ANNOUNCEMENT New Thread Prefix: Content Post

[BaconGrundleCandy]

I just went over @patfanken 's latest thread, which are his thoughts immediately after the game without the benefit of any film. The other posts are all over the place, from people questioning the intent or positivity of other posters, to talking about Bill, Brady, drafts, coaches, etc. Sure, there's a couple of tweets here and there from Lazar and others but there's mainly opinions based on "eye test" after watching the game on TV or stuff completely unrelated to the game itself.

This definitely annoying AF and shouldn't happen. The bottom is more of the issue though.

I'm not sure that's what @BaconGrundleCandy and @One-If-By-Sea were referring to when they spoke about Content based threads. I was under the impression they were talking about analyzing the game by breaking down plays and film. That is sorely lacking on this forum, unfortunately. I have real questions about why the secondary performed so poorly against a rookie QB playing only his 4th NFL game, besides the fact that JC had a baby last week. I looked at film breakdown for the Bucs game and their WRs were open all night. Something is going on with the secondary and I'm not sure what it is but it would be nice if we spent time looking at it, just so we have a better understanding.

It would be nice to see a thread dedicated to breaking down the plays and analyzing what we think is happening (not me, not qualified) instead of having to sift through dozens of meaningless posts (as it relates to the subject matter, they're perfectly fine as opinions). I'm not sure there are enough qualified posters to get this accomplished but anyway, it is what it is.

You're last sentence is key though. For example the rewatch threads were ok, better than nothing I guess but 99% of the post were someone clipping a tweet with non original thought. It just became the Lazar thread.

It would be great if a posters stepped up in that regard. Even have everyone take a different position group so it's not overwhelming. I'd gladly take on OL/DL/QB for example. We just need more posters and voices. You don't need to be Bill Walsh to participate and ask questions to get a discussion going.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

No offense to anyone, named in your post or not, but I agree with your point. Someone deciding to write a "What I thought about the game" thread isn't, or shouldn't, be what we're talking about here, IMO. I'd say that we shouldn't even be talking about threads where people are just posting Twitter/YouTube/etc... shots, comments, and postings.

To me, we're talking about threads like IIB's thread on the list of all-time QB greats, like the film breakdown threads that people like Unoriginal and BOR used to do, and that sort of thing.

If you have time to dig one or two up it might be nice to show everyone

 

[oldrover]

Still unclear what classifies as Content.

Well, on the flip side, Ian has determined that all my posts shall bear the following warning:

 

[Deus Irae]

If you have time to dig one or two up it might be nice to show everyone

Unfortunately, a lot of posts and threads have been lost to us. But here's a thread where Unoriginal and Box_O_Rocks, who were two of the posters who really got into that sort of thing, and had the ability to play with the film in a way to isolate what they wanted (that was a lot harder back in the day than it is now, so most of us talked about it, and they'd demonstrate it for those who wanted it broken down visually), got into a conversation where Unoriginal got deep enough into the weeds of OL play that I'd consider it covered under the "content" label:


Paging unoriginal - O-line grades

 

[PatsFanInVa]

"A verb, a noun, and Josh McDaniels"

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Well, on the flip side, Ian has determined that all my posts shall bear the following warning:

View attachment 36523

#metoo

 

[Ian]

Unfortunately, a lot of posts and threads have been lost to us.

Anything from December 2005 going forward is still available. I'm rebuilding the search index, which should hopefully make some of it a little easier to find.

 

[Deus Irae]

Anything from December 2005 going forward is still available. I'm rebuilding the search index, which should hopefully make some of it a little easier to find.

Thanks for the clarification. And, accordingly:


Bacon, the problem is not missing threads. The problem is that I apparently suck at using the search function with the current Xenforo system. Perhaps someone else will be able to find some other examples of the type you wanted.

 

[n6249c]

"A verb, a noun, and Josh McDaniels"

And almost always the same small set of verbs and nouns, seldom anything original.

 

[Ian]

No offense to anyone, named in your post or not, but I agree with your point. Someone deciding to write a "What I thought about the game" thread isn't, or shouldn't, be what we're talking about here, IMO. I'd say that we shouldn't even be talking about threads where people are just posting Twitter/YouTube/etc... shots, comments, and postings.

To me, we're talking about threads like IIB's thread on the list of all-time QB greats, like the film breakdown threads that people like Unoriginal and BOR used to do, and that sort of thing.

While I agree with you to a certain extent, the idea starting out is to at least highlight long-form posts that people took the time and effort to provide thoughtful commentary, opinions, etc. I feel like a lot of people obviously get discouraged from posting anything lengthy simply due to the number of posts in here as they tend to get buried. If I only highlight the posts that you say - which are very few and far between these days - we wouldn't have very many - if any - posts to put into that category. Adding this tag at least automatically creates a quick-reference link to them, which is a start.

