As many of you are aware, b/r has a college football contest running until early December. The grand prize is a trip to the BCS title game, including airfare, lodging and press credentials for the game. Start your engines, writers—everybody wanted "in" in this contest.
The winner of this contest would be picked by how many pick of the day votes he/she received. Whomever had the most picks would get the chance of his lifetime to cover a BCS game from a reporter's point of view.
Naturally, there were some questions about how this contest would be monitored.
In the b/r blog's announcement of the contest, there was a comment/question format, and a writer named Angel asked the following question:
1. Angel Navedo said on August 27, 2008 1:19 pm
Sounds like a wonderful idea that'll definitely boost traffic. However, I fear that it's going to cause some unfair voting. The writers here are talented, but I'm afraid it may result in whoever has the most friends being declared the winner. What happens when a friend logs in only to vote without fairly reviewing other articles?
Community leader Trey answered the question first with this response:
2. Trey said on August 27, 2008 3:43 pm
An important point, thanks for bringing it up Angel. Several others have emailed me with the same concern.
Rest assured, we have safeguards in place with respect to the MyPicks feature. We'll also be vigilant about policing abuse throughout the course of the competition.
We're very confident that those efforts will reward the most deserving writers over the course of a long, but exciting college football season.
B/R co-founder Alexander Freund then followed up Trey's response with this comment:
3. Zander Freund said on August 27, 2008 5:59 pm
Thanks for the comments guys.
Angel—trust me, nobody is going to be able to cheat their way to victory/game the system. I can't reveal the specifics (for obvious reasons) but my strong advice to everyone is to play it clean, because WE ARE GOING TO CATCH ANY CHEATERS AND BRING THEM TO JUSTICE.
For most of the writers who were in this contest, it was very clear that recruiting other readers for the sole purpose to have them vote for their articles was verboten. Bleacher creatures who entered in this contest trusted b/r to monitor as they had promised.
Unfortunately, not everyone knew about this, and one writer did in fact recruit some votes through emails, which has helped him remain a serious contender.
Is he a bad guy? No. Let me be clear, he is a well-respected writer here and a friend of mine as well. I feel confident he would never try to get an advantage over someone else in this contest. In fact, he even offered to take himself out of the contest. That speaks of integrity to me. He did not do anything wrong.
My frustration is with b/r. Their response to the situation has been somewhat puzzling. B/R inferred, via email, that it was indeed OK to send emails to friends, colleagues etc. to get people to vote for your own articles.
It is that stance that I find disheartening for the following reasons:
1. Community leader Trey and co-founder Zander, both very respected by all of us, made it clear on b/r that this was not allowed. To then change the rules or not adhere to a guideline posted could taint the entire contest. You simply can't have one set of contestants following one set of guidlines, and others not.
2. The purpose of the contest is to reward the "most deserving writer." Please define deserving, b/r. Is it the one who works for a large company such as myself, who could easily rack up 2,000 votes per day with one mass email sent out to my colleagues?
Or is it the one who works to perfect his craft, such as Brian Scott, Gray Ghost, Kevin Paul, or Michael Cline, and others who strive to write solid, well-articulated articles that give b/r a solid reputation.
3. There are many miffed writers who feel the contest's rules were clear or concise and have now been changed.
Some writers are mad, some are being portrayed as cheaters, and some are just frustrated because their articles have no chance to be featured when others have a steady line of voters who every day stop by and pick one writer's article without commenting, reading others, or bothering to read anyone else's articles, sending that article on to the feature page.
The integrity of this contest is now being questioned, which falls on the shoulders of those who set up this contest. Anytime a contest is run, there has to be rules. When one contestant asks a question about what is tolerated and what is not, and the answer is posted, the rules need to back up that statement. It cannot be changed, nor can it be ignored.
Luckily, we have outstanding b/r founders who are fair and just in their assessments, and I have no doubt this current situation will be handled with diligence and open-mindness.
How can we solve the problem?
While the writer who unknowingly bent the rules should not be punished, other writers have been punished by following the advice set forth in the Q&A segment. They didn't recruit extra votes.
The best solution I can come up with is have the top 10 writers be in the semi-final and have the founders come up with a topic under 750 words that each writer must submit as an article. The founders must then judge which article is the best and crown him King of b/r.
Why is that the best way? Because this is a writing contest, not a popularity contest. What if a writer who has absolutely no talent decided to recruit votes and end up winning with the most picks? Is this a person b/r wants to represent them? (And please don't think I am inferring there is such a person with those qualities in the contest.)
If this is a writing contest, then b/r should evaluate this on writing ability. Clearly, that was their original intent, and I would hope that having the best writer represent them is in their best interests—especially at such a high profile event.
There is another reason why this added challenge should be implemented. There are some outstanding writers here on b/r that have not gotten the recognition as others. This is their chance to shine and prove that while they may not have as many votes as say, myself, they are clearly worthy of consideration.
