FSWA HOF Inaugural class (1 Viewer)

[FantasyTrader]

I submit this stuff not looking to call anyone out, etc. I congratulated all the winners at the FSTA and have no problem with them getting in. They have all been active in our hobby for years.My only complaint about the process is the selection committee asked a lot of people for a lot of data (personal bio + two letters of rec of 500+ words each). It seems to me the selection committee should just narrow the list substantially before requesting this info from everyone. We had 6 people from our site alone go through this process. My guess is the selection committee had 70-100 total packages to sort through yet only five were going to get selected. Maybe other sites had a lot of time to write these things, but for sites like ours, we were already busy hammering away at our content.

From what I can recall I *think* there were between 40-50 nominations that made it to the committee in the first round and we were asked to vote for 14 of those. From there each committee member had to select their top five. I don't have firsthand knowledge whether their was a weeding out process by the FSWA board prior to that first round. This first year was particularly difficult and I expect it remain that way for 4-6 years until the industry's top 25-30 gamechangers are in. From there I expect the process to get MUCH easier. Speaking for myself only, I can say this first year was a downright painful experience. I left people I consider friends who were damn well deserving off of my ballot. But when every damn name is the equivilant to Larry Fitzgerald vs. Aaron Rodgers vs. Brees vs. Chris Johnson vs... somebody (most bodies) have to be left out and it's not because they aren't deserving. JWB - be my guest to give it shot. Join the FSWA and volunteer for the committee. Read 50 bios of fantasy's best of the best for the past three decades and see if you can come up with five that HAVE to go in and nobody else is even close. Like many things, it's easy to sit outside of the process and judge the results.

 

[Tau837]

JWB - be my guest to give it shot. Join the FSWA and volunteer for the committee. Read 50 bios of fantasy's best of the best for the past three decades and see if you can come up with five that HAVE to go in and nobody else is even close. Like many things, it's easy to sit outside of the process and judge the results.

It would actually be pretty easy for me. I have been playing fantasy sports for 20 years. Not as long as some, but long enough to make my choices easy for me... again, *for me*. That said, I am not a fantasy sports writer (outside my postings on this site), so I don't think I would qualify for the committee. I am merely a dedicated fan who knows which individuals have influenced me the most over the years.

 

[cobalt_27]

I submit this stuff not looking to call anyone out, etc. I congratulated all the winners at the FSTA and have no problem with them getting in. They have all been active in our hobby for years.My only complaint about the process is the selection committee asked a lot of people for a lot of data (personal bio + two letters of rec of 500+ words each). It seems to me the selection committee should just narrow the list substantially before requesting this info from everyone. We had 6 people from our site alone go through this process. My guess is the selection committee had 70-100 total packages to sort through yet only five were going to get selected. Maybe other sites had a lot of time to write these things, but for sites like ours, we were already busy hammering away at our content.

Yeah, I just cannot for the life of me figure out how this governing body thought this would be a good way to go about the selection process. I see FT getting somewhat defensive about the way they went about it. But, my hope is that there would be some common sense dialogue over the next year as to how to go about making this a more credible thing, altogether. It's like whoever won the poetry and creative writing contest makes it to the HOF.Would be like deciding to elect Joe Montana or Lawrence Taylor into the HOF based on how good of public speakers they were. Mind boggling.

 

[Bri]

You may be right, but it doesn't really matter the reason. The result is that the inaugural class is cheapened.

