Talk On The Premium Footballguys Subscriptions... (2 Viewers)

[Stinkin Ref]

To be honest .....I think many of us consider ourselves pretty good fantasy players if we are even hanging out here....at it’s core back in the day.....this place was kind of a secret we wanted to keep from our league mates.....I know it was for me.. (it still kinda is to me in some weird way)....this place was like our ace in the hole....our “cheat sheets” and weekly information were better than everyone else.....league mates were wondering where we got our info cause we we always seemed to have the awesome sleepers that paid off, we scooped up the WW gold that paid off way before anybody else, or whatever.... and what made this place the bomb was it gave us that huge draft day advantage with customized VBD (term credited to the site....and now basic FF lingo...#golf clap)...

but the playing field has leveled and there are no secrets and some of the articles you see here can be found elsewhere in much the same language.....the secret advantage has lost some luster...

buts that’s ok.....it really is....in today’s world we can’t expect FBG to have any better information than anybody else..(unless you have the Vegas guys on payroll)....

that was a long way of saying.....at this point ....I’d really like to see a HEAVY focus each week on the “flex” area guys.....we all know to start the top guys at each position and I don’t need an upgrade or downgrade on the studs......I need that last flex spot that could maybe be my third RB....my third or fourth WR with a great matchup ......or that second TE that FBG had ranked pretty high before the draft that has been ballin on my bench.....the early stuff and studs are chalk.....its often the flex area and that great start/sit call that makes a difference in a win or a loss...

 

[Simon Shepherd]

Hi @Joe Bryant,

I am putting this here since you asked how FBG can serve us better. I've been having an issue with MyFBG league sync for over two weeks now. During the first week, I took the time to follow the troubleshooting guide, delete, re-sync, retrace my steps, etc. No luck. Last week, I placed a ticket with your support team. The response I got to my ticket was as follows: "We went through some planned server maintenance recently and are ironing out some issues that occurred as a result. One of those issues is with MyFBG Classic syncing not functioning properly. Our development team estimates they should have syncing up and running as normal within the next few weeks. I will keep you updated as soon as I hear something from them as far as a solution and timeline." 

So, good to know the issue isn't with me. Wouldn't it have been prudent to tell your subscribers what is going on, so they didn't waste time like I did troubleshooting? Especially if it will take "weeks" to fix? Furthermore, given the history of issues with MyFBG / league import/syncing, shouldn't there be more quality control on changes you make? "Planned server maintenance" should not blow up your product. Finally, the response is mistaken in that MyFBG classic is what is broken - I am using the default online version of MyFBG - classic seems to imply its some older alternative and I have another way to sync the teams - I do not.

I know its off-season and even though I could use the league sync to evaluate wavers/FAs and trades, it isn't as bad as if this happened during the season. The fact that we STILL have communication issues on a core feature like this and I still don't know when the resolution date for this issue will be bothers me. This could all have been addressed with simple transparency - even a simple message on the import/sync page saying there are known issues and you're working on them would have been OK. 

Hey @Genester

I want to be 100% clear here - is your issue with the MyFBG Classic, which is here: https://subscribers.footballguys.com/myfbg/my.php or the League Dominator, which is here: https://league.footballguys.com 

Can you give me a brief description of the issue here?

There is one known issue with MyFBG Classic of it receiving data from the new League Dominator, since our server migration. That's being actively worked on. But if that isn't your issue, then I will make sure your problem is tracked down and brought to a swift resolution.

Edit from Joe:  I know everyone knows this, but by far the best way to get help on anything Footballguys is through our help desk at www.footballguys.com/help like @Genester already has started to do.

@Genester if you could post your ticket number here or PM it to @Simon Shepherd, that would help a ton and they'll be able to help much more efficiently. Thanks . 

 

[Simon Shepherd]

Not fixed for me.  I have been working with Matt Carey, it seems to be something with my computer.  He pulls up my account and all is good on his end.  For me, it is bizarre as other sections are 2020, but not the staff section.  I have not tried clearing caches, etc. or tried on a different computer/browser yet.  Without the ability to replicate, this one will be hard to fix.  Should not be using the work computer anyway !    

This one was brought to my attention by Matt yesterday. I'm going to look into it today. Matt will update you on the ticket.

 

[Joe Bryant]

To be honest .....I think many of us consider ourselves pretty good fantasy players if we are even hanging out here....at it’s core back in the day.....this place was kind of a secret we wanted to keep from our league mates.....I know it was for me.. (it still kinda is to me in some weird way)....this place was like our ace in the hole....our “cheat sheets” and weekly information were better than everyone else.....league mates were wondering where we got our info cause we we always seemed to have the awesome sleepers that paid off, we scooped up the WW gold that paid off way before anybody else, or whatever.... and what made this place the bomb was it gave us that huge draft day advantage with customized VBD (term credited to the site....and now basic FF lingo...#golf clap)...

but the playing field has leveled and there are no secrets and some of the articles you see here can be found elsewhere in much the same language.....the secret advantage has lost some luster...

buts that’s ok.....it really is....in today’s world we can’t expect FBG to have any better information than anybody else..(unless you have the Vegas guys on payroll)....

that was a long way of saying.....at this point ....I’d really like to see a HEAVY focus each week on the “flex” area guys.....we all know to start the top guys at each position and I don’t need an upgrade or downgrade on the studs......I need that last flex spot that could maybe be my third RB....my third or fourth WR with a great matchup ......or that second TE that FBG had ranked pretty high before the draft that has been ballin on my bench.....the early stuff and studs are chalk.....its often the flex area and that great start/sit call that makes a difference in a win or a loss...

Thanks @Stinkin Ref for the insights.

I think you're describing the landscape exactly right. In the old days, you folks could snicker at the GMs who walked into the draft "armed" with a magazine cheatsheet that was 6 weeks old. Now, virtually everyone in your draft should be adequately prepared. The level of competition has risen for sure. Which makes winning tougher. 

Thanks for the feedback there and we'll continue working on this. 

 

[Genester]

Hey @Genester

I want to be 100% clear here - is your issue with the MyFBG Classic, which is here: https://subscribers.footballguys.com/myfbg/my.php or the League Dominator, which is here: https://league.footballguys.com 

Can you give me a brief description of the issue here?

There is one known issue with MyFBG Classic of it receiving data from the new League Dominator, since our server migration. That's being actively worked on. But if that isn't your issue, then I will make sure your problem is tracked down and brought to a swift resolution.

