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.

I'd Love Us To Have More News Driven Threads On Specific Topics - Please Help (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I'm in the camp that says one of the biggest UX benefits of this board is that all player info is in one thread. It makes search so much easier and fewer posts fall off the first page because of three posts about Michael Thomas. The topics that end up meriting their own thread sort themselves out and really only a handful of stories a year deserve it.

Like the Waller thread IMO is the kind of thing that starts to clutter up the board. Where does it end? Thread for Cousins has Covid? Thread for Kadarius Toney running with the 1s what does it mean? Thread for Barkley might hold out? 

The reality is there are other places people can and should go if they want to engage in off the wall ad hoc conversations. Like many here I'm sure I'm on Reddit which is as opposite from the SP as it can be as far as how threads are organized. They are far more emphermal.

The SP is the perfect complement to that. You say that new people come to the board and it seems insane. I say that's a user onboarding issue. :)

This is a great system that once people use it and understand you see the power of having all the talk about a player in on thread. IMO you would be removing the SP's one true USP and competitive advantage that is has over every other FF site if you move away from this.


Thanks. I do fully get and understand that. I'm saying that advantage for some is a huge disadvantage for way more. That a thread title talking about Saquon Barkley off PUP and a discussion about how trustable far outweighs the database all threads in one place with a bland or bad title side. 

And for sure, it's not a slam dunk. I just think the more descriptive title side is stronger. I also am not a fan at all of the "you need a complicated onboarding process to let people understand what you're doing here" angle. I'm much more in the "The site that is most clear and understandable will win". In my opinion, and it's just my opinion, the more descriptive titles is the latter. And I'd love to see us do more of that. 

 

smbkrypt24

Footballguy
Exactly. That's exactly what I'm trying to address with this. 

This is where I think some of the folks here have a blindspot. They don't realize how much smarter they are than the average fantasy player. Tons of people here knew he came off PUP. That's what you do. But there are also a LOT of people playing fantasy football that did not know he's of PUP. So now without ever spending 1 second clicking on anything to load or reveal, they get:

1. News that Barkley is off PUP

2. A prompt for discussion as to how much you trust him this year.

BOTH of this things increase the the quality of conversation and discussion in my opinion. 
I think these are great points.  For those that come to this site seeking news about fantasy players this new method would work better.

I don't come here for the news, I typically already know what is going on in the fantasy world and really only come here for discussions and alternate view points.

 

jtd13

Footballguy
Exactly. That's exactly what I'm trying to address with this. 

This is where I think some of the folks here have a blindspot. They don't realize how much smarter they are than the average fantasy player. Tons of people here knew he came off PUP. That's what you do. But there are also a LOT of people playing fantasy football that did not know he's of PUP. So now without ever spending 1 second clicking on anything to load or reveal, they get:

1. News that Barkley is off PUP

2. A prompt for discussion as to how much you trust him this year.

BOTH of this things increase the the quality of conversation and discussion in my opinion. 
Is updating the thread title to a common format (e.g. name, position, team - latest relevant news) not an option? If it's a software limitation, is it something that could be discussed with Invision?

My fear is that this creates new problems, like multiple threads for the same event, and causing the player threads with lots of good historical discussion get kind of lost and become obsolete. Are those player threads really going to get updated when there are already threads specifically discussing latest news?

And if those threads become obsolete, the board sounds like dynasty reddit (with better posters). I really don't want to see that. 

ETA: apologies if this was already discussed a lot. I skimmed, but looking back it sounds like it's been brought up.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Is updating the thread title to a common format (e.g. name, position, team - latest relevant news) not an option? If it's a software limitation, is it something that could be discussed with Invision?

My fear is that this creates new problems, like multiple threads for the same event, and causing the player threads with lots of good historical discussion get kind of lost and become obsolete. Are those player threads really going to get updated when there are already threads specifically discussing latest news?

And if those threads become obsolete, the board sounds like dynasty reddit (with better posters). I really don't want to see that. 


