separate sub-forum of the shark pool, but here's what would make me contribute more to AC-style questions:

If we had 2 dedicated threads in the Shark Pool, I would pop in all the time.

For example, the long-running "Dynasty Trades" Thread goes on and off the 1st page but still gets lots of traffic, and to me that's a parallel to AC kinds of threads. (the trades are just posted to get opinions from others anyway, so it's some form of a Asst Coach vibe to see if you "won" the trade or not).

I think if there was one "Asst Coach WDIS" thread and one "Asst Coach Trade Offer" threads ion the Shark Pool, I would definitely hop in and out of that thread to answer with my thoughts and to even post some of my own questions. As it is right now, I go in there once a month when I'm board.

Is there no chance of making those 2 threads be the place for those questions and have them in the Shark Pool?

2 cents

 
Last edited by a moderator:
To veer off topic for a minute, my personal ACF fave is when someone asks if they should propose a trade of Darren McFadden, Ted Ginn, Vernon Davis, and Sam Bradford for Odell Beckham. Is it even worth the time to respond? As if someone is going to trade a Top 5 WR for flotsam and jetsam that has bounced around the waiver wire all season.
The trade is even worse than Stud for 4 pieces of flotsam/jetsam because the player giving the stud would also likely have to drop additional players to be able to accept the trade. Very potentially, at least one would be better than some he would be taking in the trade.

 
Hi Joey,

We're going to do it with the Subforum in the Shark Pool. Single threads in the Shark Pool might work ok in May but would be unbearable in September. 

We may break up the AC subforum into categories if you guys think it would help.

J

 
The trade is even worse than Stud for 4 pieces of flotsam/jetsam because the player giving the stud would also likely have to drop additional players to be able to accept the trade. Very potentially, at least one would be better than some he would be taking in the trade.
When I've responded that no one will take those types of trades (my trash for your stud) seriously, the OP would reply that he'll substitute Flacco for Bradford and they'll be no way they can pass that trade up.

 
Hi Joey,

We're going to do it with the Subforum in the Shark Pool. Single threads in the Shark Pool might work ok in May but would be unbearable in September. 

We may break up the AC subforum into categories if you guys think it would help.

J


To be clear, I'm not suggesting single threads per question in the Shark Pool.

I'm saying, just like the "OFFICIAL 2017 OFF-SEASON DYNASTY TRADES" is a SINGLE catch all thread for every single dynasty (and we don't end up with a thread-per-trade, I'm suggesting the same exact thing for handling the AC questions. Literally TWO total threads in the Shark Pool: one called "Official Asst Coach: WDIS Thread" and one called "Official Asst Coach: Trade Offers Thread".  That would just add 2 threads to the Shark Pool year round. No more.

I personally think the AC talk would get more folks involved if it were just a (contained) part of the vibrant Shark Pool community.

2 more cents :)

 
I think if there was one "Asst Coach WDIS" thread and one "Asst Coach Trade Offer" threads ion the Shark Pool, I would definitely hop in and out of that thread to answer with my thoughts and to even post some of my own questions. As it is right now, I go in there once a month when I'm board.
I know I am calling for a solution that no one else seems interested in, but I'll keep wailing blindly in the night!

If some wonderful programmer could write a module that with

  • WDIS and Trade entry forms which when submitted
  • updated an already existing WDIS or Trade thread in the forum
  • except these two threads are really polls.  So we could quickly scroll down the list and vote
Without getting into too much detail, the polls would be something like this:

WDIS:

Member NewYorkFred: PPR=1; Choose 3 players
[checkbox] Player 1
[checkbox] Player 2
[checkbox] Player 3
[checkbox] Player 4

Member BostonBob: PPR=1; Choose 2 players
[checkbox] Player 1
[checkbox] Player 2
[checkbox] Player 3
[checkbox] Player 4

Member LosAngelesLarry: PPR=1; Choose players
[checkbox] Player 1
[checkbox] Player 2
[checkbox] Player 3

Member AltantaJames: PPR=1; Choose 3 players
[checkbox] Player 1
[checkbox] Player 2
[checkbox] Player 3
[checkbox] Player 4


The Trade poll would look something like this:

Member NewYorkFred: PPR=1; 12 team Dynasty
[radio button] Team 1

[radio button] Team 2
[radio button] Even trade


Member BostonBob: PPR=0; 10 team Redraft
[radio button] Team 1
[radio button] Team 2
[radio button] Even trade


Member LosAngelesLarry: PPR=1; 14 team Dynasty
[radio button] Team 1
[radio button] Team 2
[radio button] Even trade


Member AltantaJames: PPR=1; 12 team Redraft
[radio button] Team 1
[radio button] Team 2
[radio button] Even trade


By going into a single thread, a member could quickly scan the list and vote on any/all Trades or WDIS.