Edit from Joe:  I know everyone knows this, but by far the best way to get help on anything Footballguys is through our help desk at www.footballguys.com/help like @Genester already has started to do.

@Genester if you could post your ticket number here or PM it to @Simon Shepherd, that would help a ton and they'll be able to help much more efficiently. Thanks . 

@Simon Shepherd Thank you for the help. I am using the League Dominator - going to MyFBG via the front page menu and then Edit/Sync your leagues. I dont even know how to access the Classic version. I have 4 leagues on ESPN that do not sync the rosters over to MyFBG. Nothing seems to help - deleting the leagues, re-syncing the rosters, etc. Ticket number is 34722.

Appreciate the fast response - FYI, I still see no announcement about the issue anywhere on MyFBG. Should one go up?

 

[Simon Shepherd]

@Simon Shepherd Thank you for the help. I am using the League Dominator - going to MyFBG via the front page menu and then Edit/Sync your leagues. I dont even know how to access the Classic version. I have 4 leagues on ESPN that do not sync the rosters over to MyFBG. Nothing seems to help - deleting the leagues, re-syncing the rosters, etc. Ticket number is 34722.

Appreciate the fast response - FYI, I still see no announcement about the issue anywhere on MyFBG. Should one go up?

Thanks @Genester I'm trying to understand the issue so we can deal with it appropriately - I'm still not totally sure if this is related to the server migration or something that is specifically only affecting your leagues. I'll chase it down with our customer service from the ticket number and Matt will get back to you there.

 

[Genester]

Thanks @Genester I'm trying to understand the issue so we can deal with it appropriately - I'm still not totally sure if this is related to the server migration or something that is specifically only affecting your leagues. I'll chase it down with our customer service from the ticket number and Matt will get back to you there.

Thank you, @Simon Shepherd. 

 

[Tau837]

When you write three points and sum with you just think I'm "blowing off the feedback and saying what you have been doing is what you want to do and plan to keep doing" it doesn't seem like there's much interest in discourse.  That's a bummer as that's why I've been spending time posting here and asking for feedback. If I don't have any interest in discourse or am just blowing off opinions, I'm pretty dumb for spending time here with lots of other things that need to be done. I don't think that's the case. 

If you care, for the points:

Again, my thought is it's not knee-jerk at all. It's updated weekly and it's current as of that point in time, but it's far from "knee-jerk" in my opinion. If I can be honest, I think that was a poor description on your part of what Sigmund does. 

We just disagree. I think fantasy value and outlook is very much like a stock. It's not a purely linear path. There are ups and downs. Some certainly have bigger movements than others. Some hold steady. We try to relate that movement. 

Not sure how to better say it than I did. How much a GM should bid is wildly dependent on lots of situations. Sigmund and have talked about removing this number entirely as it's just so difficult to have a one size fits all. We may wind up removing it after all as this is a good illustration that sometimes it seems to hurt more than it helps.

Bottom line, is some folks are asking for a different report than what we're doing. We're doing a weekly update on a "stock up / stock down" type report trying to cover a ton of players. We get a lot of feedback that we don't cover a broad enough section of players. "Why don't you ever talk about __________" is common feedback we get. That believe it or not, we listen to.

What I hear others talking about is they're less concerned about a stock up / stock down on each player and would prefer to see more detail on a much smaller number of the biggest movers. That could be cool too. As I said, would certainly be much easier to write. And it's something I've already talked to Sigmund about today and we're kicking it around how that might work and look. 

And yes, it's very possible we keep things the same. That doesn't mean we're blowing off anything. That means we've weighed things out and tried to listen as best we can and will make the decision we feel is best to best serve the customers. That's how we've done everything since day one at Footballguys. Again, I don't expect you to believe that but all I can tell you is that's how we do it. 

@Joe Bryant

I appreciate the response, particularly that you responded to some of the particular points in my previous post.

You are right, we just disagree on the utility of what you guys do with this article. I have a lot of respect for Bloom, and I'm sure he puts plenty of effort into it, I just don't think the end product is particularly valuable. And I find it interesting that no one has posted in support of it in this discussion other than yourself. But it's fine for us to disagree.

As for the blind bid waiver amounts in the article, you may have missed my point there. The article says to use those as a means to rank the upgrades relative to one another. Agree that not everyone has blind bid waiver amounts, and everyone who does uses them differently based on situation. However, if you are going to do the article and provide upgrades for 82 players in a given week, I absolutely think it is appropriate to provide a means for relative ranking. To not do so would further reduce the value of the article.

In retrospect, I should have used a term other than "knee jerk", so I'll retract that. It simply reflects my disagreement that every player's stock is subject to moving up and down based on one good or bad game with no impactful changes in situation. 

Appreciate the fact that you are talking about the possibility of something additional.

 

[Joe Bryant]

@Joe Bryant

I appreciate the response, particularly that you responded to some of the particular points in my previous post.

You are right, we just disagree on the utility of what you guys do with this article. I have a lot of respect for Bloom, and I'm sure he puts plenty of effort into it, I just don't think the end product is particularly valuable. And I find it interesting that no one has posted in support of it in this discussion other than yourself. But it's fine for us to disagree.

As for the blind bid waiver amounts in the article, you may have missed my point there. The article says to use those as a means to rank the upgrades relative to one another. Agree that not everyone has blind bid waiver amounts, and everyone who does uses them differently based on situation. However, if you are going to do the article and provide upgrades for 82 players in a given week, I absolutely think it is appropriate to provide a means for relative ranking. To not do so would further reduce the value of the article.

In retrospect, I should have used a term other than "knee jerk", so I'll retract that. It simply reflects my disagreement that every player's stock is subject to moving up and down based on one good or bad game with no impactful changes in situation. 

Appreciate the fact that you are talking about the possibility of something additional.

All good. Thanks for helping us work through this and see if we can get better. 

 

[houston]

At this moment can’t see myself renewing. $40 just seems steep, especially given current events. I expect the season schedule to be a crazy mess, if it even happens. 

Very much agree with the post saying that this place used to seem like secret information. No longer true, there’s so many places to get information. 

 

[ConnSKINS26]

At this moment can’t see myself renewing. $40 just seems steep, especially given current events. I expect the season schedule to be a crazy mess, if it even happens. 

