An Apology - Building And Creating A Better Shark Pool (3 Viewers)

[Joe Bryant]

I think I have a good understanding of the moderation thoughts.

For the other areas, what things do you folk see?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Perception is a thing, isn't it? I guess we see things as we see them if that makes sense.

Interesting. To that point, clearly in this situation the mod’s perception was that the person was trolling & being overtly political, seeing as they deleted all of the political posts & the posts pointing out that they were political posts.

Otherwise why take any action? If it was merely a perception issue, leave the troll’s posts up.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Agreeing to Disagree and moving on is a good thing in lots of cases.

I’d say the vast majority of shark pool frequenters do this all the time.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I’ll start with a couple of thoughts.

Thread organization:
For a long time, I wasn’t a fan of the archive type style with one thread, covering a player for all time.

But folks here made a convincing case and I changed my mind and now I’m with you and I think it’s the right thing.

It does require diligence on the thread title though. Some of these threads are 10+ years old and the original poster, the only person outside of moderators that can change a subject title, are not here.

That’s easily solvable, though by simply tagging @FBGmoderator in a post to the thread and alerting us. We can easily keep those in line that way.

And then, of course, for all the other threads, please do your best to keep them updated. In the same way, if you see a thread title, that’s out of date, please tag the original poster in a message and ask them to update.

Will have a bunch of those in the next few days of course is all the college player threads get updated with NFL teams.

It keeps the forum more clean to have just one thread per player, but it puts extra pressure on to make sure the title is right.

I've always been a fan of creating newer threads for annual stuff. For example, in the FFA I hate how the same Academy Awards thread keeps getting bumped each year instead of a new one created. It makes it extremely difficult to find where the discussion relevant to this year begins. Another (opposite) example, I love how there is a 2025 draft thread right now instead of just a general draft thread that gets bumped each year this time.

However, for player threads, new threads each year would be too unwieldly since there are so many, so I think you're on the right track there.

I used to think separate subforums for player threads and general fantasy strategy discussion was warranted, but I've since changed my mind. Too much of a risk to fragment the community.

I loved how last year, a bunch of us got together to do focus groups for subscriber contest strategy. That kind of stuff is excellent. This year in a similar "group project" vein, I think I'm going to run a "Shark Pool Rankings contest" thread where people can submit their personal player rankings and at the end of the season I measure and see who the best Shark Pool rankers are, and this could also give us a Shark Pool consensus player ranking for people to utilize over the summer. Wasn't sure if I needed to run this by you in case you see something like this as competition for footballguys rankings.

But collaborative strategic stuff like that is my favorite part of the Shark Pool. Lots of good minds here to work with.

Agreed. I love the collaborative stuff. The "small group" projects are great and I'd like us to do more of those. That's the kind of thinking and ideas I love to see here.

 

[Mister CIA]

Apparently, grudges last a long time.

Unfortunately, yes.

I have thy opposite experience, where I might think negatively about a person based upon political viewpoints, but am quickly reminded that they are a lot like me when we cross paths in, say, a game thread.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

For the other areas, what things do you folk see?

Other than the stuff that is already threatening to sink this thread, I love the Shark Pool format. Some of that is certainly because I'm used to it and can find my way around. We have some really creative people here who ask interesting questions and start topics that make me re-think things.

 

[JohnnyU]

Apparently, grudges last a long time.

Unfortunately, yes.

I have thy opposite experience, where I might think negatively about a person based upon political viewpoints, but am quickly reminded that they are a lot like me when we cross paths in, say, a game thread.

I would never think negatively about a person based upon their political viewpoints. I think that is silly. A good friend of mine has different political beliefs than I do, we just don't talk politics. It's good for our friendship, which has been for over 30 years.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I have thy opposite experience, where I might think negatively about a person based upon political viewpoints, but am quickly reminded that they are a lot like me when we cross paths in, say, a game thread.