I know ya love the NFL HOF debates, JWB- If anyone should appreciate the difficulty a limit of five offered the voters, it's you. If there were a brand new NFL HOF, picking just five would be oh so difficult too.If you had Barry and Jim Brown but had to leave out Sweetness for the first go around, would that mean Sweetness wasn't awesome?A FBG writer did get in, his name was Greg Kellogg. As I understand it, he had a contract with JB and DD to write for this site for a year, offer hs thoughts and throw in his two cents about them refining their masterplan. Greg was a well known highly regarded writer. DD had just ended his hiatus so they could also use a little bump in exposure to get David noticed again. He played with JB and DD in Fanex and had just finished working for FoxSports. GK was friends or friendly with a very large percent of the original staff members and would debate (like we do here) in the RSFF newsgroup with them. I'm not going to pretend I can explain GK in a few sentences. You all know JB. GK is a military brat with a high moral fiber that you can probably understand why JB would appreciate that especially when you consider that those RSFF debates were really not moderated at all. I have known or known of these guys for nearly 20 years and have never gotten the impression that any one of them would say it should be me over "this guy." One guy that I thought was a shoo-in was Adam Caplan. He was a part of those debates in the RSFF "a million years ago." He was a part of FanEx. IMO He has become a better writer and bigger presence than anyone from those days. As is the case with any top reporter, he has developed a wealth of contacts that is super impressive. FootballInjuries.com was a site he did with Steve Cohen and they did well. It seems like he's written for countless newspapers and every major site at some point. He's had a TV and a radio show. IIRC He was part of NFL.com's staff many years ago when they really bulked things up over there. I don't know John Hansen really. He has done much of the above with Adam and been equally impressive. He's also been more of a site designer/manager while Adam became more of a reporter.IMO Jeff Thomas has been the most influential on the hobby. If I'm not mistaken the FSWA and FSTA were his ideas and creations. He had the most popular FF contest ever "a million years ago" by advertising a free contest in what seemed like every newspaper in the US. His game literally brought people from the hand scoring days to the web. His legwork in getting advertisers for that site then was huge. He made advertisers believe they wanted to advertise on FF sites. I believe every site owner benefited from that. He had the first referral program that I know of for FF sites to refer members to each other and get some $ out of it.I wouldn't have a prob with any of these guys getting in over DD and JB, nor would I have a prob with JB and DD getting in over them. Five is simply a very small number that must be appreciated.

 

[Bri]

Would be like deciding to elect Joe Montana or Lawrence Taylor into the HOF based on how good of public speakers they were. Mind boggling.

public speaking? well disregarding that-If only one of these two could get in, how would you decide which one?

 

[cobalt_27]

Would be like deciding to elect Joe Montana or Lawrence Taylor into the HOF based on how good of public speakers they were. Mind boggling.

public speaking? well disregarding that-If only one of these two could get in, how would you decide which one?

Not sure. But, it certainly would have nothing to do with the quality of the written submissions that were given. I mean, perhaps on a subconscious level, the quality of the writing might sway me. But, to be instructed that this is OFFICIAL criterion on which my judgment was based--to basically be told, whoever has a better written biosketch, pick that guy...that's asinine. I wouldn't want any part of it. As a member, as a voter, or as a candidate.Bottom line, I think it reflects very poorly on the organization. First, you can't have a field of 70 candidates to start off with--you have to whittle it down by some process to 10-12. And, then you certainly can't be asking them to submit their resumes done in beautifully written prose to sway the judges. What a sham.If I were JB or DD, I tell them to take a hike the next time they came asking for my resume.

 

[Zegras11]

IMO Jeff Thomas has been the most influential on the hobby. If I'm not mistaken the FSWA and FSTA were his ideas and creations.

The FSTA was not his idea or creation. Jeff was the third FSTA president and did and outstanding job.Your points about his accomplishments were great. Well done there.In 1993, Ambrosius, myself and a guy I can't remember tried to get the organization going. Industry just wasn't big enough then and we fell on deaf ears. CDM's deal with the Sporting News, around 93-94, brought in a ton of new pay customers. That fueled huge growth in revenue to the industry.In 1998, fantasyinsights.com (Jim Lenz) staged the first ever Fantasy Sports Convention at the Tropicana. The first 4-5 hours Friday night were awesome. We actually had a lot of traffic. Then it died off big time. On Saturday, all of us in the industry met in a large group for the first time ever. There were several other smaller groups at the time pushing to organize the industry, but that impromptu meeting was the thing that really launched the FSTA IMO.I can't speak of the FSWA as I'm not a writer.I think people are starting to blend FSWA into all of Fantasy Sports in this thread.My good friend Charlie Weigart is a good example here. He's really not known for his writing.Signed,The 12th of the 12 Founding FSTA Board Members

 

[FantasyTrader]

Would be like deciding to elect Joe Montana or Lawrence Taylor into the HOF based on how good of public speakers they were. Mind boggling.

public speaking? well disregarding that-If only one of these two could get in, how would you decide which one?