Very much agree with the post saying that this place used to seem like secret information. No longer true, there’s so many places to get information. 

If you pull anything at all of value from the subscription, it has to be worth the $2.50/week that the $40 breaks down into right? To me calling it steep is funny, I don't see how you could go much lower than that for over 4 months of content not including offseason and postseason stuff.

I'm not even a subscriber, I just thought the idea that $2.50/week is "steep" was interesting, from the outside. 

 

[Simon Shepherd]

...especially given current events. I expect the season schedule to be a crazy mess, if it even happens. 

This is absolutely one of the places where we think we'll be able to add huge value this year.

Right now, we're not getting the news flow that we usually would.

In August, it's going to start flooding in like crazy - all the stuff we'd typically here in May, June, July all packed into one month.

We will be on top of this and parsing it and updating rankings. We're anticipating a crazy time there.

Our Jene Bramel is on the ball with the covid stuff and will be doing an article soon on how that's likely to affect the season. Again, this might be something new in terms of how that disrupts player participation during the season and we see this as something where we will be able to add huge value to our subscribers, doing the grunt work and chasing down reports, information and turning that into projections, rankings and news updates for you guys.

Meanwhile, we have a robust and very fair credit system in the event of a disrupted season: https://footballguys.com/moneyback.php

 

[huthut]

Would it be possible to have a manually entered cheat sheet generator? It feels like the free rate my team function has significantly more customizability than the cheat sheet, when the cheat sheet should be much more important. Most of the leagues I am in are atypical, but even the more common formats I am in are not perfectly covered by the 9 options in the cheat sheet generation. I am somewhat paranoid about getting my account information for things out there, so even though I have no reason to doubt that the data is safe in your hands, putting my accounts and passwords in to make use of draft dominator just for a cheat sheet seems unnecessary to me. 

 

[Simon Shepherd]

Would it be possible to have a manually entered cheat sheet generator? It feels like the free rate my team function has significantly more customizability than the cheat sheet, when the cheat sheet should be much more important. Most of the leagues I am in are atypical, but even the more common formats I am in are not perfectly covered by the 9 options in the cheat sheet generation. I am somewhat paranoid about getting my account information for things out there, so even though I have no reason to doubt that the data is safe in your hands, putting my accounts and passwords in to make use of draft dominator just for a cheat sheet seems unnecessary to me. 

You can manually enter your league settings into the Draft Dominator - they don't have to be imported. You can just add a manual league under where it lists ESPN, Yahoo etc.

There's a ton of cheat sheet options on that page - I think the possible cheat sheets are something like 8,000 different combos - so they'll have you pretty well covered. But the Draft Dominator will let you go all the way manually if you want, too.

 

[huthut]

You can manually enter your league settings into the Draft Dominator - they don't have to be imported. You can just add a manual league under where it lists ESPN, Yahoo etc.

There's a ton of cheat sheet options on that page - I think the possible cheat sheets are something like 8,000 different combos - so they'll have you pretty well covered. But the Draft Dominator will let you go all the way manually if you want, too.

8000 different combinations is somewhat meaningless when most of the variations don't apply to a specific league. For example, there are only 10 position combinations for a non-IDP league. My league with the most common set-up is a superflex + regular flex with 2 WR. I can do a superflex with 3 WR or a regular flex with 2 WR without the superflex, but none exactly like it. 

I was able to do it in draft dominator manually though which I did not know was an option, so problem solved I guess. Thanks for the assistance.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I was able to do it in draft dominator manually though which I did not know was an option, so problem solved I guess. 

 

[Ruffrodys05]

Funny that you posted that article.  I had read it earlier and that's exactly what I was talking about.  If the stock up / down feature looked more like that, I think it would be much more useful.  I love Bloom, but most of the stock up / down guys one week would be in the other category the next week.  I understand how getting several staffers to do this for an early week feature would be difficult.  I would be much more interested in Bloom's thoughts if it was his top five upgrades and downgrades at each position with more analysis rather than a short blurb and arrow up/down on almost every player in the league.

It's rare that I agree with bass on much related to anything but, I have to agree 100% on this.

Yes. That's exactly what it is. Few players have smooth trajectories all year long. It's very likely they move up one week and down the next. Just like a stock might on the stock market. 

I don't think Bloom has ever given buy high, sell low advice. 

You'd be incorrect. Plenty of times in the past and just this week also. Check it out, the TE's article.

 

[Joe Bryant]

You'd be incorrect. Plenty of times in the past and just this week also. Check it out, the TE's article.

We'll just disagree there.  

If you differ on an opinion Sigmund has, quote it here and state why you disagree and what you think and why you think it. But this isn't going to be a place to just shoot off rips at Sigmund. Please don't do that. 

 

[Ruffrodys05]

We'll just disagree there.  

If you differ on an opinion Sigmund has, quote it here and state why you disagree and what you think and why you think it. But this isn't going to be a place to just shoot off rips at Sigmund. Please don't do that. 

Wow you're sensitive tonight. Wasn't ripping on Bloom. Love everything he does here with the exception of the early weekly risers/fallers article. I was stating I agreed with Bass' observations. In addition, I was just correcting you that Bloom has indeed given buy high and sell low advice. Both in the past and just this week. 

Also, if you really want my feedback I'll come back and give my thoughts later.  I hadn't intended to though as I've completed survey after survey, year after year, participated in threads like this (and others dealing with specific items FBG provides) and I always get the same answer. I figured it was moot at this point. 

One other note. I don't pay for my yearly subscriptions as I earned two lifetime subscriptions through the years but, I'd continue buying them as this is still the best fantasy football site there is. Hands down. Been here since ole yeller. I know.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

We'll just disagree there.  

If you differ on an opinion Sigmund has, quote it here and state why you disagree and what you think and why you think it. But this isn't going to be a place to just shoot off rips at Sigmund. Please don't do that. 

I think you may have misread what the poster was saying, Joe. He was just saying that Bloom has given buy high, sell low advice in the past. I don't know if that's actually true or not, but he wasn't criticizing Bloom. Maybe you quoted the wrong post?