What say the bleacher creatures?
comments (138) write a comment »
write a new comment
about 1 month ago
Lisa Horne: n. A mythological character from B/R. When she speaks on a subject it is generally regarded as "over" in the time's slang vernacular.
This would be one of those times, although I'm getting a little freaked out by how often you post new articles while I'm online (which is less often than you'd think).
from about 1 month ago
"over"...huh?
from about 1 month ago
My fault.
I meant the discussion of it is over, since your word seems to more or less be law.
I went back and thumbed through all of this just to get a perspective on what's happened. I think unless b/r does something, not just anything, but something to really make an effort to fix this than they'll be the real losers here.
Yeah, some writers might get screwed. Tough nails, that's life etc. For me it's no huge matter one way or the other, I joined b/r kind of late to participate and frankly don't get the readership needed even if I did write a lot of college sports.
The issue comes up with how it's turned into a popularity contest. For instance writer A (it's not like I'd actually name who I happen to be thinking about here) gets lots of reads because what s/he writes is concise, clean, and the writer is a popular guy or girl.
Writer B writes on the same subject. S/he doesn't post links all over people's pages, writes longer though much more thoroughly researched pieces, and in reality can cover a game better than writer A, but s/he doesn't get writer A's readership for one of any number of reasons.
Writer B deserves the award, even though it's going to writer A. It's not for lack of effort though, it's because of a flawed system that presided over the contest.
B/R's entire mission statement is that this place is supposed to foster well written, well thought-out work and to encourage the best writers to float to the top. Rewarding a clearly lesser writer would compromise the integrity and make the site illegitimate, and if what all of us write on here isn't for a legitimate site, what's it for?
from about 1 month ago
Hey Ray,
In your example writer A writes "snack food", and writer B writes "wholesome meals".
Which piece of writing is better may depend on how much the reader cared to know about the subject. My only question is who better to judge that than the readers themselves?
On posting links, I like it when people tap me on the shoulder and say check this out. Their link has the headline in it, so I have an idea what it's about and can choose to read it at my leisure or not. I find it completely unobtrusive.
I don't expect people to sit eagerly waiting for me to discover and love their content. A little salesmanship is a good thing- the squeaky oil gets the grease. Ya know?
from about 1 month ago
Buddy, good comment. I think whether someone pastes links to their articles is up to the individual. If you don't want it posted to you - say so. I like to know when my friends have written a new article. Good point.
from about 1 month ago
Ray,
I don't think "a clearly lesser writer" winning is something we have to worry about. In your taste, you may prefer one over another, and you may even consider that one writer to be "clearly" better, but I feel you're losing sight of what this site is about—community. We all decide.
It's an "open source sports network," and that's what sets it apart. If we didn't have such an ability as a community to rate articles to affect what kind of play they receive on the site, as well as edit each other, foster dialogues, etc., then it wouldn't be as good as if it were just a site where people could write articles and staff editors decided where everything went and were the only ones who could edit, and so forth.
For the record, I did not feel like this contest is that big of a deal and it's a shame the debate over it has escalated to some people feeling like things aren't fair. But because a lot of people do care about it, it is important, and if it's important it should be decided by all of us as a community.
If the community has control over all the things I listed above, it should have control over this contest, and how else can it have control than being able to vote? Friends and family should be able to vote if they actually read the article and a good amount of others. We should welcome new people to our community, and if that's what brings them in it's OK so long as they continue to display they are a part of the community in other ways. Keeping people from voting for their friends and family members could maybe be possible, but there are gray areas on who is a "friend," and the crew in charge of this can't know who everyone's aunt is. Also, most everyone has family and friends who would be interested in this site and can be invited to see if they want to vote, as well.
If we had the founders and/or staff editors judge the contest, it wouldn't be a bad idea, per se, but it wouldn't be in line with what this site is all about. The community should decide it, and changing the rules on how something is done in the middle of a game or season would be even less fair to those who have made accommodations to the original rules.
Zander's post below is totally on-target, especially when he mentions the leader board (which, by the way, should be easily accessible for us to see each week—much like BCS standings are...I have no idea how to view them if they are public domain on here). The top writers are at the top and anyone who writes a lot of quality articles, especially if they're exclusive to B/R or are from blogs by bloggers who are still major players in this community like Miami Mitch, will be thought of as a top writer here.
The contest was set up to reward those who write not just quality articles, but a lot of them. Someone who is dedicated. Not just someone who can write the best one article on a topic (though that might be a good way to judge another contest with different goals).
It could be argued Gray Ghost's moving piece on a topic only peripherally related to sports is giving him an unfair edge right now, but he's offered to have it removed from counting as a college football article, and, furthermore, it would not carry him through the whole contest even if it counted and he chose to remain in the running. There is plenty of writing left to do and picks left to earn.
So to anyone who thinks this whole thing has been mishandled, please understand the process could not have been perfect for everyone to be totally happy with how it is conducted. Either you construct it in a way that allows it to bring new readers to the site (friends) or you make it solely to reward those already on the site, and either way has its advantages and disadvantages. Since doing it in a way that brings new readers in can still reward those already here, the original plan probably was best. I think there was just some confusion from the outset on what was and wasn't allowed.