Should we start seeing different style posts that highlight different things, I'll separate them out by category and organize them. But for now, the idea is to encourage the people who want to write informative posts to do so and highlight them since that obviously encourages higher quality posts. I'm sure there will be some people who will likely do a better job than others and we'll see how things go and if there are ones that are really good, I'll bookmark them and as I said, I'll see if we can expand things from there.

 

[Ian]

Thanks for the clarification. And, accordingly:


Bacon, the problem is not missing threads. The problem is that I apparently suck at using the search function with the current Xenforo system. Perhaps someone else will be able to find some other examples of the type you wanted.

I also obviously know what you're referring to and I'll do some digging this week as well.

 

[n6249c]

While I agree with you to a certain extent, the idea starting out is to at least highlight long-form posts that people took the time and effort to provide thought, opinions, etc. I feel like a lot of people obviously get discouraged from posting anything lengthy simply due to the number of posts in here as they tend to get buried. If I only highlight the posts that you say - which are very few and far between these days - we wouldn't have very many - if any - posts to put into that category.

Should we start seeing different style posts that highlight different things, I'll separate them out by category and organize them. But for now, the idea is to encourage the people who want to write informative posts to do so and highlight them since that obviously encourages higher quality posts. I'm sure there will be some people who will likely do a better job than others and we'll see how things go and if there are ones that are really good, I'll bookmark them and as I said, I'll see if we can expand things from there.

Ian, first I’d like to compliment you for doing this. It really demonstrates just what a great job you do at working to make this forum better for all of us. Thanks!

I’d also like to say that although I can’t speak for anyone else for me at least the recent traffic on this board has discouraged not just posting but even spending time to come here and read. There’s enough crap in the world today, I don’t need any more filling my screen. I’ve already been filtering a lot based on topics and posters, and this helps.

So I applaud any kind of tag that helps distinguish thoughtful commentary from the drivel. You’ve obviously given lots of thought to the design and implementation and even if it’s not perfect and doesn’t satisfy everybody’s idea of the ideal solution it’s a big improvement. Again, THANKS!

 

[Chevy]

Next up - we need a one-off tag for the Jets Suck series of threads ... Dynamic - should read Issue X (X being the iteration of that thread) - Total Posts (total of all Jet's Sucks threads up to that issue). Maybe:

 

[Deus Irae]

Well, my near complete inability to properly use the Xenforo search has resulted in me finding one of the threads where 98.5's Jimmy Stewart was posting his nonsense, and Rob was already claiming that I'd lost it back in 2014, while he was doing things like white knighting for Tim Wright.

So I'd have to give thanks for this thread, even if just for that.




Also, BGC, here's another Unoriginal thread of the sort I meant, at least with regards to his posts:


Unofficial Offensive Line Analysis Thread, Week 1 Miami 2014


If I can find the 2007 SB thread that gets referred to, I'll add that in this thread as well.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Well, my near complete inability to properly use the Xenforo search has resulted in me finding one of the threads where 98.5's Jimmy Stewart was posting his nonsense, and Rob was already claiming that I'd lost it back in 2014, while he was doing things like white knighting for Tim Wright.

So I'd have to give thanks for this thread, even if just for that.




Also, BGC, here's another Unoriginal thread of the sort I meant, at least with regards to his posts:


Unofficial Offensive Line Analysis Thread, Week 1 Miami 2014


If I can find the 2007 SB thread that gets referred to, I'll add that in this thread as well.

This is great stuff.

 

[n6249c]

Next up - we need a one-off tag for the Jets Suck series of threads ... Dynamic - should read Issue X (X being the iteration of that thread) - Total Posts (total of all Jet's Sucks threads up to that issue). Maybe:

View attachment 36529

Before the Jetes Suk tag I think we need the RLKAG tag to identify all polls.

 

[Brewskies]

I am old. Why are we doing this? I must have missed something. Is the forum broken? If not, .....

 

[goheels22002]

Mods, I have suggestions to set the guard rails for what cannot be considered a "Content Post"
1. Any post that mentions Roger Goodell
2. Any post that does not recognize the Ideal Gas Law as an immutable law of nature
3. Any post that mentions Ben Dreith, except posts by The Ghost of Ben Dreith
4. Any post that compares not going for it on 4th and three to going for it on 4th and 2
5. Any post that does not recognize the value of players acquired with draft picks (see: Moss, Randy)
6. Any post that has the words "Spygate" and "Marshall Faulk" in the same paragraph
7. Any post that hints that the Tuck Rule was not what the NFL Founding Fathers had in mind

I hope this is "helpful."

 

[n6249c]

I am old. Why are we doing this? I must have missed something. Is the forum broken? If not, .....

Some of us think the forum is broken. Guess you missed that.

 

[borg]

Some of us think the forum is broken. Guess you missed that.

The Gronkateer virus has not been contained and a new variant is overwhelming the main board