 

[BassNBrew]

From week 10 last year

QUARTERBACK UPGRADE

QB Lamar Jackson, BAL

QB Russell Wilson, SEA

QB Matthew Stafford, DET

QB Jameis Winston, TB (waiver wire: 20-40%)

QB Jimmy Garoppolo, SF (waiver wire: 15-30%)

QB Derek Carr, OAK (waiver wire: 10-20%)

QB Kirk Cousins, MIN (waiver wire: 10-20%)

QB Kyler Murray, ARI (waiver wire: 10-20%)

QB Ryan Fitzpatrick, MIA (waiver wire: 7-15%)

QB Nick Foles, JAX (waiver wire: 7-15%)

QB Ryan Tannehill, TEN (waiver wire: 5-10%)

QB Kyle Allen, CAR (waiver wire: 5-10% )

QB Brian Hoyer, IND (waiver wire: 3-5% )

QB Brandon Allen, DEN (waiver wire: 1% in very deep/2QB/Superflex)

QB Chase Daniel, CHI (waiver wire: 1% in very deep/2QB/Superflex)

QB Ryan Finley, CIN (waiver wire: 1% in very deep/2QB/Superflex)

QB Dwayne Haskins, WAS (waiver wire: 1% in very deep/2QB/Superflex)

And the Week 11 Downgrades

QUARTERBACK DOWNGRADE

QB Matthew Stafford, DET

QB Jared Goff, LAR

QB Brian Hoyer, IND

QB Philip Rivers, LAC

QB Aaron Rodgers, GB

QB Jacoby Brissett, IND

QB Ryan Fitzpatrick, MIA

QB Matt Ryan, ATL

Week 12 QUARTERBACK DOWNGRADE

QB Kyle Allen, CAR

QB Mitchell Trubisky, CHI

QB Jared Goff, LAR

QB Mason Rudolph, PIT

QB Tom Brady, NE

QB Philip Rivers, LAC

QB Ryan Finley, CIN

QB Patrick Mahomes, KC 

QB Deshaun Watson, HOU

Week 13 Upgrade

QUARTERBACK UPGRADE

QB Sam Darnold, NYJ (waiver wire: 25-50%)

QB Baker Mayfield, CLE (waiver wire: 25-50%)

QB Ryan Tannehill, TEN (waiver wire: 25-50%)

QB Jameis Winston, TB

QB Ryan Fitzpatrick, MIA (waiver wire: 15-30%)

QB Kyle Allen, CAR (waiver wire: 12-25%)

QB Drew Brees, NO

QB Andy Dalton, CIN (waiver wire: 5-10% )

QB Mitchell Trubisky, CHI (waiver wire: 1%)

QB Deshaun Watson, HOU

QB Devlin Hodges, PIT (waiver wire: 1% in very deep/2QB/Superflex)

QB Drew Lock, DEN (waiver wire: 1% in very deep/2QB/Superflex)

QB Gardner Minshew, JAX (waiver wire: 1% in very deep/2QB/Superflex)

 

[Joe Bryant]

Wow you're sensitive tonight. Wasn't ripping on Bloom. Love everything he does here with the exception of the early weekly risers/fallers article. I was stating I agreed with Bass' observations. In addition, I was just correcting you that Bloom has indeed given buy high and sell low advice. Both in the past and just this week. 

Also, if you really want my feedback I'll come back and give my thoughts later.  I hadn't intended to though as I've completed survey after survey, year after year, participated in threads like this (and others dealing with specific items FBG provides) and I always get the same answer. I figured it was moot at this point. 

One other note. I don't pay for my yearly subscriptions as I earned two lifetime subscriptions through the years but, I'd continue buying them as this is still the best fantasy football site there is. Hands down. Been here since ole yeller. I know.

Not sensitive at all. But I read that as ripping Bloom saying he gives flip or not thoughtful advice. Obviously, he won't always be right. But if that's not what you meant, (thanks @Uruk-Hai) I apologize.

Would very much like feedback if you have it. Clearly you're an excellent GM. 

And also I feel like it needs to be said. We have over 10,000 surveys filled out and returned every year. Most all of them have very thoughtful suggestions on what we can do better. There's no way in the world we'll be able to implement all the things people ask. I hear a good bit the idea that because we didn't immediately implement the ideas people suggest that we don't listen. Or we're blowing off feedback. That's not true at all. It's actually pretty discouraging to hear that attitude when I spend as much time as I do trying to find out what people are looking for. 

So please, understand we are looking for feedback here and for what people are looking for. We're not saying, "give us your feature idea and we'll implement them immediately." So if you want to share ideas on how we can make FBG better, with the understanding that they'l be seen as that, sharing feedback, then I'd love to hear them. 

I think this thread is a good example. I'm interested in hearing the feedback that some folks think they'd rather see a much less wide and much deeper look at the waiver wire. I've wondered that too. 

But for the guys here who think that's a good idea, I will be honest and say I've had just as many people contact me saying they think it's a terrible idea and they love it the way it is. That happens on just about every feature we have. It's my job to weigh it out and make the call. And hope the people who didn't get the change they wanted still like us enough to stay. it's a not fun juggling act but that's just running business sometimes. 

Thanks for sharing and would very much like to hear your opinions on how we can improve. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

@BassNBrew I'm not certain what you're saying. If it's meant to point out player's values move up and down week to week, that's exactly what the report is meant to do. It's a weekly look at their value in a stock up / stock down trending look.

It's not at all a ranking. We do those and detailed stats in other places.

A top QB like Mahomes can have absolutely have some event happen where his stock goes down this week compared to where he was last week. And still be a top QB. Just like Apple stock might take a dip one day.  In the same way, a bad QB can have an event happen where his stock goes up. And still be a slightly less bad QB value. 

I understand the folks who are saying they'd rather have a different type report than the weekly up or down. And I see some value in that. It's just a different report than what we're currently doing. 

 

[rascal]

I used to pay, but my interest, and financial commitment, to fantasy sports has dropped.  I'd be interested if it was considerably cheaper, but of my two leagues I still play one is family (no money) and the other is amongst friends ($200 total with most possible being $140).  Just not worth it.  Especially when I just need predraft rankings and I can get stuff like that for free from fantasypros.

 

[Tom Hagen]

@BassNBrew I'm not certain what you're saying. If it's meant to point out player's values move up and down week to week, that's exactly what the report is meant to do. It's a weekly look at their value in a stock up / stock down trending look.

It's not at all a ranking. We do those and detailed stats in other places.

A top QB like Mahomes can have absolutely have some event happen where his stock goes down this week compared to where he was last week. And still be a top QB. Just like Apple stock might take a dip one day.  In the same way, a bad QB can have an event happen where his stock goes up. And still be a slightly less bad QB value. 