Now that the confusion is cleared up, let's all have fun with the contest and know that whoever wins is someone who won over the community and possibly also did a lot to bring new readers and contributors to said community. I expect this contest to be back next year and maybe a fresh start and removing the previous winner from contention will make everyone feel better, but this year right now can still make for an excellent contest.
-Tim
about 1 month ago
Thanks Lisa for voicing this to the b/r community.
The b/r leadership should take note and fix this 'problem".....
from about 1 month ago
Thanks Georgia, and good luck in the contest!
about 1 month ago
i think B/R needs to run all of its contests better. They need to come up with a respectable, anonymous committee of judges, and when your article gets POTD from one of these committee members, that's what counts toward your total, not POTD's in general.
from about 1 month ago
But doesn't that still lead to cronyism? Or at least the accusation? Won't the judges who have traded friendly e-mails with people be biased towards those people a little bit?
from about 1 month ago
maybe anonymity all the way around, judges and writers...somehow...maybe a person who keeps track of which article belongs to which writer who doesn't vote, the writers, and the judges...i don't know, i'm just brainstormin here
from about 1 month ago
I think if you keep multiple votes from the same ip address out of it, you can take the gloves off everybody and see who wins the eyeballs contest.
Maybe have an award go to the piece voted to be the best amongst the participants. Have a rule that you can't vote for yourself, and must vote once and only once.
I don't know. I'm just playing a little devils advocate. I don't even watch college football. Fortunate for me the way the local Huskies are playing.
about 1 month ago
Thank you for writin' this! lol
about 1 month ago
I'm in the NFL contest and not the college football one, but this article reflects exactly how I feel about the contest. The NFL contest is based on reads, and there seems to be some under the table stuff going on, as the front page writers are obviously having the most reads. I had articles on the front page before this contest, since it has started none of my stuff gets any visibility. That's totally unfair. Of course as a result I'm losing and so are the other writers who don't make the front page.
There has to be something better, and I agree with your notion of a topic to write about judged by the site founders. Long as they don't carry bias either.
Good article.
from about 1 month ago
i'm in the NFL contest too, never have had a front page article, and i'm leading my division...it must be the B/R equivalent of the AFC West...but point is, i'm still leading without front page exposure
from about 1 month ago
Somebody please tell me there is a fantasy football contest! :)
from about 1 month ago
I'm waiting for an NBA contest myself
about 1 month ago
Good call Lisa, thanks for clearing a few things up.
about 1 month ago
I'm not in the contest because I don't even get many POTD votes, even though my articles are better than everyone else's (lol), but I'm happy that cheating is going to be put to justice. Thanks for the info on this, maybe when PSU goes for a 2 or 3 peat I'll be in the contest.
from about 1 month ago
"but I'm happy that cheating is going to be put to justice."
ok, let it be known that i am the writer in question(for you non sherlock types out there). i wasn't aware of the rule (because it wasn't a rule) actually i should say i wasn't aware of the Q&A. where basically other writers were warned about this.
i would never intentionally break the rules of any contest i would ever take part in. if i was knowlingly breaking the rules i definitely wouldn't post it on someone's public profile. i invited friends and family to the site (which i would anyway through my writing) but i also told them about the contest. so instead of just reading and moving on, most signed up and vote every week. i never advertised that i was in this contest to my readers at tigerreport.com in fact, everyone who voted for me that i invited is someone i know personally and most are very special people in my life. there are about 10 or so that do peruse the site and as i told GG and zander last night, i think a few of my friends have even enjoyed other writers on the site namely lisa.
like i told gray ghost (who has been great through this whole ordeal) as well as zander, i post my real name and my real picture on this site.
i don't have money or fame. all i have in this world is my integrity. i try to share my personality through my writing and treat the audience as if they're just one of my buds.
i would never circumvent the rules after putting myself out there week after week and expect readers and writers to come back and read what i have to say which honestly is what i want. i want readers to read me because they i want them to feel like they know me and look fwd to my work. i know my style isn't for everyone but there is a certain level of trust btwn the reader and myself and that is trust i would never want to break.
i'm on B/R to write and to get read and hopefully build an audience. the great thing the site is besides the writing and reading, i've had great fun interacting with all of you. i would even consider some of you friends. in fact many have standing invitations to come tailgate with me at LSU games.
so regardless of how we got here, here we are........i see only four possible solutions:
1) like lisa already offered, coming up with an alternative way to win.
2) a writer suggested removing any votes i received from voters who have come to the site just to vote for me.
3) start all over (you know the BCS standings don't start till this week anyway) with clearer rules.