I agree - There's a 49er fan (or 2) where we could not be more diametrically opposed politically, but we almost always come together over takes on the team.

As many have said before me, there is always more that unites us than divides us. Sports are a perfect example of how people who disagree fundamentally about political issues can get along as friends within the bounds of a sports discussion. And by that connection might even have more productive discussions about the bigger issues outside of sports.

The issue, as in the impetus for this entire topic, is when politics creep into a sports discussion or more specially are hammered in repeatedly like a round peg being forced into a square hole with a mallet.

That’s when tensions will rise.

I was an ag/hort applied sciences major in college. One of my favorite professors challenged the class to define “what’s a weed?”. I had him for a few classes - he’d ask the question and would get all sorts of literal answers. Then he’d smile at the class and say, “no. a long stemmed red rose growing in the middle of a cornfield is a weed.”

If people want to be political, there are all sorts of places on the internet to discuss that. Twitter, reddit, formerly the politics forum here. But the middle of a sports conversation isn’t one of them.

That said, I’ll make the caveat that ARod is a political figure. He took a public position because of his politics and some folks don’t appreciate him for that. He became more polarizing. So I could see someone in the ARod topic saying “I’m not a fan of his politics”. That’s fair game, and if someone is being honest about that being the reason they don’t like the ARod or any player, that’s actually totally ok. Or if someone likes him more because of his politics, that’s also fine to say. I would respect them no more nor less for that honesty.

But there’s a big difference between that and someone else projecting those views on another person or group of people. So while I can say “I don’t like X player for their politics”, it becomes antagonistic for someone else to say “YOU aren’t a fan of X player because of that player’s politics”.

That’s the difference between opinion and projection. A lot of trolling is projecting opinions on others, or attributing feelings (like “hatred”) on to people in disagreement - that is disingenuous and inappropriate.

In my humble opinion.

Like all things, it’s nuanced. And the best trolls love toeing the line with plausible deniability. But they’re never as subtle as they pretend to be.

I’m thankful to those here who tolerate my politics because they enjoy my sports takes. But I try not to mix the two out of respect for the community - because again FBG shark pool isn’t a political forum.

 

[Football Jones]

Perception is a thing, isn't it? I guess we see things as we see them if that makes sense.

Interesting. To that point, clearly in this situation the mod’s perception was that the person was trolling & being overtly political, seeing as they deleted all of the political posts & the posts pointing out that they were political posts.

Otherwise why take any action? If it was merely a perception issue, leave the troll’s posts up.

I wasn't surprised all the political posts and those pointing them out were deleted. Heavy politics aren't going to fly here for many reasons. It was a good decision.

The discussion turned into a fiasco. All the projecting, political feelings...just a mess. A real turd of a thread (or part of a thread). I didn't help matters by not bailing. Lesson learned.

 

[eighsse2]

I would never think negatively about a person based upon their political viewpoints.

Is this meant literally? If so, that's pretty impressive. I try to not let that happen, but it's far from my natural response to political differences.

 

[eighsse2]

Perception is a thing, isn't it? I guess we see things as we see them if that makes sense.

Interesting. To that point, clearly in this situation the mod’s perception was that the person was trolling & being overtly political, seeing as they deleted all of the political posts & the posts pointing out that they were political posts.

Otherwise why take any action? If it was merely a perception issue, leave the troll’s posts up.

I wasn't surprised all the political posts and those pointing them out were deleted. Heavy politics aren't going to fly here for many reasons. It was a good decision.

The thread turned into a real fiasco. All the projecting, political feelings...just a mess. A real turd of a thread (or part of a thread). I didn't help matters by not bailing. Lesson learned.

I've seen the word "projecting" numerous times in this thread. Can someone explain what this means in the case of interactions on this board? I know it's some kind of psychological term, but looking it up I guess it means a few different things, and I don't really know what it means exactly here (or anywhere, to be honest).

