11/21/24
July 16, 2002
Buffalo News column talks about the lack of sports blogs, Sportsfilter is kind of slammed - but any press is good press I say.
posted by owillis to navel gazing at 10:18 AM - 14 comments
With regards to increasing reader content. I used to be critical of those who said sports posts don't belong on Metafilter, they belong on Spofi. Now I'm not so sure. I think that migrating some of the sports discussions that take place on Mefi will help this grow (If that's desirable). Maybe everytime there is a mefi sports post there can be a parralel spofi post, then as soon as a few spofi comments are present we can link to spofi in the mefi comments? Didja follow that? Is that considered dirty pool to take discourse away from Mefi for Spofi?
posted by vito90 at 11:15 AM on July 16, 2002
Sportsfilter has some interesting material, but not enough of it. After the death of Ted Williams, for example, it had exactly two links in ensuing days, one to ESPN.com and one to the Boston Globe, not exactly hidden resources. He has a good point, but the author ignores the dual nature of SportsFilter. While I do come here to find interesting news and info about sports, I more often come here to discuss interesting things I have already seen on ESPN.com or other sports news sites.
posted by insomnyuk at 11:58 AM on July 16, 2002
But yes, o-dubya, any press is good press. Congratulations!
posted by djacobs at 04:24 PM on July 16, 2002
viteo90: Maybe everytime there is a mefi sports post there can be a parralel spofi post, then as soon as a few spofi comments are present we can link to spofi in the mefi comments? There are a couple of problems with this. The sites aren't related, so there's no easy way to do this. I don't think it should be done, either, since it would disturb the organic nature of both sites. Also, at some point we're going to have gotten all of the crossover traffic we're going to from MetaFilter (if we haven't already), so thinking of SportsFilter as the sports section of MetaFilter isn't going to make sense to people reaching the site from other sources (like the linked article, for example). insomnyuk: the dual nature of SportsFilter This is what I like about SportsFilter (and MetaFilter, too): you either get offbeat links to and discussions of things you might not have seen otherwise, or you get intelligent, interesting discussions of what everyone's talking about. (The subject matter of the site makes SportsFilter inherently more topical.) We had a great influx of international commentary during the World Cup, with a lot of different perspectives.
posted by kirkaracha at 09:41 PM on July 16, 2002
I reluctantly agree with the article. As an Indiana boy, the World Cup posts sparked enough interest in me to actually watch a few world cup games for the first time. I actually enjoyed it. Who knew? I agree that posts are for the most part shallow (headlines,blah, blah). The only way to remedy that is for users to search out stories of interest beyond espn and sportsline. As much as I hate to say it, the SI pictorial on baseball bats of yore a few months back was fascinating and the kind of material I'd love to see on SpoFi. I promise to do my part.
posted by ttrendel at 11:35 PM on July 16, 2002
I think the biggest thing we can do is post more links, even if some of them are mainstream. If you compare SportsFilter at six months of age to MetaFilter at the same point, we're doing much better on comments and much worse on links. Lately, I've been hesistant to post some links here because I have posted several that got less than five comments in response. MetaFilter users didn't let it bother them back in 2000, probably because their expectations were different, so the weblog had a healthy number of new links each day. So far, I think there has been only one period in which SportsFilter was living up to its potential: The World Cup. There was enough sustained interest here that people were not only digging into the mainstream stories but finding unusual ones. My guess is that this happened because the football crazies on MetaFilter knew they could come here and overdose on the subject. My hunch is that once there's critical mass on a subject or an event, the content will improve. It isn't happening for baseball this year, though that might change during the playoffs (if a strike has not taken place). What are our next big opportunities -- the college football and NFL seasons?
posted by rcade at 07:53 AM on July 17, 2002
I come to SportsFilter to discuss the mainstream stories of sports. Sure I like some of the off-beat stuff, or the articles about sports I don't watch, but when there was the NHL playoff, World Cup and baseball discussions, it was perfect. It's even better when there is a topic with definitive sides (netting above the glass in hockey) and people debate it. I go to MeFi for the crazy links and the fun flash games. The discussion about some of the topics is good, but tends to devolve into name calling and ideological furor by the 15th comment.
posted by grum@work at 09:26 AM on July 17, 2002
I think the football seasons will be crucial in garnering new members. We already have strong representation in hockey, world cup football, and even football, but I think we should push for expansion at the start of every season and major sporting event. Good discussions will always exist for these issues, so long as there is a half-way decent link to spark discourse. Also, more links about obscure, lesser known sports and events hopefully will become more frequent, that way sports fans who aren't into the Big 4 will have something to look forward to.
posted by insomnyuk at 09:27 AM on July 17, 2002
Lately, I've been hesistant to post some links here because I have posted several that got less than five comments in response. MetaFilter users didn't let it bother them back in 2000, probably because their expectations were different, so the weblog had a healthy number of new links each day. I agree. Great point, rcade. Well, guys (and jerseygirl :-), your charge for today is, "go forth and link!" (links with merit, of course) Maybe we at least have a good opportunity to grab some new members in the Buffalo market. Any Drew Bledsoe scuttlebutt?
posted by msacheson at 11:43 AM on July 17, 2002
Wow - and you sure linked! July 16 was a blank for SpoFi, but today ... Today was a GREAT day! For my part, I will do the English football linking once the English Premier League season begins in August ... and perhaps earlier, if the darn Yahoo! EPL Fantasy League starts in the next week or so.
posted by worldcup2002 at 05:41 PM on July 17, 2002
Way too much ESPN.com posting in here. Postings from the local "fishwraps" and TV outlets is much more interesting IMHO. Heck, it may be beneficial to get something going with some of the sportswriter sites, and if it means that the actual authors of the pieces post themselves, well, so be it.
posted by Conquistador at 06:30 PM on July 17, 2002
Major problem is that besides the baseball season/strike we are in the DEAD zone for sports right now. Pigskin is coming, and the rest shall follow.
posted by owillis at 11:21 PM on July 17, 2002
I disagree - NBA rumors, Baseball, World Cup/Tour De France! November/December is the DEAD zone! Early season NBA, and all NFL - stinks!
posted by djacobs at 01:19 PM on July 18, 2002
it's not a slam, does anyone think spofi has enough content? And often the content is dissapointingly mainstream. I know it's come up before, but spofi's editors (with community input, if they want) need to decide if spofi is a "first read" for sports (in which case we need XML scores, no spoilers, etc. etc.) or a "second" or "last" read in which case it should focus on the under the radar stories and discussions. I think the format is clearly more suited to the latter.