4) i will remove myself from the contest as to not cause any hard feelings (honestly this mess has shown me how trivial this contest is, at least to me. i'd much rather rewind this and take the advice of a fellow writer before the contest started of not to enter.)
while i think winning the contest would be an awesome experience as a writer and a fan, i will hopefully have a healthy two month old bouncing around in early january.
as my wife would beat me with a rubber hose if i drop out, i'm the kind of person who doesn't want to rock the boat and definitely don't want to be viewed as a bad guy. i may not have a whole lot of confidence but i promise you i'm not a bad guy.
so there's my take, i'll abide by whatever's decided and please know that i apologize for being the root of all this drama. i respect this site, myself, and all of you too much to play fast and loose with the rules.
as my coach says....
thanks, a have a great day!!
from about 1 month ago
Isaac...
Don't blame the writer...it's not his fault. He's not a cheater, and in fact, has been nothing short of classy throughout this whole thing.
Look, my issue is with how b/r will handle this. The writer shouldn't be DQ'd because he didn't know. B/R should have clearly posted all rules and what NOT to do.
They didn't do that, but when someone asked about recruiting voters, the answer sems to indicate that was not allowed.
The writer most likely didn't see that- it's not his fault.
from about 1 month ago
Justin-
You have my complete respect. You didn't know about the Q and A. The problem can be fixed....it's up to b/r to fix it. Hopefully, they will come up with a solution where everyone is happy with it. The community needs to hear from them.
I came up with one scenario...but I'm sure there are other good ones.
from about 1 month ago
I didn't know it was Justin, first off. Second off, I thought someone was intentionally cheating. I must've misunderstood. Sorry.
from about 1 month ago
no problem, I-rock.
from about 1 month ago
Also, I love the idea that you and David used for the LSU-Florida game. I'm going to try and get that for the PSU vs. Ohio State game.
from about 1 month ago
Justin-
I don't think you should drop out. You made no secret about your strategy so there is no way anyone can say there was mailicious intent. You're right, there were no real rules in the beginning so I dont see how you could break any.
I hope we can find a way to scrub the contest so that the best writer wins, not just the one who posts the most. This should be about quality, not quantity.
about 1 month ago
I don't know what my stance on this is -- it's an interesting read though. When I heard about the contest, I wasn't jumping up and down...I knew I wouldn't win, since I am focusing my energy on only one column a week...I also thought it would be foolish not to enter, because I didn't know how the COACF column would be received and it WAS about college football, after all.
My main concern was that my column (which I could care less if it got picked or not) wouldn't show up where others would find it (and ultimately send in highlights, quotes, comments, and stats) if it wasn't getting picks, comments, etc.
I do use the Facebook share button to promote my column, and have e-mailed friends to tell them about B/R and what I'm putting so much time into writing each week. Some of those friends have joined B/R to comment, and in occasional cases even write their own pieces. I'm sure the increased traffic and word-of-mouth had to be a motivation for B/R putting the effort and finances into producing the contest.
At the same time, I haven't e-mailed people and told them to create accounts so they can vote for my articles, and I haven't mentioned the fact that I'm registered in the contest to any of them.
So is the possibility for abuse out there? Yeah. Since I've e-mailed people about my column, maybe I'm technically disqualified myself (and would be glad to withdraw if so)...but has the contest and its current structure brought more readers, credibility, and talent to the site? Probably hard to argue with that.
Ultimately, I as a writer will reap the benefits of increased traffic on my favorite sportswriting site...so I'm not spending too much time worrying about or trying to change the format. And as a not-so-serious contestant for a prize (or in your proposed alternative, a semifinal round), the fairness aspect doesn't bother me. Of course, if all involved agree that a "write-off" is the way to go, I think we'd truly see the best of what B/R CFB writers have to offer...and that's exciting.
from about 1 month ago
Tim-
A write off would be fun. Unfortunately, how much time does b/r want to devote to reading articles?
about 1 month ago
How can we solve the problem?
Lisa, I couldn't have worded this portion of your article better myself. Let's disect this for a moment. First prize is a trip to Miami, I am Miami Mitch; is this a coincidence or merely God's plan for me to have the tickets? I am not one to bring religion into any argument but afterall I am just a God fearing college football writer (or as Bleacher rates me, 'Scribe") so who am I to question a higher authority? If God intended for me to win then so be it, I graciously accept the solution.
I always try to live in the solution and never the problem and thank you for solving this issue which has kept me awake many nights.
On a side note: this contest and the rules were not one our friends at Bleacher's best ideas. As someone posted earlier, if someone has their articles on the front of bleacher and 3 times on the front of the college football home page how can anyone even expect to compete with that? I admit that there are many better writers than me, it doesn't mean I need to see the headline of their article 4 or 5 times without seeing someone else's once.
from about 1 month ago
Also, you've already said the top 10 has been tainted by skewed stats (which they are) so how is using the "tainted ten" make things any better? take the top 100, put their names in a hat and pick a name.
from about 1 month ago
Mitch-
Yes, good point. Having a few friends vote for you really doesn't skew the contest...what it does is that article's 6 or 7 POTDs getting prominent placement....once that happens...you get 100x more reads than anyone else, and then the picks start racking up. That is a problem.