I understand the folks who are saying they'd rather have a different type report than the weekly up or down. And I see some value in that. It's just a different report than what we're currently doing. 

I don’t want this to seem critical of Bloom who does a great job, but maybe he could provide a little more context of what upgrades and downgrades mean. I think a lot us look at this report for lineup and waiver advice. 
 

Personally, I don’t see any value in downgrading Mahomes outside of an injury. I’m not cutting him and most likely not benching him unless I got lucky and ended up with Jackson. While you are right that his value can change, those changes are around the margins and unlikely to be actionable. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

While you are right that his value can change, those changes are around the margins and unlikely to be actionable. 

Yes. Again, I think this is more the fact some folks. may be looking for something that's a different report.

This is a wide view of players. It even has a category of "holding steady" which points out the players that aren't moving in value. They're definitely not actionable. But for a lot of our readers, that is valuable information. They are looking to us for a "which way are they moving?" report. That's what this does. And sometimes the answer is "they're not moving up or down". That's not actionable, but it's information they want. Similar to if you have Apple stock and you see the stock price is unchanged. 

 

[habman]

I don’t want this to seem critical of Bloom who does a great job, but maybe he could provide a little more context of what upgrades and downgrades mean. I think a lot us look at this report for lineup and waiver advice. 
 

Personally, I don’t see any value in downgrading Mahomes outside of an injury. I’m not cutting him and most likely not benching him unless I got lucky and ended up with Jackson. While you are right that his value can change, those changes are around the margins and unlikely to be actionable. 

I was going to write something similar but you hit the nail on the head.    This report, in my opinion, should be something that looks to future value rather than what happened last week as we already pretty much know what happened last week.  If not this report then a new report but in a simple format like this.   

 

[Joe Bryant]

I was going to write something similar but you hit the nail on the head.    This report, in my opinion, should be something that looks to future value rather than what happened last week as we already pretty much know what happened last week.  If not this report then a new report but in a simple format like this.   

It's definitely a future value look. But that's also helpful feedback as we should give better clarity on exactly what that means. If Travis Kelce were to hypothetically be suspended for 4 games, that's a hit to Mahomes but not long term. We should do better there on clarity. Thanks. 

 

[GroveDiesel]

There is such a glut of fantasy football information currently that there is nothing that unique to the paid content vs free content on tons of other sites IMO. When I do get stuck on a sit/start question there is never any advice that is so profound that it helps me make a decision, they are always projected fairly close together and I am like "well, I know that, otherwise I would not be looking around for advice". By profound I mean something beyond what myself, a non-sports writer would come up with. Granted, some players are completely interchangeable within weeks, but at that point they could probably save time and just have tier lists rather than project one player to get 8.8 and another to get 8.7.

I think this is largely where I am. There are dozens of sites where people list their projections every week and toss out a few weekly articles on waiver adds/drops etc. They’re a dime a dozen and fantasy has largely become a commodity IMO with very little value added by most sites due to the unpredictability/luck portion of FF being just as big as any knowledge/expertise advantage any site may have.

VBD was a game changer for fantasy sports. And early fantasy sites with knowledgeable sports guy that dove into stats provided huge advantages for fantasy players that used them. Now it’s really hard to provide extra value because there are so many sites doing these things and everyone knows about them and uses some site. 

But there are things that can be done to provide value IMO:

1) Provide data and reasoning with every projection. The backbone of the early days of this site was built on data nerds. I fondly remember tons of great discussions of statistics, analytics and use of data in the forums because this was the type of site that drew those sorts of people because those sorts of people understood the advantage it provided. A bunch of staffers/app giving me a list of guys is virtually meaningless to me. I can find similar lists all over the internet. Convince me that your lists matter more because you show your work. I want to see exactly why each person thinks Player A will have a certain number of receptions, yards, TDs on the season and each week. If guys are just making stuff up based on their guts, that has no value to me. If they can explain that it’s because the average projected pass defense against WR2s for the season is ranked 10th overall, and that next week’s numbers are because Player A is going up against a primarily zone based defense ranked #23 overall against the pass and #27 against #2 WRs while player A has put up 20% more fantasy points against zone defenses over man defenses.

FBG does do some of this and I enjoy it. The articles for streaming QBs, Ks, and defenses are great for this.

Ultimately the result between just throwing a list out versus backing up each ranking with analytics and analysis may be exactly the same. But the latter makes me FEEL like I’m paying for something more valuable.

2) Providing more information and customization is big. Lots of folks have mentioned IDP and Dynasty content needing improvement. Yes, the majority of leagues are going to be basic leagues, so I can understand catering mostly to that group, but providing content to the other groups differentiates a site and is going to provide a long term player base of more hardcore players who will likely stay around longer than others as fantasy continues to contract a bit.

For me personally, I play in a couple of keeper leagues and there is essentially NO rankings or customizable draft apps that allow me to customize values the way I need to in order to make good keeper decisions. Basically the only way sites allow is to designate rounds that you forfeit picks to keep players while my systems use a salary type system.

3) Entertainment. Ultimately this is what this is all about, right? Lists and data and apps are great, but if it’s packaged in an entertaining way, that makes a big difference. Great writers and clean presentation are worth their weight in gold. I know I said above that data was so important, but so is entertainment. I love Footballoutsiders because of their data and the way they present it. But two of my favorite reads over there have been Audibles at the Line and Scramble For The Ball. Neither one of them really provide any useful information, but they both are fun reads with entertaining banter. 

 

[matuski]

Keep the subscriber contests and don't change so much that I can't find what I want when I want it and I'll be here until I retire from FF.

 

[huthut]

Was about to complain that you cannot do keepers for draft dominator, but turns out you can. I never really poked around in the settings before, so I feel like I under-utilized this tool in the past. Even though it is hard (or rude) to play around with this during live drafts where you only have a minute per pick or you should be talking with people rather than staring at a phone/computer, it is still handy for some ADP data and organizing which keepers are held on which teams in which rounds instead of making excel sheets.

 

[filup]

Long time subscriber for 9 years now and love footballguys content, podcasts, youtube streams. Found FGB as a secret tool in the beginning to get leg up on my friends, now I use it still as a good tool and reference to confirm my beliefs. 

