Sign in to follow this  
rajncajn

Question about correspondent formats

Recommended Posts

It seems like everyone is using different formats for their IDP team reports. I personally have no problem with that, but think it might be better if we all used a similar format so that it would be easier to find the info you're looking for in each thread. I liked Darin's format personally, but would have no problem with redoing my report if it suited the masses.

 

I've added some updates to my report via a new post to the thread. So I also wanted to get some input on how we should add new info. Should it be edited into the original post, added as a new post in the thread or both? I was thinking both would probably be good using a colored font for new info in the original post as well as the latest update date at the top. That way the new info is listed in one post by itself and bumps up the thread and it can be integrated into the original, first under a heading such as "Rumor Mill" and can then be moved into the main body or deleted as the info progresses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rajncajn, I like the way you did yours. While you took some of darin3's format, you still listed each position seperately, under it's own title/paragraph. That is what I like, I don't want to have to wade through paragraphs to find the info I want. Listing LB's as weak side vs. strong side, and RILB/LILB in 3-4 defenses is very helpful too.

 

Some things I would like to see, call it my wish list: Players age, hieght and weight. Where possible, a points projection. (I will be adding a breakdown of projected tackles, passes defensed and INT's as well, since a points projection isn't specific enough due to the variance of league scoring ystems). I will also expound some more on positional backups, which is something that can change a lot, both pre- and in-season.

 

That Infirmary area that darin came up with is good too. I'll be working on my Jets report this week some with more info. I think we can use a bit of all of the formats that have been used so far, just MHO. I really like the way Ziachild did Houston.... easy to read, broken down by position with some explanation of why some starting spots are still to be determined. By in large, I think the reports so far have been very good! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Rovers. The reports have been tremendous! Thanks to all who have reported! :D

 

This is the kind of thing that will set The Huddle's IDP forum head's & shoulders above the rest.

 

Again, thanks for all you IDP correspondents are doing!

 

DMD should set up a IDP correspondent tube sock fund or something :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked about this when darin3 was first talking about the concept, but, at the time, I believe he said it was cool with him if everybody did their own thing.

 

However, I tend to agree with rajn -- we should have a standard format. I thought the format I used was about as straightforward as possible, but it would obviously need an additional section or two once the season starts (like "Hot & Not" or something). Also, right before I read Rovers's post, I thought to myself "We should all be putting up stat projections for every player." So, obviously, Rovers is an extremely smart person. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I asked about this when darin3 was first talking about the concept, but, at the time, I believe he said it was cool with him if everybody did their own thing.

 

However, I tend to agree with rajn -- we should have a standard format. I thought the format I used was about as straightforward as possible, but it would obviously need an additional section or two once the season starts (like "Hot & Not" or something). Also, right before I read Rovers's post, I thought to myself "We should all be putting up stat projections for every player." So, obviously, Rovers is an extremely smart person. :D

 

828572[/snapback]

 

 

 

As much as I'd love to say, "yeah, let's have a 'standard'", I know this is probably not entirely possible. Not everyone has the same amount of time and energy to spend on this IDP correspondent deal. I trust that everyone is going to give it their all, and we, as Huddlers, know that the information presented will be only somewhat reliable, as the correspondent will be using information gleaned from other websites, radio and TV reports, and the local fishwrap.

 

I think my format is a very easy, simple-to-read format. It encompasses everything the IDP team owner needs to know: who's hot/not, who to start/bench in the next week, who's hurt/out/returning from injury, and any "inside" info that the normal Huddler may not know about.

 

I agree w/ rajn and Rovers... that we can further break down the hot/not, start/bench and even injury report to a LB/DB/DL format.... and even go into further depth with listing DBs into S, CB... LBs into MLB, OLB, etc.

 

Projections would be cool, too, especially here in the off-season. I, personally, will be doing a "projections" report for the Bolts closer to the "kickoff" of most drafts (late July-ish).

 

Bottom line, us correspondents are taking time out of our busy schedules to research and write these reports... while it'd be great to have a standard format (and I think very possible), I don't think we should restrict the writers in terms of a format.

 

Just my opinion... and again, to all those that have volunteered, I salute you, and hope you'll keep us informed!!! I certainly appreciate everyone's input with respect to the content for the correpondents' reports, and I trust we will come up with a way to ensure that the information presented is the most succinct, reliable, and worthwhile.

 

:D

Edited by darin3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.