 

[JohnnyU]

I would never think negatively about a person based upon their political viewpoints.

Is this meant literally? If so, that's pretty impressive. I try to not let that happen, but it's far from my natural response to political differences.

I have no issue setting aside political differences for sake of friendship. Actually I'm surprised at anyone who can't.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I've seen the word "projecting" numerous times in this thread. Can someone explain what this means in the case of interactions on this board? I

Projection is when someone attributes thoughts, emotions, or beliefs onto someone else, or onto a group of people.

The statement, “you all just hate him because of his politics”, for example.

If anyone, or a group of people had said that they didn’t care for [him] because of [his] politics, it’s an accurate statement.

However if anyone, or a group of people were saying things like “I read that Jennings said he was a selfish player” or “a GM said he’s not well liked” and the response is “you all hate him for his politics” then that is a projection of emotion onto others (hate, when no one has expressed hatred) and a misleading premise (because of politics) because that wasn’t in fact the reason.

Thus one can be said to “project” those things onto another, or onto a group of people.

 

[eighsse2]

I would never think negatively about a person based upon their political viewpoints.

Is this meant literally? If so, that's pretty impressive. I try to not let that happen, but it's far from my natural response to political differences.

I have no issue setting aside political differences for sake of friendship. Actually I'm surprised at anyone who can't.

And maybe "think negatively" can mean different degrees of things.

Mister CIA may have, or may not have, meant something along the lines: a political opinion of someone that makes him post a strongly disagreeing reply, with reasoning, and then shake his head in disbelief, thinking "how can [username] think something like that ..."

Rather than thinking something like: "[username] is clearly a horrible person and I want nothing to do with him."

The first example would be a pretty reasonable thing that could be called "think negatively about a person".

 

[Football Jones]

I would never think negatively about a person based upon their political viewpoints.

Is this meant literally? If so, that's pretty impressive. I try to not let that happen, but it's far from my natural response to political differences.

I wonder how much political bias is in the SP? Assuming you know a poster's affiliation, do you engage with the "opposition" as much as you would somebody from your own affiliation?

Hopefully, the bias is near zero as far as the board goes, but I suspect there's a little bit of it. I could be wrong, though.

 

[eighsse2]

I would never think negatively about a person based upon their political viewpoints.

Is this meant literally? If so, that's pretty impressive. I try to not let that happen, but it's far from my natural response to political differences.

I have no issue setting aside political differences for sake of friendship. Actually I'm surprised at anyone who can't.

And maybe "think negatively" can mean different degrees of things.

Mister CIA may have, or may not have, meant something along the lines: a political opinion of someone that makes him post a strongly disagreeing reply, with reasoning, and then shake his head in disbelief, thinking "how can [username] think something like that ..."

Rather than thinking something like: "[username] is clearly a horrible person and I want nothing to do with him."

The first example would be a pretty reasonable thing that could be called "think negatively about a person".

That makes more sense than the definitions I was finding. Basically, similar to putting words in another's mouth, I guess? Reading between lines, when there's nothing there?

 

[Football Jones]

Perception is a thing, isn't it? I guess we see things as we see them if that makes sense.

Interesting. To that point, clearly in this situation the mod’s perception was that the person was trolling & being overtly political, seeing as they deleted all of the political posts & the posts pointing out that they were political posts.

Otherwise why take any action? If it was merely a perception issue, leave the troll’s posts up.

I wasn't surprised all the political posts and those pointing them out were deleted. Heavy politics aren't going to fly here for many reasons. It was a good decision.

The thread turned into a real fiasco. All the projecting, political feelings...just a mess. A real turd of a thread (or part of a thread). I didn't help matters by not bailing. Lesson learned.

I've seen the word "projecting" numerous times in this thread. Can someone explain what this means in the case of interactions on this board? I know it's some kind of psychological term, but looking it up I guess it means a few different things, and I don't really know what it means exactly here (or anywhere, to be honest).