Thanks. The thread title can be updated only by the original poster or the moderator. 

Many times, the thread is super old and the OP may not be here any more.

The problem with a moderator having to constantly scan every thread and update is it's just a ton of work. And even the best ones will likely be hours behind at times. And news moves fast. The window for discussion Barkley coming off PUP and how much you trust him might be super short. It's tons better for @Dr. Octopus to have started a thread with that title when he did and people can jump in right now. Instead of waiting for moderator to fix the thread title this afternoon. 

 

jtd13

Footballguy
Thanks. The thread title can be updated only by the original poster or the moderator. 

Many times, the thread is super old and the OP may not be here any more.

The problem with a moderator having to constantly scan every thread and update is it's just a ton of work. And even the best ones will likely be hours behind at times. And news moves fast. The window for discussion Barkley coming off PUP and how much you trust him might be super short. It's tons better for @Dr. Octopus to have started a thread with that title when he did and people can jump in right now. Instead of waiting for moderator to fix the thread title this afternoon. 
Thanks. I can see how that's an issue. 

Is there any capability to have "tiers" of moderators? For example some frequent and solid posters could be given mod power, just to change thread titles (not something they would do as part of the staff, but as they already contribute a lot and start many threads, it's probably something they'd be happy to do). 

Alternatively, could the breaking news threads be merged into the player threads after they have run their course for a couple days?

 

C & C

Footballguy
As an example, this is what I'm talking about when I say I'd much prefer a more descriptive title:  Saquan Barkley - 08.09.21 - activated from the reserve/PUP list - Do you trust him?

That's a topic a LOT of people have on their mind right now. And we have a lot of smart people here who I bet have good discussion to bring for this topic. 

My thought is a topic with a better title like will generate tons better discussion than a title that is just "Saquon Barkley - NYG"


I understand what you're trying to do and I agree it could be helpful and generate more discussion, but this will create more posts and more clutter.

If I'm away for a day, a few days, a week, and come back to the pool there is a very high chance I'll never see this discussion, it's off the first page, top few pages.  If it's in the Barkley thread, it's on the first two pages and I'll catch up on the discussion.

What I keep coming back to, the board used to be the way you are pushing it towards.  Granted, maybe the thread titles could have been better and the search function is likely better now, but Footballguys leadership and we as a community moved towards the current usage.  So, what were the reasons why we changed to the current design/usage? And how will avoid the pitfalls that caused us to change? I believe these questions need addressed to understand how effective the proposed change will be.

 

Andy Dufresne

Footballguy
My argument was that message boards are better used as discussion boards - not breaking news boards. There's plenty of places to get breaking news.

But let's try to make it work.

 

jtd13

Footballguy
Thanks. I can see how that's an issue. 

Is there any capability to have "tiers" of moderators? For example some frequent and solid posters could be given mod power, just to change thread titles (not something they would do as part of the staff, but as they already contribute a lot and start many threads, it's probably something they'd be happy to do). 

Alternatively, could the breaking news threads be merged into the player threads after they have run their course for a couple days?
I see @tangfoot already suggested idea 2 above. I'm thinking about it more and wondering if a combination of the above 2 ideas would work:

1. When significant developments happen, a new thread is started with a clear and descriptive title.

2. When a mod sees the new thread, he merges it to the player thread, thanks the poster who correctly made the hot topic thread, and updates the player thread title.

2a. If there's a capability for "pseudo-mods" that are established posters who would only update thread titles (generally the people starting threads and bringing latest discussions topics to the board anyway), step 2 could be done pretty easily. If it's not currently possible, it may be worth discussing with the platform. Creating a new role with only some mod capabilities shouldn't be that difficult from the software side.

The benefits I see are that relevant topics are clearly titled at the top of the board, notifications to update the player thread are visible and easy to find, and the player thread remains up to date. 

The main Drawback is that it's still work for the mods if 2a isn't possible (not much more work than merging duplicate threads, but those are still likely to happen, so it's double).