My concern is for the little guy....there are some outstanding writers here who haven't gotten any reads. I try to read as much as I can, but I'm also inundated with bulletin board posts asking me to read articles from writers I am a fan of...when there's 15 a day, that doesn't leave a lot of time left to read the ones with no comments.
I think we writers should stop soliciting reads on other's bulletin boards as well. I hate feeling guilty about not reading a fellow writer's articles. And I do feel guilty!
from about 1 month ago
I actually blasted a writer for doing that to me 1 too many times over too short of a period (maybe unfairly as well) and I felt really bad about it (especially after Dave copied and pasted my comments about what I used to do when I was a college student) to my profile and deleted them from the post. I try and read as many as I can and I leave a ton of comments and answer all of my comments give everyone a post of the day vote etc.
I think the maximum exposure for the most people is a goal of just about everyone, how can it be done? do you bump a good writers article after X amount of time for this? :
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/68460-georgia-florida
I don't think that's the answer either. I do think maybe 1 post per person per 24 hours is a starting point, if you miss breaking news here or there so be it, it will all work out. I have no idea except a rotating borad but even the is 2 am est the same as 7 pm est? Not really...
from about 1 month ago
Mitch my friend, I'm not sure what you mean by "the tainted ten". I'm wondering - apart from the issue that Justin knew nothing about - what have the top ten done to taint ourselves?
from about 1 month ago
Ghost,
I couldn't even tell you what the standings are but I would guess you are winning; if so you should just be declared the winner.
As to your question, it isn't anything that any of you have done, but when front page space has been compromised then everything else surrounding gathered data from that sample has been compromised as well. My comments were meant purely as a joke, I didn't think people took the contest that seriously. Personally I wouldn't want to go to the title game if Miami wasn't in it, that's just me. I'm going to the event I want to go to on Dec. 6 in Las Vegas when the Pacman and the Golden Boy Square off .
from about 1 month ago
Thanks Mitch. I knew you were joking about the game. I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't something else "in the air" that I might need to clear up. I always appreciate your comments, and know that you give an honest opinion. Thanks.
from about 1 month ago
I just want to throw out there that there is a lot of space on the front page and the college football main page—enough that a few artificially (as some may call it) inflated articles aren't exactly pushing all other quality articles to the wayside, as some seem to suggest.
I recognize the exaggeration for effect with these comments and I respect and understand the opinion, but this site is set up quite well to get any article worth its word count a fair shot at reads and ratings. Pretty much any article is guaranteed 100-plus hits, and, if people like it and rate it highly, it gets better placement on the site and it goes from there. If it's really good, the reads count grows exponentially.
Aside from those who "network," and I don't have a problem with doing that if everyone knows it's anything goes, I'm not sure the entrenched prolific writers are commanding all that much of a real advantage; their constant string of highly rated articles is due to posting *quality* full articles on the site that command those high ratings. They aren't throwing stories at the site and hoping they'll stick because they have a reputation.
In other words, Lisa gets a lot of play on the site, but if she wrote all her articles as separate aliases I think nearly all of them would get about the same play (this story not included, because her standing lends it its credibility). I've seen plenty of writers hit the front page on their first article. There is certainly some benefit, of course, in having an established base of people looking out for your next story, but the advantages gained in that department are earned, not undeserved.
Perhaps most importantly of all is that this contest is conducted over the course of a long season; anyone who is even in the top 50 did a ton of work to get him/herself that far. I think recruiting friends can only do so much, especially with Zander's described protections in place ensuring the person actually reads the story.
As long as someone maniac doesn't set up false accounts with which to vote at the public library (and I can't imagine that anyone good enough to be close to winning this contest would do such a thing), you can't really say the winner will be someone who is undeserving.
from about 1 month ago
*"some maniac"...the risk of adding words to an already written sentence without rereading it befalls me again...
about 1 month ago
Whoa! Definitely didn't expect to see my name mentioned here! It's a shame that my initial concerns upon finding out about the contest have reached this point, but I honestly don't know what b/r could have done to stop it.
As writers, we look for support from anywhere we can get it. It's not exactly a glamorous lifestyle (or hobby). Most people hate reading. I don't think we can fault any of the writers for what their friends and relatives do.
I'll be honest, I've gotten into the habit of reaching out for support, because it's something I want for my life. Those people close to me know that, and some of them have made the effort to register, comment on an article, or pick something of mine as a favorite. I'm not going to tell them to stop.
Having friends and family shouldn't be an unfair advantage. But what defines abuse? I'm sure b/r has something in place to detect multiple votes coming from the same IP address. Last thing we want is people registering multiple accounts to get themselves an Article of the Day.
from about 1 month ago
Angel-
Wow, hi, nice to meet you. Sorry we had to meet this way, but your question raised a valid point, as well as multiple screen accounts etc...little did you know!
about 1 month ago
Does giving you a POTD on this kind of ruin the whole point?! I kid, I kid.