Depends on the context. I'm not sure how other people are using it, but it can be used as an example of when somebody takes a generalized statement and projects it onto themselves, making it personal. In NFL terms, it's like you saying Philly fans get rowdy at games (meaning, in general), but somebody takes offense to the statement because they don't get rowdy.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I would never think negatively about a person based upon their political viewpoints.

Is this meant literally? If so, that's pretty impressive. I try to not let that happen, but it's far from my natural response to political differences.

I wonder how much political bias is in the SP? Assuming you know a poster's affiliation, do you engage with the "opposition" as much as you would somebody from your own affiliation?

Hopefully, the bias is near zero as far as FF goes, but I suspect there's a fair amount of it.

Not sure. But let’s assume it’s zero. It just is way better to keep politics out of the Forums. Thanks.

 

[Joe Bryant]

have been suspended multiple times for responding to troll posters and nothing ever seems to happen to the other guy. before you suspend somebody maybe spend 5 min and look into what caused the post

that’s a good one. I’ve witnessed this numerous times, (and been in your shoes a few as well).

It’s a little like the NFL where the guy who threw the 1st punch walks away while the ref flags the retaliation.

It would take 30 seconds to review to see that 4-5 punches where thrown before the retaliation happened (figuratively speaking)

thats exactly what it is. either do it right or dont do it at all.

We always aim to get things 100% right. But this is an example of I don’t think you throw the whole thing out if you’re not able to get it 100% right.

We sometimes will miss on moderation. But I don’t think that means we turn it into just anything goes.

But yes, bigger picture I understand completely the frustration.

 

[Football Jones]

I would never think negatively about a person based upon their political viewpoints.

Is this meant literally? If so, that's pretty impressive. I try to not let that happen, but it's far from my natural response to political differences.

I wonder how much political bias is in the SP? Assuming you know a poster's affiliation, do you engage with the "opposition" as much as you would somebody from your own affiliation?

Hopefully, the bias is near zero as far as FF goes, but I suspect there's a fair amount of it.

Not sure. But let’s assume it’s zero. It just is way better to keep politics out of the Forums. Thanks.

100%

 

[JohnnyU]

I would never think negatively about a person based upon their political viewpoints.

Is this meant literally? If so, that's pretty impressive. I try to not let that happen, but it's far from my natural response to political differences.

I have no issue setting aside political differences for sake of friendship. Actually I'm surprised at anyone who can't.

And maybe "think negatively" can mean different degrees of things.

Mister CIA may have, or may not have, meant something along the lines: a political opinion of someone that makes him post a strongly disagreeing reply, with reasoning, and then shake his head in disbelief, thinking "how can [username] think something like that ..."

Rather than thinking something like: "[username] is clearly a horrible person and I want nothing to do with him."

The first example would be a pretty reasonable thing that could be called "think negatively about a person".

One’s political views just isn’t important to me. I get it, that to some it is for their own reasons. This board notwithstanding, for those that don’t want to be friends with someone because of their political beliefs is being short sighted, but that’s just my opinion. I know some disagree and that’s OK too.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

One’s political views just isn’t important to me. I get it that to some it is for their own reasons. This board notwithstanding, for those that don’t want to be friends with someone because of their political beliefs is being short sighted, but that’s just my opinion. I know some disagree and that’s OK too.

Not to go down a rabbit hole, but that’s a bit difficult sometimes.

I have a very diverse group of friends. If includes people of color. If a white friend uses the N-word, for example, I will advise them that I’m not with that.

If they continue to do so, I’ll end that friendship.

Likewise with any other slur. I have customers who are LGBTQ, I have friends with children on the spectrum, or who identify as LGBTQ. Again - someone insulting those groups with gay slurs or using the R-word as an insult is an insult to my friends or those I consider family.