@Joe Bryant thoughts?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I see @tangfoot already suggested idea 2 above. I'm thinking about it more and wondering if a combination of the above 2 ideas would work:

1. When significant developments happen, a new thread is started with a clear and descriptive title.

2. When a mod sees the new thread, he merges it to the player thread, thanks the poster who correctly made the hot topic thread, and updates the player thread title.

2a. If there's a capability for "pseudo-mods" that are established posters who would only update thread titles (generally the people starting threads and bringing latest discussions topics to the board anyway), step 2 could be done pretty easily. If it's not currently possible, it may be worth discussing with the platform. Creating a new role with only some mod capabilities shouldn't be that difficult from the software side.

The benefits I see are that relevant topics are clearly titled at the top of the board, notifications to update the player thread are visible and easy to find, and the player thread remains up to date. 

The main Drawback is that it's still work for the mods if 2a isn't possible (not much more work than merging duplicate threads, but those are still likely to happen, so it's double).

@Joe Bryant thoughts?


Thanks. We already try to do #1. 

2 and 2a are good in theory but a ton of work for moderators. Over 20 years I've seen one thing consistently - moderating sucks and most people quickly lose energy for it. 

 

jtd13

Footballguy
Thanks. We already try to do #1. 

2 and 2a are good in theory but a ton of work for moderators. Over 20 years I've seen one thing consistently - moderating sucks and most people quickly lose energy for it. 
2a was that the frequent posters who already start lots of threads and bring relevant content be given capability to merge and update thread titles. Outside of identifying those posters, I doing see much work for the moderators. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
What I keep coming back to, the board used to be the way you are pushing it towards.  Granted, maybe the thread titles could have been better and the search function is likely better now, but Footballguys leadership and we as a community moved towards the current usage.  So, what were the reasons why we changed to the current design/usage? And how will avoid the pitfalls that caused us to change? I believe these questions need addressed to understand how effective the proposed change will be.


YES. What I'm suggesting is how the board used to be. 

I think the reality is it's probably us taking our eye off the ball when it started to move toward the giant database type threads which felt nice for organization but were way less good for generating discussion. 

The staff moved more to other areas like twitter where they could engage in much more topic oriented discussion.

I disagreed with the new direction but honestly didn't have the time or energy to fight it, and left it alone. I've put at lest 3 hours (I sadly don't have) into this over the last day. 

Me taking my eye off the ball and choosing the path of least resistance back then is my fault. 

It finally hit a point for me when I had someone (who finds the no description of the topic in the title a huge negative) ask me why I still love and defend our forums so much. I thought about it more and started to look more closely and was reminded of how much I disliked the current form with the generic titles and realized we were getting way less good out of the board than was possible. I realized if I were a poster, I wouldn't engage much with a format like this. So I asked folks to start doing more specific news topics. 

That as I knew it would, turned into something much bigger. I should have known better I didn't have time. But the boards are important to me and I want them to be the best they can. And I firmly think we have major flaws in the current form. 

And I think that flaw is incredibly easy to fix if people start posting, as they already. have, with more descriptive titles. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dr. Octopus

Footballguy
The Global Head of HR for my company once said when addressing everyone at a Town Hall meeting, "The only people that welcome change are babies with a full diaper" and I think that's what's going on here. People hate change.

I have some reservations as well, but I'm willing to give this change a chance and see what happens.

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
2a was that the frequent posters who already start lots of threads and bring relevant content be given capability to merge and update thread titles. Outside of identifying those posters, I doing see much work for the moderators. 


That's what I mean. Those posters would become moderators and that's a ton of work for them to keep titles updated. As opposed to posters creating good titles to start with in real time. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
The Global Head of HR for my company once said when addressing everyone at a Town Hall meeting, "The only people that welcome change are babies with a full diaper" and I think that's what's going on here. People hate change.

I have some reservations as well, but I'm willing to give this change a chance and see what happens.


Agreed. It's human nature. I get it. I don't like change either. 