My home league is season long and still on yahoo and I know a lot of my friends and coworkers are still on yahoo as well. Would be great if there was some emphasis on yahoo specific predraft rankings (adp, rank, yahoo FP rank), articles about mining yahoo draft values (done weekly, as yahoo updates them leading up to the draft), yahoo draft integration? (not sure if this was already in draft dominator). I believe yahoo still holds a large chunk of the casual fantasy base and we would love yahoo specfic content. 

Thanks for listening to us Joe and FBGs keep up the good work!

 

[Chainz]

I've always loved FBG and was a happy subscriber for way more than a decade, but I have to admit that this year was the first one where I was giving it a hard thought if it's still worth the money. I've just recognized that I don't use this site as often as I did. Maybe because I've been playing FF for almost 20 years now and I kinda have the feeling that I don't need strategy articles that much anymore. Maybe because there so much more FF content out there.

But what I loved about FBG was the IDP content back in the days. I mean it's a topic many have spoken about here in this thread and I have to agree that I'm not satisfied with the IDP content anymore. Of course I still love Eyes Of The Guru by Sigmund, but as others have mentioned before it's coming out too late for waiver purposes. Don't get me wrong, I prefer to have a good article by Sigmund after he has watched all the tapes and made up his mind about several topics, so I'm fine with Eyes Of The Guru coming out on Wednesday or Thursday, but I would love to see more fresh articles about IDP all through the week. IDP seems to be the forgotten child of FBG nowadays while everyone seems to love the newborn child DFS.

One more hypothetically question concerning the payment: If the season is cancelled (of course we all hope this won't be the case), will you refund some money or give us a discount for next year? Have you spoken about this kind of stuff already? I know, it's not a huge amount of money, but we also have a worldwide crisis right now. I for myself lost my job and won't get another one in the near future I guess (tourism sector), so paying the $40 has been much harder for me than it has been in the past.

 

 

[Nick Vermeil]

Voted no. I just don’t have time these days to digest the content. Love you Joe and all the guys though!  (Most anyway!)

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

A thought.

One issue we have when creating an article like Waiver Wire Upgrade / Downgrade is we have readers with a huge range of teams.

If you're in a 10 team basic scoring league starting 2 WRs, you have a very different view of the Waiver Wire than someone in a 14 team superflex league starting 3 WRs and a flex. 

When there's a smaller number of players we highlight, the chances are good that lots of people will read and their response was "Please may I play in your league where _______ is on the waiver wire. He was drafted in the ______ round in my serious league".

Or it goes the other way. We try to highlight a player that fits the 14 team super flex waiver wire league, and we omit highlighting a guy that would be a great addition to the 10 team league owner. 

The way we currently do it, it gives a stock up / stock down for a ton of players and we ensure we cover most situations. 

Just a thought and a counter. 

The fewer players method would be a lot easier to write. It's tough weighing every player and trying to determine the direction they're trending. And it's a little disheartening how some people seem quick to criticize someone as thoughtful and smart as Sigmund as just knee jerk reacting to whatever happened Sunday. I know that's not accurate at all. But that's life. With the current way, we are able to cover a lot more customers. 

I'm open to looking at it though. 

Another thought:

What stops you from doing both?

Run a deeper stock report as is, with that deeper list you feel adequately covers the spread of league parameters you see as "most situations."

Then provide a deeper analysis on the Top 5 up and down, or most interesting 5 moving up or down (as just top might be obvious). This is where the analysis from guys like Bloom become that much more fascinating. And provides more of a differentiated offer than other sites that have the same buy/sell approach every week.

What I am really interested -- only if you care to share, Joe, -- is what, after three pages of this thread and the 10K surveys (or whatever number applies to this past year), do you think you are going to focus on improving/changing/iterating/creating this coming year based on all that feedback?

I know I for one wouldn't hold you to anything -- I appreciate it's a tough thing to answer especially if you go in another direction (for time, cost, resource, or prioritization reasons), and you may not know the exact plans yet, or not want to share.

But with so many giving you feedback, I'm curious about what features you may think at this point have enough critical mass to focus on, and what (even in broad strokes) you are thinking of doing to them.

 

[Blackbear]

Honest opinion. I loved weekly IDP podcast. And I can and will subscribe. But lack of IDP updates would make me shy away from broadcast now. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Another thought:

What stops you from doing both?

Run a deeper stock report as is, with that deeper list you feel adequately covers the spread of league parameters you see as "most situations."

Then provide a deeper analysis on the Top 5 up and down, or most interesting 5 moving up or down (as just top might be obvious). This is where the analysis from guys like Bloom become that much more fascinating. And provides more of a differentiated offer than other sites that have the same buy/sell approach every week.

What I am really interested -- only if you care to share, Joe, -- is what, after three pages of this thread and the 10K surveys (or whatever number applies to this past year), do you think you are going to focus on improving/changing/iterating/creating this coming year based on all that feedback?

I know I for one wouldn't hold you to anything -- I appreciate it's a tough thing to answer especially if you go in another direction (for time, cost, resource, or prioritization reasons), and you may not know the exact plans yet, or not want to share.

But with so many giving you feedback, I'm curious about what features you may think at this point have enough critical mass to focus on, and what (even in broad strokes) you are thinking of doing to them.

Thanks for the thoughtful post @Stompin' Tom Connors

The only thing stopping us from doing anything is pretty much the same thing for every business - Time, Money and Resources. 

I'd love to be able to clone Sigmund. Or raise the price of the subscription significantly without losing customers. Or add a ton of hyper capable staff for free. And a zillion more things. That's the struggle with any business. That's just life.

My job is primarily how to best allocate the money, time and resources we have and get the most out of them. Meaning give our customers the best value. 

But prioritizing is tough. I fully get the passion for all the different segments of Fantasy Football. I appreciate them all. Deciding how to prioritize them for the finite money, time and resources becomes the challenge.

You have to weigh out what the data tells you in what features people view, what your gut tells you on what's best. And also factor in the reality of the person giving the feedback. I hear from people who tell me we suck and they'd never buy anything from us.  I honestly don't put a ton of stock in any suggestions they might have. Other people will only be happy if we do three times the content we're doing for half the price. That's not possible for us to exist that way. 

And I fully get the disappointment when people ask for a feature and it doesn't happen. It's disappointing to read us weighing out and deciding not to do a feature be seen as blowing off the feedback but I get it. That's just how it works. 