Absolute deal breakers. And contrary to being “short-sighted”, I believe it means I’m being thoughtful enough that while I otherwise like that person, their intolerance of others is a deal-breaker for me when deciding who i will be friends with. It isn’t easy, and I wish those people didn’t have those hateful views. But it is what it is.

Honestly, in a supposedly free country, those things shouldn’t be “political”. But that’s the world we now live in. Those things have been politicized. So I take principled stances on what I will or will not tolerate.

Fortunately the vast majority of my friends / family are empathetic people who care about such things. But I’ve cut a few people out over the years, with no regrets.

 

[Gatorade]

I have been away a few days and came back to this interesting read. I don't understand how people get so upset over minor things. Being married almost 45 years, I have learned to let the little things slide. Keeping politics out of here is a good thing, even though I regularly talk to neighbors with different ideas. To me it is no different than talking to Philly or Washington fans about a game I love that we may have different ideas about. Also, as I get older, some things I forget and some things just don't bother me anymore. I think I am healthier for it. So please, can't we all just get along.
On the AI subject, I dislike it in this context unless you are just talking about statistics. But then again, I dislike most AI content I read. So hey, get off of my lawn. This forum is great.

 

[JohnnyU]

One’s political views just isn’t important to me. I get it that to some it is for their own reasons. This board notwithstanding, for those that don’t want to be friends with someone because of their political beliefs is being short sighted, but that’s just my opinion. I know some disagree and that’s OK too.

Not to go down a rabbit hole, but that’s a bit difficult sometimes.

I have a very diverse group of friends. If includes people of color. If a white friend uses the N-word, for example, I will advise them that I’m not with that.

If they continue to do so, I’ll end that friendship.

Likewise with any other slur. I have customers who are LGBTQ, I have friends with children on the spectrum, or who identify as LGBTQ. Again - someone insulting those groups with gay slurs or using the R-word as an insult is an insult to my friends or those I consider family.

Absolute deal breakers. And contrary to being “short-sighted”, I believe it means I’m being thoughtful enough that while I otherwise like that person, their intolerance of others is a deal-breaker for me when deciding who i will be friends with. It isn’t easy, and I wish those people didn’t have those hateful views. But it is what it is.

Honestly, in a supposedly free country, those things shouldn’t be “political”. But that’s the world we now live in. Those things have been politicized. So I take principled stances on what I will or will not tolerate.

Fortunately the vast majority of my friends / family are empathetic people who care about such things. But I’ve cut a few people out over the years, with no regrets.

Being respectful to others should be a given. Common decency is expected and that has nothing to do with politics. If it does, then those people are just stupid. There is no place in my world for that kind of stupid and most people on all sides of the political spectrum realize that.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Being respectful to others should be a given. Common decency is expected and that has nothing to do with politics.

Thank you.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

 

[JohnnyU]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

I would think the footballguys podcasts reach out to a lot of new people. Perhaps an occasional pitch to that audience about the forums would be a good thing.

 

[Mister CIA]

And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

I'm a very casual FF player these days, so this is not best heard coming from me, but if someone is serious about FF and they are in it to win it, participation in this forum is the single best thing they can do win, more than proper FBG subscripton, where actual participation matters (nothing refines one's opinion better that opening it up for criticism). Hope I don't come across like I'm sleighting your product (it's great) but there's wisdom to be found here, and lots of it. Maybe emphasize this to subscribers.

 

[Joe Bryant]

And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

I'm a very casual FF player these days, so this is not best heard coming from me, but if someone is serious about FF and they are in it to win it, participation in this forum is the single best thing they can do win, more than proper FBG subscripton, where actual participation matters (nothing refines one's opinion better that opening it up for criticism). Hope I don't come across like I'm sleighting your product (it's great) but there's wisdom to be found here, and lots of it. Maybe emphasize this to subscribers.

Thanks GB. No sleight at all. I agree that a place to have two way discussion is invaluable.