But I think your Barkley thread (AND the good discusion that followed) is a shining example of how we can get the most out the forum. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
What's funny on the change part is as @C & C noted above this is more a change BACK to how we did things before.

When the board was way more active. Granted, there are lots more options now for people to spend time on then there were 15 years ago. But I think our format shift from what we had to this no description title thing had a serious negative effect on the board.

And for sure, not on the people here. If you like it, you're still here. Format is a self fulfilling prophecy as if you don't like it, you leave. But I think we lost a ton of people and we've lost a ton of good discussion over the years with poor user experience due to making thread topic a guessing game. I think we can do much better. 

 

humpback

Footballguy
I think these are great points.  For those that come to this site seeking news about fantasy players this new method would work better.

I don't come here for the news, I typically already know what is going on in the fantasy world and really only come here for discussions and alternate view points.


My argument was that message boards are better used as discussion boards - not breaking news boards. There's plenty of places to get breaking news.

But let's try to make it work.
Totally agree. If you're trying to follow in the "first" trap that most of social media has become, then something like this would be "better", but at least for me, that's not why I visit these forums. All of that info. is available elsewhere (usually before it's on here), and I know I'm in the minority here but just being honest, it's why I don't bother to click on threads when I see Faust is the last poster (usually a whole bunch of threads in a row)- there's a very high likelihood that I've already heard the news and probably already read the same exact link. No offense at all, I know many enjoy his work, just not what I come here for.

IMO this board is more about discussion, various opinions, etc., not breaking news or knee jerk reactions to it. Also, I think it's going to be a bit of a cluster as everyone will have a different "opinion" on what is thread-worthy. IMO the "test threads" for this idea really aren't, none of them are major. Akers blowing out his ACL I get, but not really a rookie QB having a bad practice, someone coming off the PUP list, a veteran player missing a few practices early in camp, etc.

I get it, you want more "activity", just think most of it isn't super productive and will clutter things up.

 

jtd13

Footballguy
That's what I mean. Those posters would become moderators and that's a ton of work for them to keep titles updated. As opposed to posters creating good titles to start with in real time. 
I guess I saw it as not much different work than starting the thread, and that many of the posters would be happy to update thread titles to keep information relevant. I'm naive to the actual process though. I certainly don't want to make a structure that creates more tedious work for you guys.

And just to clarify, I appreciate what you are trying to do, and I'm not resistant to it. I just think the good posters and the good historical context are the best things this board offers. I'm just spitballing ideas that I'm hoping could keep the latter and accomplish what you envision for the board.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Totally agree. If you're trying to follow in the "first" trap that most of social media has become, then something like this would be "better", but at least for me, that's not why I visit these forums. All of that info. is available elsewhere (usually before it's on here), and I know I'm in the minority here but just being honest, it's why I don't bother to click on threads when I see Faust is the last poster (usually a whole bunch of threads in a row)- there's a very high likelihood that I've already heard the news and probably already read the same exact link. No offense at all, I know many enjoy his work, just not what I come here for.

IMO this board is more about discussion, various opinions, etc., not breaking news or knee jerk reactions to it. Also, I think it's going to be a bit of a cluster as everyone will have a different "opinion" on what is thread-worthy. IMO the "test threads" for this idea really aren't, none of them are major. Akers blowing out his ACL I get, but not really a rookie QB having a bad practice, someone coming off the PUP list, a veteran player missing a few practices early in camp, etc.

I get it, you want more "activity", just think most of it isn't super productive and will clutter things up.


Thanks. For sure it'll take maturity on the posters to post things worthy of discussion. That's where I trust you folks.

And I positively have zero interest in "more activity". I am only interested in more good and helpful and productive discussion. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

humpback

Footballguy
Thanks. For sure it'll take maturity on the posters to post things worthy of discussion. That's where I trust you folks.