I'm hesitant to say anything as I want to be very careful to not promise something before I know we can deliver it. We're already set for this year on pricing so generating more money to pay writers for additional features is a challenge. It may be more an issue of cutting other parts of our business.

Thanks for the continued feedback here as we work on our business and try our best to bring folks the most value. 

 

[jwb]

I have been a subscriber since 2007. Don't see that changing.

Yes, back then, it was invaluable info, and I always had a leg up on everyone in my league. Now, not so much. But I stay mostly for the moderated forums, and I re-up every year because as I've gotten busier,  it just seems easier to pay the $40 to have lists/articles/etc e-mailed to me than to hunt them down for free. I also like the myfbg waiver wire feature, which is awesome for multiple leagues (when it works/syncs right  - there were times last year it didn't, showing me guys who were long gone as available). 

That's the part I would like to see made better. Syncing multiple leagues, doing it once, and having it simply work from then on. 

The other thing I'd like to see more of involves dynasty content - not so much updated rankings (because imho, dynasty rankings should not change all that fast), but in uncovering those hidden deep-roster guys. One of the most valuable things in dynasty is that "free" player you plucked from the ww last year that becomes useful (or even explodes). I won a title one year largely because Arian Foster and Peyton Hillis happened to both be on my roster when they started to matter (after being picked up and dropped constantly).    

 

[houston]

Totally understand if you don’t, but any chance of giving a peak behind the curtain of how 2020 has impacted your business? 
 

How down are subscription numbers compared to recent years? 
 

Would a NFL season cancel be devastating to this site? Or was a strong safety net in place? 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Totally understand if you don’t, but any chance of giving a peak behind the curtain of how 2020 has impacted your business? 
 

How down are subscription numbers compared to recent years? 
 

Would a NFL season cancel be devastating to this site? Or was a strong safety net in place? 

Sales have been ok thus far but 80% of our sales are in August. We make almost all of our money from subscription sales. So a canceled season would mean near zero revenue for a year. That would be challenging. 

 

[JamieMurphy]

I know this will be a pretty unpopular opinion, but I get some of the best information here off the forum. Maybe charge a nominal fee for the forums for a year if there's no football just to keep you guys in business?

(Ducks head and runs quickly for the door trying to avoid angrily thrown projectiles)

 

[PigSkinMan]

I was a new sub last year, mainly subbed for the contest. But as someone who’s probably on the younger side of this message board (I just finished college a couple of years ago), I’d like to add a few things.

1. From what I understand FBG’s built their rep back in the day by providing more coverage than most sites did, sadly that advantage is now gone. Getting daily reports back in the day was likely a massive advantage, that’s what made Rotoworld a powerhouse too. Now there’s twitter, free sites, podcasts, etc. So this isn’t really FBG’s fault, it was just inevitable. 
 

2. I think people enjoy subbing to a FF website when they feel that it truly gives them a unique advantage. Now in 2020 this no longer means just providing breaking news, coach’s quotes, updates from camp/practice and generic sleeper/bust articles. Any semi-invested FF player will get the important news. These days you probably need something more tangible like an amazing tool(draft dominator is decent, I’d focus on improving it and dedicating as much time as possible to make it easier to use for personal rankings and perhaps merge it with an algorithm or simulator to provide projections, sometime in the future). Then there’s more out of the box things like developing a simulator/algorithm that provides player projections for weekly lineups and rest of season value, I subscribe to a couple of sites that uses these and it’s something that definitely separates a site from the group. It makes the subscriber truly feel like they have a leg up on their league mates and not just paying for a few people’s eye-test based opinions. 
 

3) Just more out of the box thinking in general is something that sparks interest in an audience. More based on exploiting market deficiencies. For me this is more strategic based rather than “sleeper/bust” talk. Which positions are being valued too highly this year and what contrarian strategy could someone apply to take advantage of a market deficiency . Are younger or older players overvalued in dynasty leagues, how to read when to strike and sit back during auction drafts(auction dominator should be more research based and less customizable for studs/scrubs and depth strategies imo), and so on. Maybe even deep dive into coaching hires, see which positions and formations a head coach/OC ran during previous jobs in the NFL/College. 
 

I just feel like younger fans/players across all sports tend to be more interested in analytics, algorithms, outside of the box thinking and less of the eye test-based opinions and generic (sleepers, value picks, busts that tend to just follow the trends). 
 

I realize a lot of this is easier said than done and doesn’t necessarily line up with everyone on FBG’s staff’s strengths. 

 

[greyhorse]

I paid $59.99 for the All Pro early bird special for this upcoming season.  I had a 3 year subscription that ran out after last season, which I can't remember how much it cost but certainly was a heck of a lot cheaper than $60 a season.  I think it was probably like $75 for 3 years?  Does that even make sense?  I know that FBG added a lot more DFS content, so I did pay for the Pro version, even though I don't really play DFS seriously.  Especially the more that I learn that these big contests are essentially flooded with pros dropping thousands and max entries on each tourney.  Nonetheless, I occasionally dabble with the single entry contests so I do find DFS info valuable.

I know that there is a money back guarantee on the yearly subscription through the end of July.  So if in a month it looks like the season won't go, then I'm expecting a bunch of people will cancel and ask for refunds.

I love the articles and MyFBG. Like others, once Rotoworld became main stream, I still felt like this was one of the last secret sites.  Not sure why I would think my league mates were dumb enough not to be able to find it, just like I did, but maybe that's just wishful thinking.  

I find the Draft Dominator hard to use, even after reading the tutorials.  Fantasy Pros is such a cleaner platform, it's intuitive, and it syncs with my league's platform so I can get real time advice without manually inputting the pics while trying to keep up with my real draft.

 

[Simon Shepherd]

I find the Draft Dominator hard to use, even after reading the tutorials.  Fantasy Pros is such a cleaner platform, it's intuitive, and it syncs with my league's platform so I can get real time advice without manually inputting the pics while trying to keep up with my real draft.

We made a focus this year to make the Draft Dominator easier to use. Give it a shot as especially for getting started with a new draft, it's now much clearer than before. League sync does come at a higher cost from Fantasy Pros, especially if you need more than 1 league, but it's something we do consider each year. It's a large undertaking and not one we want to do without being 100% sure we're going to be able to do it near perfectly, as nothing would be worse than messing this up halfway through a customer's draft.