 

[BoltNlava]

And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

I'm a very casual FF player these days, so this is not best heard coming from me, but if someone is serious about FF and they are in it to win it, participation in this forum is the single best thing they can do win, more than proper FBG subscripton, where actual participation matters (nothing refines one's opinion better that opening it up for criticism). Hope I don't come across like I'm sleighting your product (it's great) but there's wisdom to be found here, and lots of it. Maybe emphasize this to subscribers.

Thanks GB. No sleight at all. I agree that a place to have two way discussion is invaluable.

Building off of this. I read a lot here for years for free and am now a subscriber. I think pushing the forum to the forefront is pretty wise. Hey- come in for free and read among those who actually compete and subscribe if you crave more knowledge. This really works. I'm proof.

 

[Joe Bryant]

And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

I'm a very casual FF player these days, so this is not best heard coming from me, but if someone is serious about FF and they are in it to win it, participation in this forum is the single best thing they can do win, more than proper FBG subscripton, where actual participation matters (nothing refines one's opinion better that opening it up for criticism). Hope I don't come across like I'm sleighting your product (it's great) but there's wisdom to be found here, and lots of it. Maybe emphasize this to subscribers.

Thanks GB. No sleight at all. I agree that a place to have two way discussion is invaluable.

Building off of this. I read a lot here for years for free and am now a subscriber. I think pushing the forum to the forefront is pretty wise. Hey- come in for free and read among those who actually compete and subscribe if you crave more knowledge. This really works. I'm proof.

That's awesome. Thank you!

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I'm a very casual FF player these days, so this is not best heard coming from me, but if someone is serious about FF and they are in it to win it, participation in this forum is the single best thing they can do win, more than proper FBG subscripton, where actual participation matters (nothing refines one's opinion better that opening it up for criticism).

I agree. I’ve been tipped off to so many value players here - it’s how I landed rookie 5th rounder Pacheco in 2x 16 team leagues, for one recent example.

The dynasty value topic is invaluable for spitballing trade ideas. The feedback from peers who have no skin in the game is better than any trade calc or value chart.

Finally, the team/player topics have homers who often have more/better/earlier information than anyone else.

No product could compete with that.

 

[JAA]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

IMO the way to bring new folks here is offer something CBS and Reddit dont.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

IMO the way to bring new folks here is offer something CBS and Reddit dont.

Thanks. Can you elaborate there on what you think that might be?

 

[BoltNlava]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

IMO the way to bring new folks here is offer something CBS and Reddit dont.

you mean like less adds that mess up your feed and cleaner look that isn't confusing and distracting? I agree.

 

[JAA]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

IMO the way to bring new folks here is offer something CBS and Reddit dont.

Thanks. Can you elaborate there on what you think that might be?

If I knew I would share. I havnt thought about it, but kids these days consume content much different than us 3-digiter's.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

IMO the way to bring new folks here is offer something CBS and Reddit dont.

Thanks. Can you elaborate there on what you think that might be?

If I knew I would share. I havnt thought about it, but kids these days consume content much different than us 3-digiter's.

That's part of the challenge. Most of the advice I get on this is implementing a newer platform like Discourse that is more modern than our current Xenforo platform.

More mobile friendly and modern.

But I know there will be folks who don't like that.

So maybe it's other things.

 

[JAA]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

IMO the way to bring new folks here is offer something CBS and Reddit dont.

you mean like less adds that mess up your feed and cleaner look that isn't confusing and distracting? I agree.

How about a GenAI daily summarization feed into an audio podcast? Take the most meaningful SharkPool content in the past 24 hours, turn it into audio, and publish it. You can also have a weekly summary which is a 60-90 min podcast also.

I think what would be novel, and the toughest part, but the GenAI needs to somehow maintain posters and their personality. What I mean is it cant just be a single voice of content. It almost has to be a bit of a discussion/argument from specific biased perspectives.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Some if it will be a push for folks here to be more welcoming and patient with the newer folks. I get that that's not always the most convenient thing.