Solid read Lisa, and you voice the opinions and concerns of many well in this piece, present company included.
from about 1 month ago
Thinking about this some more, I think people need to think about this one "bigger picture" here... because it isn't just POTD's... it's also placement. With the votes that come through, a person gets better placement and then hogs the home page too. There could have been plenty of people that could have been on the home page, and maybe had a piece that would have spoken out to people in a way that he/she felt they deserved a POTD themselves... therefore, so you could think about one person getting a bunch of POTD's taken away, or all of them entirely... what about the other folks in the contest that had what could have been their best piece of the contest robbed of any publicity... and buried before it was even able to get out there? Therefore, you aren't just affecting one person here, but many. It's almost not something that can be fixed at this point.
To explain further, we're all passionate about writing, otherwise why would we be here - unless we're just passionate about talking sports, in which we're here just talking and not in the contest. Not every piece we put out there is perfect... or great, we all know that. You could have a gem you're really proud of, and the next one... eh, whatever. It happens.
Anyway, just a extra few cents to put there into the discussion...
from about 1 month ago
Kev-
nice comments, and well stated. It's funny, but I know many folks here don't know you write for FOXSports.com. You are living proof that a good writer isn't getting any props for solid writing....you are one of the ones that I am concerned for.
from about 1 month ago
Thanks for the kind words Lise... yes, it's true, my name is Kevin and I write for Fox. There, I said it. You know, maybe it's like the "tree in the woods theory". If Kevin writes on B/R and nobody reads it, then did I ever write for B/R?
Hmm, I think I need some more coffee.
from about 1 month ago
I think both of you guys are great writers but working for Fox doesn't make it so as most of their sports coverage is far and away the worst in the industry and industry history. Poor graphics, Tim Mcarver, woosh sounds...they make sports a joke.
Like I said, I think you 2 are some of the best around but writing for Fox is more of a handicap than a confirmation. If you guys are ever interested in making serious money blogging give me a call...
from about 1 month ago
Boy I just re read my comment and wish I had a delete button, I feel like an idiot. In any event I just don't think working for Fox is what differentiates being a good writer from not being a good writer. I don't think that's what you were going for and I apologize. As far as making money, if I could ever pry you guys away you know how to reach me.
about 1 month ago
The article was good but I cannot make any comments since I did not enter the contest.
about 1 month ago
Just send Kev, Justin or David. They're the most talented writers on here. I end up deleting over 100 fan based feeds a day. I can always trust those three to truly tell it like it is.
from about 1 month ago
Ed-
You picked three good ones! Good for you for sticking to those you like consistently.
from about 1 month ago
I didn't even know there was a contest until I read this.
from about 1 month ago
Your focus is too narrow.
about 1 month ago
The contest, like the site itself, unfortunately is a popularity contest. The more popular you are with the readers on the site, the more reads you get, the more reads you get, the more comments, the more comments the more exposure... it's neverending.
I personally don't know how articles are picked for the front pages, but it seems to be unfair. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to it. There are certain writers that get every article they write featured, while others seem to be stuck in oblivion. It seems to me the more your article is featured the more reads it will receive and the more votes it could pick up.
I hold no grudges mind you... The top 10 writers in the contest, IMO, are all talented writers and I enjoy their work tremendously. The problem lies with those who can't break into the "system" that is in place. IMO, that is what is most unfair.
from about 1 month ago
K-
yes...it's now a popularity contest, and it's unfortunate. Have any ideas on how to fix it?
about 1 month ago
I'm with Mitch. The top 10 idea isn't the solution.
This is "Bleacher" Report, written by those in the bleachers--and voted on by those in the bleachers. An anonymous "committee" would not seem to be in the spirit of B/R, although I'd happily volunteer to be a part of one.
And I certainly can't blame Justin; no one said what he was doing was wrong--until now, 56 days or so in. Let's not forget that he was one of the most popular writers on the site before this competition. Now if he ends up going to Miami, people would moan and groan, and that is unfair to Justin.
Along the same lines, is it considered "cheating" to post your articles to a million different peoples' boards on B/R? It's that kind of self-promotion that seems to be just as bad. Spare me the "I'd love your feedback on this..." and "Thought you would enjoy this..." or "Thinking of you..." (Okay, maybe not that bad, but still.) Self-promotion is self-promotion, and unfortunately, this contest led to a lot of that.
To me, the situation seems irreversible. You just can't call a mulligan and start over at Week 8.
The rules may have been bad to begin with, but I think we need to continue with them.
Just my take.
And be sure to check out my new article! Kidding.
from about 1 month ago
you had a chance to plug "creature vs creature" and you totally blew it.
j/k, bro.
from about 1 month ago
This contest has spawned a lot of the "self-promotion" you are talking about. I am guilty of myself and have stopped doing it. But in defense of those who still do, it is virtually impossible to make a name for yourself without doing it. Once people know who you are and you have built a fanbase then you don't need to do it, but unless you troll deep into the articles pages you will likely never see some really good articles.
from about 1 month ago
Tim...I am not suggesting anything be reversed. I am not suggesting starting over...I simply am suggesting that a writing submission be required to give some of those writers who haven't had the exposure a chance to show off their talents.