And I positively have zero interest in "more activity". I am only interested in more good and helpful *ad productive discussion. 
*Freudian?  :D

IMO, so far these "new" threads haven't generated more good and helpful discussion. Of course, likely growing pains because it's new, but not sure the juice is worth the squeeze. Most of these "topics" (so far) aren't thread-worthy IMO. I guess after the topics die down in a day or two if the plan is to merge them in the master-thread it isn't much harm, but IMO having a topic for every time someone limps off, has a bad practice, etc. doesn't add much.

Part of this could be a redraft vs. keeper/dynasty focus as well, these minor things have almost zero impact longer term.

 

Hankmoody

Footballguy
As an example, this is what I'm talking about when I say I'd much prefer a more descriptive title:  Saquan Barkley - 08.09.21 - activated from the reserve/PUP list - Do you trust him?

That's a topic a LOT of people have on their mind right now. And we have a lot of smart people here who I bet have good discussion to bring for this topic. 

My thought is a topic with a better title like will generate tons better discussion than a title that is just "Saquon Barkley - NYG"
I think everyone agrees with your concept (even I do and I'm the biggest PITA here) I think we're just concerned with how fragmented this makes the forums for those of us that use them every day.  Someone's going to post a really cool link to a chart in the thread you cite, then 12 weeks later that thread is 44 pages deep and there are 3 other Barkley fragments talking about his smoking hot start and can he maintain or his contract demands and how they might lead to him faking injuries or him getting into a car accident and what's the plan in dynasty leagues, are you trading or holding?  Now we have 4 places that we have to look for to find these great segmented insights and need a Faust level of bookmark indexing

Changing the topic of the Saquon Barkley - NYG thread to Saquon Barkley - NYG - activated from PUP do you trust him? for the duration it's applicable accomplishes the same thing you (and we) want.

Free subscriptions is a pretty good idea.  I haven't paid for any FF content for years now so there may not even an opportunity cost associated for some of these.  Can your software mix-and-match mod permissions on a per-user or usergroup basis?

 

Grigs Allmoon

Footballguy
I know me and if it gets too cluttered I'll just stop reading and go somewhere else because I just don't have time to dig for info. I think what you're asking for is a good idea but I just don't think the main board if the place for it. Just my $0.02


I don't get this argument. Why do you have to do more digging if the thread titles are more detailed, and up to date? There is a lot more digging if you have to click into a thread, sift through to the recent post(s) just to see if there is something there you're even interested in. Often, there's not.

 

Biabreakable

Footballguy
You know the saying don't judge a book by its cover?

That is pretty much how I feel about this obsession with thread titles.

The discussion is good based on the merits of its content, not because of its title.

On the other hand I have seen some very clever thread titles along the way. The Eagles team thread for example has had some titles that really had me in stiches at times.

 

EthnicFury

Footballguy
Yeah I completely agree that more descriptive/up to date thread titles would be hugely additive, but also am firmly in the camp that is not looking forward to the proliferation of extra threads. Realistically I never get past page 5, rarely page 3, unless I’m doing a search for some obscure sleeper. If we have threads for every little thing I’m going to miss a lot. I’ll also probably skim those headlines as the news and click into relatively few.

Not my show, but I agree with the posters suggesting some sort of lower tier ‘thread title mod’ compromise might be the best way to go here.

To Joe’s point about format being a self fulfilling prophecy, I worry that while this may have been a perfectly fine direction way back when, the people who wanted that format already left, and the new change may be a discordant fit with those who remain (myself included). If I wanted rotoworld I’d go there. That probably sounds harsher than I mean it to be—this is my first and most frequent fr stop, as it is now, and part of my concern is because it is one of the few places that work for me as constructed.

 

RenegadeRoy

Footballguy
The reality is there are other places people can and should go if they want to engage in off the wall ad hoc conversations. Like many here I'm sure I'm on Reddit which is as opposite from the SP as it can be as far as how threads are organized. They are far more emphermal.


Exactly. I go to Reddit to see if there's any headlines popping and then come here to the player threads for analysis. The discussions on many other sites (Reddit for example) is garbage, echo-chambery, and reactionary. Here it's more measured, big picture, and varied.