 

[smbkrypt24]

Some if it will be a push for folks here to be more welcoming and patient with the newer folks. I get that that's not always the most convenient thing.

Yes, it isn't uncommon for someone new to start a topic in the wrong area or a wrong question in a topic. I see a lot handle that well, but I do think as a group there could be improvement in not embarrassing that poster. Encourage them to be part of the forum as opposed to discourage there attempt at learning more.

 

[BoltNlava]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

IMO the way to bring new folks here is offer something CBS and Reddit dont.

Thanks. Can you elaborate there on what you think that might be?

If I knew I would share. I havnt thought about it, but kids these days consume content much different than us 3-digiter's.

That's part of the challenge. Most of the advice I get on this is implementing a newer platform like Discourse that is more modern than our current Xenforo platform.

More mobile friendly and modern.

But I know there will be folks who don't like that.

So maybe it's other things.

CBS uses too much flash and ads that are quite large that distract the eye. IMO lean clean info that is concise and easy to navigate is much preferred. Paying customers should not have to wade through bs to get to what they need. K.I.S.S. is the direction I'd lean to...with just a little more 2026 and a little less 2015.

 

[JAA]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

IMO the way to bring new folks here is offer something CBS and Reddit dont.

Thanks. Can you elaborate there on what you think that might be?

If I knew I would share. I havnt thought about it, but kids these days consume content much different than us 3-digiter's.

That's part of the challenge. Most of the advice I get on this is implementing a newer platform like Discourse that is more modern than our current Xenforo platform.

More mobile friendly and modern.

But I know there will be folks who don't like that.

So maybe it's other things.

CBS uses too much flash and ads that are quite large that distract the eye. IMO lean clean info that is concise and easy to navigate is much preferred. Paying customers should not have to wade through bs to get to what they need. K.I.S.S. is the direction I'd lean to...with just a little more 2026 and a little less 2015.

As a cbs lover, I do not get swayed by their ads. If there was more novel content, I could be pulled away.

 

[fatness]

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

When I look at the very top of www.footballguys.com I see the logo, then Rankings -- Articles -- Tools -- Podcasts -- More
There is no overt mention of the forums.
Many of the Sunday morning crush looking for last-minute FF info don't know even see that the forums are here.
The very top of www.footballguys.com should be the logo, then Rankings -- Articles -- Tools -- Podcasts -- Forums -- More
with a dropdown menu under Forums listing them all.
That will draw more viewers to the forums.

 

[JohnnyU]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

IMO the way to bring new folks here is offer something CBS and Reddit dont.

Thanks. Can you elaborate there on what you think that might be?

If I knew I would share. I havnt thought about it, but kids these days consume content much different than us 3-digiter's.

That's part of the challenge. Most of the advice I get on this is implementing a newer platform like Discourse that is more modern than our current Xenforo platform.

More mobile friendly and modern.

But I know there will be folks who don't like that.

So maybe it's other things.

CBS uses too much flash and ads that are quite large that distract the eye. IMO lean clean info that is concise and easy to navigate is much preferred. Paying customers should not have to wade through bs to get to what they need. K.I.S.S. is the direction I'd lean to...with just a little more 2026 and a little less 2015.

As a cbs lover, I do not get swayed by their ads. If there was more novel content, I could be pulled away.

Ads is what ruined rotoworld. They went away from great content to nothing but a busy / distracting site, with less content.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

IMO the way to bring new folks here is offer something CBS and Reddit dont.

Thanks. Can you elaborate there on what you think that might be?

If I knew I would share. I havnt thought about it, but kids these days consume content much different than us 3-digiter's.

That's part of the challenge. Most of the advice I get on this is implementing a newer platform like Discourse that is more modern than our current Xenforo platform.

More mobile friendly and modern.

But I know there will be folks who don't like that.

So maybe it's other things.