And yeah, you know full well how bad the self promotion is...if mine is bad, I can only imagine what yours looks like. It took me hours to delete all of them.
LOL..on the last sentence.
about 1 month ago
Lise,
It was always a popularity contest is my point. I think the suggestion you offered is one way to fix it. B/R from the begining called it a writing contest. So it should be the writing that is judged. The problem is that it cannot be fairly judged by those who are in the contest themselves.
It's all up to the B/R guys. Maybe each writer submits one article per week to be judged by the community. Each submitted article would receive the same visibilty (maybe on the B/RCS page) and the community would vote for their favorite article, or rank the articles, or whatever.
The problem is that it will always be unfair until each article receives the same amount of exposure.
from about 1 month ago
Kris-
good point on the self-promotion as a tool t help ge more exposure for the less-read writers. But it gets so overwhelming that it gets to the point where you read none of them because you dont want to offend anyone by reading some, but not others.
about 1 month ago
I trust the B/R guys to determine a winner that is worthy. They should not even consider the very manipulatable(not a real word) POTD, reads, or comments in determining a winner. Remember, our goals as writer are far different than the B/R management whose must sell ads based on traffic to "keep the lights on" here at the best online community in existence. Oh yeah, Zander has a very large boat payment they need to cover also ;-)
from about 1 month ago
Of course they have bills to pay...no one is faulting for that. I wish them all the best. I wanna go on the boat!
from about 1 month ago
Z BOUGHT A BOAT!!! (I have a deep water dock!)
from about 1 month ago
Maybe second place gets a boatride with Zander, dress apropriately Lisa;-)
about 1 month ago
Lisa... you make great points as always but I think you have realize that it is almost impossible to make a contest of internet reads/votes/placement fullproof of "cheating" or extra promoting (keeping in mind that i'm not accusing anyone of doing so... just making a point).
It is so easy, as you mentioned, to have people vote for you and to publicize your work via other sites and quite frankly, there is nothing wrong about that. I think it's impossible to have a fair contest if you leave it up to the internet world.
The only way things can be done where everyone can agree that its fair is by having a panel of BR judges who decide/vote each week or something along those lines. Even then, i'm sure there will be some who shout about favoritism - which also could be valid.
My point is that I think b/r has done the best that they can do considering how open the venue is. Did they underestimate the contest a little? Maybe.
The entire format needs to be changed to have a really fair and accurate contest. That's my two cents.
from about 1 month ago
Shaun-
Thanks for your input. I also agree a panel would be great, but the problem is that these guys are pretty busy already, and it would intrude on their already busy day. I know they work hard, and to ask them to read more stuff than they already do is a bit overwhelming.
about 1 month ago
Lise
its a conflict of interest Lise (POTD is a sweet devil - its sweet and its a devil)
cap Z needs to keep this beast alive each day - and that means his objectives are diff from yours and mine
just like between a research organization - that's core function is to do research, but also - sell and market itself, which means it should do all the PR stuff
Sean pointed out sometime back and I disagreed with him - he was like rosenthal came here and wrote, and he did not like that
but we are growing - and i perf. recognise the bleacher aspect of it (amateur writers and sports fans - and not professionals) but we can use the PR and marketing that rosenthal will bring to the board
so - yours, mine and Z's objectives - although its for the same domain, are very different
You gotta think from both the party's shoes
i do agree on the manipulation part - but people play to win, we all are different.
Cheers
from about 1 month ago
LOL...yes, the POTD was a complete conflict of interest. SIGH.
Of course the founders have different priorities...they are sitting on a goldmine and need to get the most bang for their buck. I'm all for making a buck, trust me.
about 1 month ago
I'm not even in the damn contest and my bllod is boiling ;) Yeah, what Lisa said!!!
about 1 month ago
I've noticed the same thing with this contest. I have two fundamental flaws the contest/site.
I'm not criticizing Gray Ghost in any way, with this comment, but two of his articles that brought in I don't know how many of his POTD votes, I'm guessing between 50-100 if not more of his votes came on articles that weren't really college football related. They were great articles, but articles I don't know if they really truly belong in a contest like this, the first being his article on "How to Earn Props in the B/R community" and "My Student, Hero." Again, great reads, not sure if they are contest appropriate. It's the same thing with this article. It's going to get POTD that will count towards the contest, but in the end this is an article about the contest, not about college football.
I don't read Justin's stuff because it's about LSU for the most part, and I couldn't give a hoot about them, so I won't comment on how he gets his POTD's because I don't have a clue.
The other problem is the rampant solicitation. I hate when someone posts a link on my board. I usually delete it unless it was for an article the person was specifically asking me to read. I only solicit links to people the article specifically pertains to. If I write something about MAAC basketball, I'll post it on the guy on here that writes about the MAAC.