I fear that spreading the feedback across multiple threads softens the experience. I'm in the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it camp"... but maybe I'm wrong. I'm willing to give this new system a shot. I work in software design and if the users don't like a feature, we roll it back or work with them until it's something they do want.

Really appreciate the openness and round table discussion here, Joe. It really goes a long way. The greatest resource of this site is the users. Not the ability to post breaking news the fastest. Not some useless splashy layout. It's the users. It's nice to know that you see and appreciate that. 

 

humpback

Footballguy
We'll just have to disagree there. I think @Dr. Octopus Barkley thread is a perfect example of what I'm looking for. 

I fully accept not everyone will agree though. Thanks. 
Now do the Chase thread...

Why do you feel having a new thread is necessary to accomplish your goal of good discussion? What being discussed in there couldn't be discussed in the main Barkley thread? Quite frankly, it seems like very little of the discussion has anything to do with the title, which everyone knew was inevitable. It's just an "excuse" (poor wording) to get discussion about him going again, no?

I see the point about the title being current, but I think having the ability to change that (or add a sub-title?) would be better than having a new thread for every minor "development". Again, if they are going to be merged into the main thread at some point it probably isn't a big deal, but for instance the "new" Barkley thread already has deviated greatly from the title (coming off the PUP list) and now has become a catch-all for Barkley, his fantasy value, other RB value, etc. I'm not saying it isn't useful, but it doesn't really align with the new thread title, which seemed to be the main motivation for the change.

Your show, just giving my opinion.

 

eric rymer

Footballguy
I don't get this argument. Why do you have to do more digging if the thread titles are more detailed, and up to date? There is a lot more digging if you have to click into a thread, sift through to the recent post(s) just to see if there is something there you're even interested in. Often, there's not.
You have to do more digging because there is a potential for a lot more threads cluttering up the SP. It's valid info for sure. I'm not questioning that one bit. Even if it's not one of my specific players, there is useful info that I could use in various ways. I just think a pinned thread or subforum with the updates and links then a cross post into the player thread keeps the SP clean and streamlined. 

To be clear I love the idea. I just don't want a cluttered mess in the SP. Even if the titles are clear I think excess threads could potentially take away from the amazing value the SP provides. 

 

SKI

Footballguy
I think everyone agrees with your concept (even I do and I'm the biggest PITA here) I think we're just concerned with how fragmented this makes the forums for those of us that use them every day.  Someone's going to post a really cool link to a chart in the thread you cite, then 12 weeks later that thread is 44 pages deep and there are 3 other Barkley fragments talking about his smoking hot start and can he maintain or his contract demands and how they might lead to him faking injuries or him getting into a car accident and what's the plan in dynasty leagues, are you trading or holding?  Now we have 4 places that we have to look for to find these great segmented insights and need a Faust level of bookmark indexing
Counter-point from someone that isn't here regularly in the last few years:  having mega threads means that someone who isn't here everyday faces threads with hundreds of pages that started years ago and is dissuaded from jumping into them and participating. 

Honestly, it isn't that hard to scan issue-specific threads when you do a search for a particular player  and the exercise actually provides useful information on trends involving that player. 

 

Hankmoody

Footballguy
Counter-point from someone that isn't here regularly in the last few years:  having mega threads means that someone who isn't here everyday faces threads with hundreds of pages that started years ago and is dissuaded from jumping into them and participating. 

Honestly, it isn't that hard to scan issue-specific threads when you do a search for a particular player  and the exercise actually provides useful information on trends involving that player. 
So click to the last page and start there.  If you find yourself in the middle of something you are interested in, back up from there.  I do this all the time.  I just jumped into the Swift thread and didn't care about what happened last season, I just wanted to see what the buzz was people were currently discussing.