 

[Simon Shepherd]

2. I think people enjoy subbing to a FF website when they feel that it truly gives them a unique advantage. Now in 2020 this no longer means just providing breaking news, coach’s quotes, updates from camp/practice and generic sleeper/bust articles. Any semi-invested FF player will get the important news. These days you probably need something more tangible like an amazing tool(draft dominator is decent, I’d focus on improving it and dedicating as much time as possible to make it easier to use for personal rankings and perhaps merge it with an algorithm or simulator to provide projections, sometime in the future). Then there’s more out of the box things like developing a simulator/algorithm that provides player projections for weekly lineups and rest of season value, I subscribe to a couple of sites that uses these and it’s something that definitely separates a site from the group. It makes the subscriber truly feel like they have a leg up on their league mates and not just paying for a few people’s eye-test based opinions. 

Hey @PigSkinMan - what exactly do you mean by "algorithm or simulator to provide projections" here? Can you give an example of another tool in the industry that is an equivalent? Just want to make sure I understand you before I write up a wishlist item on this.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Just my .....but it feels like a thread like this may have been more appropriate sometime shortly after KC hoisted the Lombardi in February.....if looking for feedback, ideas, direction, comments, complaints, etc.....allowing FBG the time to take in the feedback and announce/implement any changes, etc based on what is posted in this thread......and prior to the early bird deadline (6/21) and the upcoming "go time" in August.....June 12th seems a little late to the party....

 

[Joe Bryant]

Just my .....but it feels like a thread like this may have been more appropriate sometime shortly after KC hoisted the Lombardi in February.....if looking for feedback, ideas, direction, comments, complaints, etc.....allowing FBG the time to take in the feedback and announce/implement any changes, etc based on what is posted in this thread......and prior to the early bird deadline (6/21) and the upcoming "go time" in August.....June 12th seems a little late to the party....

For sure. We do a big ask with the big survey sent out before the playoffs.

This was mainly just a question I had wondering how many folks here support us with buying a subscription. 

And then anytime I'm on that topic, I'll always ask how we can better serve people. I'm thinking that 12 months a year.

Purely curious question on my part here.

The question came up recently asking how many Shark Pool posters bought subscriptions for the Footballguys Premium content. I'm not sure so I thought I'd ask here.

What we offer.

I'm also interested in two more things.

1. For the people that do buy the Premium Subscription, how can we better serve you with it?

2. For the people that don't buy the Premium Subscription, can you share reasons why not? And what we could do that might make it worth buying?

I of course want honest feedback but could I please ask that we keep the comments constructive?

I get it that some people just don't like us or don't like the way the board is moderated. If that's the case, there isn't much we can do there. But I'd very much like to hear how we can better serve people. 

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

For sure. We do a big ask with the big survey sent out before the playoffs.

This was mainly just a question I had wondering how many folks here support us with buying a subscription. 

And then anytime I'm on that topic, I'll always ask how we can better serve people. I'm thinking that 12 months a year.

No worries.....not sure if I saw/took the time for the survey....and I am guessing there may be many more like me.  (Not sure how good your response rate was on the survey?) A survey....even if allowing for comments, etc... can only do so much.  Sometimes you need a forum like this thread to really get deep in the weeds and allow for that immediate back and forth dialogue.  Actually seeing that the "powers that be" (you) are actively listening and participating in the discussion, instead of just reviewing results of a survey, can make a difference. Or at least make this segment of your visitors actually feel "heard". The nuggets you get here may be the really meaningful stuff.  It may also be reflected in the survey, but here you get more of the juice behind the responses.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

No worries.....not sure if I saw/took the time for the survey....and I am guessing there may be many more like me.  (Not sure how good your response rate was on the survey?) A survey....even if allowing for comments, etc... can only do so much.  Sometimes you need a forum like this thread to really get deep in the weeds and allow for that immediate back and forth dialogue.  Actually seeing that the "powers that be" (you) are actively listening and participating in the discussion, instead of just reviewing results of a survey, can make a difference. Or at least make this segment of your visitors actually feel "heard". The nuggets you get here may be the really meaningful stuff.  It may also be reflected in the survey, but here you get more of the juice behind the responses.  

Thanks. And agreed.

It's also worth noting too that you folks here are unique. You're the power users. 

My guess is the number of IDP and Dynasty users here in the Shark Pool population is 10X what it is in the average fantasy football player population. Maybe 20x. 

That's cool. But it also is something I factor as well. 

The challenge for us is making a product that you folks will like but also the much more casual guy will like. We'll keep trying. 

 

[acarey50]

Thanks. And agreed.

It's also worth noting too that you folks here are unique. You're the power users. 

My guess is the number of IDP and Dynasty users here in the Shark Pool population is 10X what it is in the average fantasy football player population. Maybe 20x. 

That's cool. But it also is something I factor as well. 

The challenge for us is making a product that you folks will like but also the much more casual guy will like. We'll keep trying. 

I had a very similar discussion a few years ago with a friend of mine that runs another FF site, which also happens to be part of the USA Today group, and this was essentially the issue they had when figuring out where to focus their content.

The vocal minority of users that were on a fantasy football message board from February through July were your "power" users - they were the dynasty and IDP types, with deep benches, taxi squads, etc., that wanted detailed and regularly updated rookie data all off season, that were interested in the battle for the 4th WR spot on the Titans, but they represented a very small percentage of the paying customers, who were primarily more casual users who did want that spoon fed approach and news aggregation to tell them who to draft and who to start. The power users don't really need that, they are looking for something different, they want that little nugget of information that might be parlayed into gold - I believe Arian Foster and Hillis were mentioned above, for me it was tidbits on Philip Lindsay that paid off.

Your last sentence there is the difficult part - cater to the paying masses which are the casual guys that more or less want to be told who to start where a relatively simple list of projections will work for that, or spend resources on the smaller segment that would prefer a more targeted and detailed approach about why Player X should be stated this week of Player Y, and none of those guys are top 20 guys as it's more the flex spot. It is not an enviable position to be in as there is no right answer.

For me I would love to have features like the Bloom 100 and the Combined Rookie Draft Board updated weekly all offseason, with detailed notes on why each adjustment was made, but I also do not realistically believe that would provide a decent ROI for the site. As others have mentioned, I also would love to have the Eyes of the Guru out on a Tuesday or at least very early Wednesday so it can be used for waiver decisions.