If you want to get extra reads and comments post your stuff on StumbleUpon, Digg, Ball Hype, Fark, facebook, and Yahoo! Buzz.
from about 1 month ago
Jameson, so you're not criticizing me eh? How dare you publicly dismember me in front of my adoring fans!!!!! This cheap attempt at character assassination will not go unanswered! Defend yourself Sir! :)
Actually, I agree with what you said about my articles. The "Props" article did deal with some CFB terminology, and was listed as humor, but I gladly yield to your judgment. I have previously written Zander and Trey and asked that my POTD's (60+) from "MY Student" be deleted as I do not feel they were CFB related. I said the same thing to Justin in a private email. So I totally agree with you, and had already attempted to get them erased.
I apologize to anyone who felt I was kicking out non-related articles in order to gain POTD's and a trip to Miami. I love CFB and I am a part of this community, but I am not a CFB writer. I write to reach the heart. That's me. Period.
In fact, and this is not a weak attempt at humility, I write human interest stories and humor articles that are meant to be an uplift, and I do not think they belong in this contest. I signed in because I was invited to.
I am going to church tonight and the gym afterward, and when I get back I will write my take on all of this. After all, I AM THE MAN that Justin Goar passed in this mornings new rankings!!!!! Am I angry? Have I hired a hit man (couldn't afford his price!) Do I feel gored (sorry Justin - couldn't pass it up!)?
Stay tuned.
about 1 month ago
I found this post boring and offensive. On a day when we could have been mocking Clemson and their former head coach, we instead are focused on the rights or wrongs of a writing contest. Have we no shame? Where our are priorities?
I hope tomorrow we can get back to the unrelenting team bashing that defines college football.
from about 1 month ago
CF...we look forward to your bashing of Clemson, carry on! ;p
from about 1 month ago
lol.
about 1 month ago
Brilliant idea, Lisa. I think that it would be great to have the top ten writers of the CFB section vote as well (not their own articles, of course), in addition to the founders of the site. Make it even more exciting. Even do a semi final and a final between two or three writers. Make people write twice as hard.
Great job
about 1 month ago
I remember during the NFL Draft Challenge, they did a contest to write articles based on the draft. The writer that got the most READS than anyone else won and therefore, a way to any opening day NFL game they chose. Would it be possible for this contest to go along with this? I know that b/r is really just trying to make sure the content is always good, and I like that, it creates credibility. But it is somewhat hard to get a POTD over someone that mostly gets these POTD's simply for their history of great articles, and that's not a bad thing.
But if the goal is to give everybody at least somewhat of a fair chance, I think readership should be the basis on picking the winner. Maybe even combine it with POTD's somehow?
I guess a rough idea would be along these lines:
Tag your article as College Football Challenge Contest
You can do as many articles as you want to be eligible, as long as they pertain to the contest.
The amount of combined readership will be a factor.
The amount of Pick of The Day votes received will be a factor.
It just could be the possibility that, let's say, someone who writes pretty much only about soccer, or MMA, or hockey gets the most POTD votes in this time. They may not care if they get a free trip to the BCS title game, but rather the World Cup or something of the like. So the guy that got second place, that pretty much only writes about College football, that may have deserved it more, and would have liked to go to the game more, does not get the opportunity.
I don't know, just something I thought about I suppose.
Good article!!
about 1 month ago
I just want to know how to get one of those sweet B/R t-shirts.
from about 1 month ago
Robert, did you already throw away your "blackout" shirt?!!
from about 1 month ago
Well, Bama finally soiled it. I had to wash it and put it in the closet until January.
Go Dawgs! Beat those Commies!
about 1 month ago
OK. First off, Thanks for writing this Lisa. It will be interesting to hear what b/r has to say about the solution, if there is one at all.
Confession: at the beginning of this contest, I remember thinking to myself after reading a great college football article by one of my peers, that if I vote this article POTD, it hurts my chances of winning the contest. So, I don't know, maybe I'm the only selfish writer who thought that. Assuredly, I put that thought aside and continue to give my picks to those deserving.
I also agree that Justin is a Top writer, and he may have won regardless of the misunderstanding.
I recently noticed that every article he wrote was getting POTD, and I'll admit, I got a little irritated because I had written an article that I was so sure was going to get POTD on the same day, and needless to say, I didn't get it. So I went to his board and asked him to tell me when he was posting a new article so I wouldn't post the same day. ;) He graciously told me about his supporters coming to the site to vote. So, that said, I too believe that He wasn't cheating at all. He was just networking. And as many of us who have day jobs know, you have to network or you won't get noticed.
When I first got to this site, as everyone else, I wanted my articles to get read. I studied the site and noticed that a lot of people were posting on boards that their articles were available to read. So, I started doing that too. It worked! I began to get reads, comments, fans, and somehow even a POTD. Now, when I write a new article, I go to the boards of those who are my fans and I tell them I have a new article. And maybe, if the article is pertaining to a specific team, I'll go to others who I know are fans of the team, etc. Is this wrong? I don't think so. Why wouldn't I tell my fans that I have a new article?
As