 
Hi Joey,

We're going to do it with the Subforum in the Shark Pool. Single threads in the Shark Pool might work ok in May but would be unbearable in September. 

We may break up the AC subforum into categories if you guys think it would help.

J
Maybe Joey and I think alike, as I would be more inclined to read and reply to something I actually see as a thread in circulation. I am not sure there will be much difference in traffic and response to a Assistant Coach Sub Forum versus the old Assistant Coach Forum.

Maybe if you had dedicated threads started by and answered by staff guys in the sub forum where people would leave them questions and then they answered many / most / all of them it would get people to frequent the sub forum.

Speaking only for myself, I would rather see an answer from a staffer than a poster I haven't heard of . . . but that may not be what you are shooting for in terms of staff resources (ie having staff devote time to essentially free content from staff in season).

 
For what it's worth, joey, Sigmund's catch-all question answering thread in the Shark Pool goes through so many pages in a matter of minutes that it's impossible to keep up with, and only really works because Sigmund is the only person answering, so he can just start at the first one and reply till he runs out of time.  I agine how many more pages it would grow to if even four or five regulars took it on themselves to start replying to that many posts...

I think the dynasty trades one works because most owners may complete half a dozen trades a year, vs. haveing half a dozen WDIS questions every Sunday.  The volume is much lower.

Just a thought...

 
I used to answer a lot of questions in the ACF years ago.  I have asked very few questions but at least 1000 of my total posts were me trying to help people in the ACF.  I usually focused on questions involving trades or team building.  I would usually only answer a WDIS question if there was a poll.  That was years ago, and I remember getting some kind of reward from FBG for a couple/few years (I think it was a free subscription for the year).  I never used the subscription, but it would probably be an incentive for some people.  I just liked talking football and I liked helping people out.  I stopped (also years ago) because I was tired of the obnoxiousness.  One of the reasons I would go to the ACF was to get away from the garbage that is so pervasive in the Shark Pool and FFA, but it was no longer fun to talk football in the ACF either.

Maybe you can go back to giving some kind of reward to people who go out of their way to help out in the ACF.  I would also encourage (or even require) that simple yes/no, or WDIS questions have a poll.  That said, the polls, the OP providing all of the league and team info needed to answer, being excellent to each other, etc... were already talked about in the old ACF and it still wasn't working.  Besides updated board technology, what is new about the new ACF?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Appropriately contextual and brief is key. Often times folks are on both extremes (who to start this week with no player opponent listed) or an essay just looking for validation rather than to solicit discussion or opinions. 

At work we have a concept called "newspaper headlines" to try to hit both rungs of focused summary and the opportunity for more details so that folks can respond to the headline or dig into a deeper discussion about the detail provided. 

 
Maybe Joey and I think alike, as I would be more inclined to read and reply to something I actually see as a thread in circulation. I am not sure there will be much difference in traffic and response to a Assistant Coach Sub Forum versus the old Assistant Coach Forum.

Maybe if you had dedicated threads started by and answered by staff guys in the sub forum where people would leave them questions and then they answered many / most / all of them it would get people to frequent the sub forum.

Speaking only for myself, I would rather see an answer from a staffer than a poster I haven't heard of . . . but that may not be what you are shooting for in terms of staff resources (ie having staff devote time to essentially free content from staff in season).




 




 
Thanks Guys. We're going to do it as a subforum and not a Shark Pool thread in circulation. And for sure, this will be driven by board members. 

J

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I know I am calling for a solution that no one else seems interested in, but I'll keep wailing blindly in the night!

If some wonderful programmer could write a module that with

  • WDIS and Trade entry forms which when submitted
  • updated an already existing WDIS or Trade thread in the forum
  • except these two threads are really polls.  So we could quickly scroll down the list and vote
Without getting into too much detail, the polls would be something like this:

WDIS:

Member NewYorkFred: PPR=1; Choose 3 players
[checkbox] Player 1
[checkbox] Player 2
[checkbox] Player 3
[checkbox] Player 4

Member BostonBob: PPR=1; Choose 2 players
[checkbox] Player 1
[checkbox] Player 2
[checkbox] Player 3
[checkbox] Player 4

Member LosAngelesLarry: PPR=1; Choose players
[checkbox] Player 1
[checkbox] Player 2
[checkbox] Player 3

Member AltantaJames: PPR=1; Choose 3 players
[checkbox] Player 1
[checkbox] Player 2
[checkbox] Player 3
[checkbox] Player 4


The Trade poll would look something like this:

Member NewYorkFred: PPR=1; 12 team Dynasty
[radio button] Team 1

[radio button] Team 2
[radio button] Even trade


Member BostonBob: PPR=0; 10 team Redraft
[radio button] Team 1
[radio button] Team 2
[radio button] Even trade


Member LosAngelesLarry: PPR=1; 14 team Dynasty
[radio button] Team 1
[radio button] Team 2
[radio button] Even trade


Member AltantaJames: PPR=1; 12 team Redraft
[radio button] Team 1
[radio button] Team 2
[radio button] Even trade


By going into a single thread, a member could quickly scan the list and vote on any/all Trades or WDIS.
This is great for a quick response with no reasons.  That definitely has a place.  For quick Sunday morning decisions where someone wants the crowd to help them run their team. 

I like to see more  reasoning behind an answer rather than just player A over B or Trade A over B.  The discussion surrounding why one or the other is the important part to me.  It gives some context and allows  you to evaluate the poster to see if you think they know what they are talking about.   

 
This is great for a quick response with no reasons.  That definitely has a place.  For quick Sunday morning decisions where someone wants the crowd to help them run their team. 

I like to see more  reasoning behind an answer rather than just player A over B or Trade A over B.  The discussion surrounding why one or the other is the important part to me.  It gives some context and allows  you to evaluate the poster to see if you think they know what they are talking about.   
I would say that, the comment section still could handle this.  And perhaps doing this could be more obvious than before where at times it is not always clear to which question a reply is aimed.  If the options of the poll were numbered, the comments could begin... In regards to WDIS #6, etc.

 
I would say that, the comment section still could handle this.  And perhaps doing this could be more obvious than before where at times it is not always clear to which question a reply is aimed.  If the options of the poll were numbered, the comments could begin... In regards to WDIS #6, etc.




 
Yes. And I'll say there is a need for both. Sometimes people just want "who to start". Other times, they want more info on "why" so they can keep working through the question. Both have value. 

 
My apologies if someone else already said this but put info in the title of your post, such as Dynasty -- Melvin and Alshon for Julio?  Make people interested in the question and more likely to read the question, responses, and maybe contribute.

Below are some of the current headings:

Would you consider this offer?  PPR Dynasty

Blockbuster of all deals

Need help moving draft picks on dynasty

Does this make sense given roster?

I think I will b ok

And then you have "Another 1.01 question" which makes you wonder why they didn't post in one of the other 1.01 threads.

 
Thanks Guys. We're going to do it as a subforum and not a Shark Pool thread in circulation. And for sure, this will be driven by board members. 

J
I like the subforum idea because I can go to the AC thread easily while in the SP. Sounds weird, maybe lazy of me, but I'm more likely to go to it when it's staring at me in the face. 

I do like the new format. Huge upgrade. Can see where it needs to go from here I guess! 

 
Changed to:

1. State the offer / trade / question clearly.

2. Give clear and concise details about your league and situation. Let us know your scoring system, league info, roster and more. Enough to make a good decision, but don't overload.

3. Give the Pros and Cons of each player involved in the deal. Give past history. Give us the current situation with the players. 

4. Tell us which way you're leaning based on the Pros and Cons of #3.

5. Be appreciative of the feedback.
#2 says don't overload, but #3 and #4 just clog it up IMO, that's asking for a LOT.  If I'm offering advice, I should already know the pros and cons of the players.  The biggest key is to keep it brief.
 

Trades
League scoring
League, roster, lineup sizes
Format - keeper, dynasty, contracts/cap if applicable.
Players involved.
Both team rosters if alternatives are requested, otherwise only the requestor's

WDIS
League scoring
All available position/flex options
Waiver wire alternatives

Add/drop
League scoring
All available position/flex options and all players being considered to add
 

 
Wouldn't the old Opinions of the masses (or whatever it was called) accomplish this for WDIS? Select player A and then player B and you get the answer. Maybe do something similar to Fantasy Pros only for FBG instead of media "experts". Keep track of everyone's input and allow it to whittle down from the best 10% for a position.

 
Thanks Guys. We're going to do it as a subforum and not a Shark Pool thread in circulation. And for sure, this will be driven by board members. 

J
One other comment regarding the new subforum format, sometimes it gets confusing to follow the string because it defaults to the "most votes" order which places responses out of sequence.  I am constantly reorganizing it to "date order" so that I can see the sequence of answers.  This causes more of a problem when I just want to pop in to see a new response.  If more than 1 new response is in there and have votes they will be scattered so I it's unclear if you are seeing all the responses.  

It's not a huge deal but it would be quicker for new posts if it defaulted to date order. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top