CBS uses too much flash and ads that are quite large that distract the eye. IMO lean clean info that is concise and easy to navigate is much preferred. Paying customers should not have to wade through bs to get to what they need. K.I.S.S. is the direction I'd lean to...with just a little more 2026 and a little less 2015.

As a cbs lover, I do not get swayed by their ads. If there was more novel content, I could be pulled away.

Ads is what ruined rotoworld. They went away from great content to nothing but a busy / distracting site, with less content.

We need to add some ad revenue. But I've never felt I had the energy to deal with the outcry of ads on a free forum.

 

[BassNBrew]

Ill add in that we all "grew up together" on the internet over the past 20-25 years. There are too many regulars here to perpetuate the toxicity of typical social media. One of the reasons I believe FBGs still exists. We all don't tune in on the regular, though there are enough of us coming and going which helps keep a solid tone IMO.

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

I'm not sure what you're arrangement with Bloom and Lammey is to name a few, but they used to post here and don't come up in a member search. In the old days, most of you staff posted here, now not so much. I would want my talent producing podcasts for me to be tossing out some message board teasers and maybe engaging their fan "in person" here. Personally I think they could pick up some perspective by spending time here but maybe that's not important if entertainment is their primary goal. I don't mean to be snarky with that statement. I watched my first Audible last year and was blown away with how entertaining it was. Absolutely crushed the content value. Personally that's more important for me in a FF podcast when I have access to great content here already. I watched that podcast because of a link in this forum or your e-mail. They should be "returning the favor". I suspect they have regular listeners that would love this forum if they knew about it.

 

[Mitchie]

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

When I look at the very top of www.footballguys.com I see the logo, then Rankings -- Articles -- Tools -- Podcasts -- More
There is no overt mention of the forums.
Many of the Sunday morning crush looking for last-minute FF info don't know even see that the forums are here.
The very top of www.footballguys.com should be the logo, then Rankings -- Articles -- Tools -- Podcasts -- Forums -- More
with a dropdown menu under Forums listing them all.
That will draw more viewers to the forums.

this is a good point, would think this had to be intentional on some level as forums are not easy to find.

 

[Dan Lambskin]

I think the biggest improvement you could make is not allowing a certain poster to bump every player thread with every little piece of info he finds

Would rather see discussion but instead this place has basically turned into an RSS newsfeed, except you have to click on the post to see it first

 

[Joe Bryant]

Adding new people is something I'd like to improve here. This isn't an especially welcoming group. I don't think it's because our people are not kind, it's that lots of us have been here forever and we have a lot of cliques and inside stuff. I'd love to figure out to add new folks. And I know that's probably not a popular opinion.

Some talk about how the forum isn't entirely dead yet but it's on it's way. The fact is any group will always lose some people for various reasons. And we need to be replacing those folks with new folks.

I'm not sure the best way to do that but would love thoughts.

When I look at the very top of www.footballguys.com I see the logo, then Rankings -- Articles -- Tools -- Podcasts -- More
There is no overt mention of the forums.
Many of the Sunday morning crush looking for last-minute FF info don't know even see that the forums are here.
The very top of www.footballguys.com should be the logo, then Rankings -- Articles -- Tools -- Podcasts -- Forums -- More
with a dropdown menu under Forums listing them all.
That will draw more viewers to the forums.

this is a good point, would think this had to be intentional on some level as forums are not easy to find.

Thanks. That is a good point and we should look into that. Not intentional at all other than trying to streamline the menu. We constantly get feedback that our menu is too crowded and cluttered. But I agree it should be higher.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Thanks @Dan Lambskin. I know folks posting news items want to make the forum as good as it can be.

Maybe there can be a discussion there on the best way to do that.

LIke with all the forum, it's a balance of signal to noise and trying to keep a high bar for what's relevant. The challenge is different people have different levels of what they want.

Some want everything. Some want just the big things. We can talk on that.

@Faust can you share your thoughts on it?