Not sure. But, it certainly would have nothing to do with the quality of the written submissions that were given. I mean, perhaps on a subconscious level, the quality of the writing might sway me. But, to be instructed that this is OFFICIAL criterion on which my judgment was based--to basically be told, whoever has a better written biosketch, pick that guy...that's asinine. I wouldn't want any part of it. As a member, as a voter, or as a candidate.Bottom line, I think it reflects very poorly on the organization. First, you can't have a field of 70 candidates to start off with--you have to whittle it down by some process to 10-12. And, then you certainly can't be asking them to submit their resumes done in beautifully written prose to sway the judges. What a sham.If I were JB or DD, I tell them to take a hike the next time they came asking for my resume.

Sorry, I went back and re-read that earlier post and I'm afraid I misspoke. It wasn't that we were told to "ignore" what we know personally about the nominees, just that it wasn't our job to go scouring the internet for every applicant's accolades and accomplishments. So in that respect, unless you personally know about the nominee's history in the industry, what you're left with is to go off of the nomination itself. That's what I meant to say. We weren't told "whoever has a better written biosketch, pick that guy". I agree with you, that is asinine. But with so many highly decorated candidates, it often came down to the quality of the application.

 

[komments]

I'm, on a personal level, bummed that Joe & David didn't get the nod. I wonder (thinking out loud) if our guys being a dynamic duo will hurt them in the first year or two, as voters only want to put in 5 people per year, and that would take up two spots. Either way, I don't think it'll be long before they get the nod. At least it damn well shouldn't be.

Doug and PFR definitely deserves a spot there as well.

As big as Football Outsiders has gotten, they even acknowledge that Doug helped inspire their work.

Thanks to those that remember me. A couple things - back in 2000-2001 I was tasked to compare page views for hard sports vs. fantasy sports. I can say that back then, if football had 100 unique views, baseball had about 50 and basketball had about 25. Hockey and NASCAR were around 15 but NASCAR was the fastest growing of all the sports in terms of percentage growth. Only fantasy football outdrew the hard sports coverage.As for Drinen - Mike Beacom asked the HoF class to put together a list of people who were not considered last year (all those that were will automatically be re-entered - that includes Joe and David as well as many others). Doug was one of eight that I added (Dennis LePore, Steve Cohen, Adam Caplan, Rick Serritella, Rob Phythian, Mike Hall, Doug Drinen and Gregg Rosenthal - though I am not sure Rosenthal has enough years in to be eligible).

 

[komments]

I can see that it's a tough job to identify the inaugural class, but this class seems lacking to me. Are these really the 5 best and most deserving fantasy sports writers/trade members of all time?I started playing fantasy baseball in 1991, and Ambrosius is the only one of these guys I was aware of at that time and for years afterwards.Next, I started playing fantasy basketball (NBA) in 1994 or so... and none of these guys were relevant.Finally, I started playing fantasy football in 1995. Again, I wasn't aware of any of these guys for at least a couple of years.Then there is the debate of quantity (e.g., years in the profession) vs. quality. For the past 10+ years, IMO Joe and David have been running the best web site and publishing the best content available for fantasy football. Does it really matter if someone else was around a few years longer? 10 years of top quality trumps 15 years of average to above average quality IMO.Finally, there is the "contributor" category, for lack of a better term. Doug has been mentioned here, and justifiably so. In the same vein, what about Bill James? I knew about him years before any of the members of this inaugural class, and you can be sure that his writing, while not fantasy focused, was fantasy relevant. What about Daniel Okrent, who came up with Rotisserie League Baseball in 1979? Etc.While I respect the guys in this class, I find myself extremely underwhelmed with them as an inaugural class, which should represent the best of the best to date. The simple fact is, that is not what it represents, at least not to me.

I have the introduction and acceptance speeches from all the inductees. Maybe if you hear about some of those guys credentials you will be more accepting. I personally felt I was the only one that didn't belong. You can hear a description of how the inductees were selected as well as the introductions and induction speeches.http://pcstupidity.com/greg/hof.mp3