 

Hankmoody

Footballguy

jtd13

Footballguy
So click to the last page and start there.  If you find yourself in the middle of something you are interested in, back up from there.  I do this all the time.  I just jumped into the Swift thread and didn't care about what happened last season, I just wanted to see what the buzz was people were currently discussing.
Yeah, I do this all the time. Sometimes I spend a few weeks taking a break from message boards, and can catch up pretty well here by jumping to the last page and scrolling backwards.

 

Hankmoody

Footballguy
Yeah, I do this all the time. Sometimes I spend a few weeks taking a break from message boards, and can catch up pretty well here by jumping to the last page and scrolling backwards.
I would never survive the Dynasty Trade thread without this tactic.  Who cares about trades from April now?  The NFL draft changed a ton, if only perceived value, so all of that older stuff is completely irrelevant to me.  I do it a whole lot now that I think about it.

 

Hankmoody

Footballguy
ok and I am now seeing the brilliance of this in action - Faust is having a ball coming up with new titles.  Hopefully I didn't create a monster that distracts him from posting great original content too.

What am I thinking?  Faust has 48 hours in a day to post stuff, he'll be fine!

 

SKI

Footballguy
So click to the last page and start there.  If you find yourself in the middle of something you are interested in, back up from there.  I do this all the time.  I just jumped into the Swift thread and didn't care about what happened last season, I just wanted to see what the buzz was people were currently discussing.
To Joe's original point, why would I jump into a random thread that is on the front page?  The current system only works if (a) you are already searching for information on a specific player, (b) already posted in that thread or are following it, or (c) are a completionist who reads literally everything in the SP.

Someone who just drops in to the SP isn't going to open up a thread that is 700 pages long to browse.  The current approach isn't designed to welcome in new posters, IMO.   

 

Team Chaos

Footballguy
I am on here quite a bit, and have been for several years. However, I really don’t post much at all. I consider many of these posters much more informed than me, so I am generally looking for peoples takes on a player or situation.
 

I don’t spend much time on other sites, and I am not on social media, so I also appreciate Faust’s links. It’s a way for me to catch up on what’s being said around the internet. 
 

As far as the current subject, I agree with what many have said here. I actually really like the current system. 
 

However, I will readily admit that that has a lot to do with what has been said about people not liking change, and I definitely fall under the old dog category when it comes to new tricks. I definitely appreciate what Joe and the staff do here, and I can certainly understand what he is trying to do.

I think one of the key things Joe said at the beginning of the thread is that search is our friend. I currently tend to skim the first page or two to see what has been discussed since the last time I was here. Rarely, but occasionally, I will use search because I want to research opinions on a certain player that isn’t showing on the first page. I am willing to try change when a good argument has been made for it as has been made by Joe. I envision that with this change, I will most likely use search more. That way I can see the various threads on a given player and read the new posts on each. 

 

Gally

Footballguy
I think there is a happy medium that could be found.  I really like the player threads (and don't really care about the title other than the player name with regards to reading the thread).  However, I do understand the intimidation of there being 400 pages already in the thread.  I do always jump to the last page and back track to the last month or so (or further if the discussion warrants it) but understand the intimidation factor.

What if we did player threads by year?  That would cut down on the huge size and the title is easy:  "Jonathan Taylor - 2021"  I don't really need a specific topic in the title.  I go there to see the latest discussion on JT.  Start a new one right after the Super Bowl.  

I guess I don't understand the purpose of a separate minor thread discussion on a player when there is already a player thread that is supposed to be all discussion about that player.  It might be that I don't put a lot of importance on the added description of the title beyond the player's name.  

That being said, I though the Akers injury thread to talk about the impact in general of that injury to RB's and what has happened with that was useful and not specifically an Akers thread as it went beyond the player.  I think those warrant separate threads......but the news of the injury and the specific impact to Akers should have just been in his player thread as a historical reference to that player.  

 

Hankmoody

Footballguy
To Joe's original point, why would I jump into a random thread that is on the front page?  The current system only works if (a) you are already searching for information on a specific player, (b) already posted in that thread or are following it, or (c) are a completionist who reads literally everything in the SP.

Someone who just drops in to the SP isn't going to open up a thread that is 700 pages long to browse.  The current approach isn't designed to welcome in new posters, IMO.   
Well it wouldn't be a random thread if you were interested in (as your originally posted) jumping in and participating, it would be a thread you're interested in jumping into and participating in that you are intimidated on trying to catch up on.  In that scenario what I suggested works brilliantly.  And you forgot one:

(d) can't click the "last page" link from the main forum.  If you hover over the last page number listed after the thread title it will pop right up for you.

Here, try this:

https://forums.footballguys.com/topic/785152-dynasty-redraft-wft-rb-antonio-gibson-played-in-washingtons-turbo-set-on-sunday-signaling-potential-for-an-expanded-role/page/25/#comments

Now you can skip 24 pages of Antonio Gibson stuff that's old and mostly irrelevant now - and if you decide you do want to catch up you just go back a couple pages and start wherever you get interested.

 

SKI

Footballguy
Now you can skip 24 pages of Antonio Gibson stuff that's old and mostly irrelevant now - and if you decide you do want to catch up you just go back a couple pages and start wherever you get interested.
But *why* would I think that I would be interested in page 25 of a thread with an innocuous title?  I think that is Joe's point.  The generic, and sometimes inaccurate titles don't welcome in new posters/participants. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
And here's perfect execution:

https://forums.footballguys.com/topic/791860-dynasty-redraft-te-donald-parham-chargers-eying-a-bigger-role-for-parham/

This thread was started in January but it could have been started in 2015.  Faust pops an eye-catching title and now maybe I"m interested in reading it (I"m not, but at least I know what the update is) without having a brand new thread dedicated to same.


Correct. I agree that's great. The problem though is most of the time, the person who can edit the title isn't here. So we're stuck with a thread title that is at best non informative and the reader has to play a guessing game for what the news is on that player. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
But *why* would I think that I would be interested in page 25 of a thread with an innocuous title?  I think that is Joe's point.  The generic, and sometimes inaccurate titles don't welcome in new posters/participants. 


This is it 100%. Now I get it. Because of how we've done it for a while, we don't have many (or any) new folks coming in. They come in, take a look, realize it's a complicated "onboarding" and leave. So we exclude adding new blood. For ones that have been here for a while, by definition they like it or they wouldn't still be here. But that doesn't mean it's the best way. For anything. You see this all the time in all kinds of non sports organizations. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I see the point about the title being current, but I think having the ability to change that (or add a sub-title?) would be better than having a new thread for every minor "development". 


Thanks. That's where you folks have to be mature and smart. If we have a new thread for every "minor development", we're doing it wrong. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

barackdhouse

Footballguy
Now do the Chase thread...
Only reason that blew up was because this whole thing is new. There wouldn't have been the back and forth in there about thread titling if we were doing a fresh Chase thread. Plus these other threads that have been created today and yesterday more or less show that. Yes the new Chase thread went off the rails but that was the tip of the spear.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hankmoody

Footballguy
But *why* would I think that I would be interested in page 25 of a thread with an innocuous title?  I think that is Joe's point.  The generic, and sometimes inaccurate titles don't welcome in new posters/participants. 
Well now I'm confused because the post you replied to of mine was explicitly stating to change this, to not have a bunch of generic player threads but to give a bunch of people the ability to get into them and make their titles dynamic.  Did you misunderstand my post?  I was agreeing with his premise that the titles need to not be bland to draw people in.  What we don't need is 5 threads on the same player regarding 5 different moments in that player's timeline.  The search function here stinks, it always has, and wait until you see  the regular season activity, current threads end up on the 5th page, how far do you think a thread is going to go that's a week old? 

 

jobarules

Footballguy
I like the way Rotoworld does it and has one player thread for each player. All the news for that player is limited to that thread. Having dozens of threads about one player makes little sense.

Also, all the RW threads have the same naming convention "2021 Darren Waller Outlook Thread". If someone starts a thread and names it differently the mods correct it but everyone seems to follow the naming convention now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top