STATS

[DOUGHBOYS]

Umm, your pick, Greg.



Carry on

[Greg Ambrosius]

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Sack:

Greg:



Well received, sorry about the vacation day. I have your email and understood. Thanks again.





Gekko: All I'll say is that it was in my league. Greg was made aware of it and I trust that he'll handle this. Matter of fact, he already has. Thanks. ken - was someone able to switch out a player after the lock? i'm glad it got taken care of in your league. my concern would be if it happened in other leagues. [/QUOTE]Every league is being looked at by STATS. This is easy to make sure every league is consistent with Monday's lineup. This is being done.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

Umm, your pick, Greg.



Carry on Thanks for the heads up just before I took my wife out for lunch. I'm going young with Matt Kemp.

[Quahogs]

From my point of view... FWIW




As consumers it's good to have a platform to voice our concerns. Pressure is a great way to produce results.
Is STATS doing all they can to meet our concerns? Because companies risk consumers voting with their feet if substandard service continues.
If Tom and Greg were programmers and owned STATS, STATS would be near perfect.
Only Greg and Tom know the depth of their working relationship with STATS. Considering their experience in the industry, if they feel STATS is the best backbone for their business that they have put their blood and sweat into then that's good enough for me.

[Edwards Kings]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

Umm, your pick, Greg.



Carry on Thanks for the heads up just before I took my wife out for lunch. I'm going young with Matt Kemp. [/QUOTE]Dooh! Man I wanted him at the turn....



Also, the election is about 37 days away...



Obama/Biden

McCain/Palin

Ambrosius/Kessenich



Hmmmmm......

[sportsbettingman]

Add me to the list.



If this was year one or two, I could understand, but I cannot believe how much STATS relies on the PLAYERS to police their accuracy.



That's ass backwards.



The PLAYERS should rely on STATS to police their accuracy.



~Lance

[eddiejag]

I think Quahoags say's it best and that's what i believe.If Greg could get a better system then Stats he would.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Originally posted by Sack:

A team in one of my leagues received the Stats for a player on Monday(yesterday)yet shows on the taxi today? I don't want to carry this debate on, but I do need to clarify Kenny's point here because this is serious. According to STATS: "It is impossible for anyone in the event to have a different lineup on Monday or Tuesday of this week. We checked the transaction records and 0 moves have been made since the deadline."



The team in question has a timestamp of his move at 12:43 AM ET Monday. YOu can go to the Transaction History page to see all of this for each league, including this one. Again, in this example Ken Griffey Jr. was active yesterday and he is active again today.



I hope this clarifies this example.

[Sack]

Just to clarify:



I'm not making this up. I KNOW what I saw last night, I wish now I had printed this.





Once again, This wasn't my attention to point fingers at at one specific team. A RUN by Ken Griffey tonight will cost me $1250 so it actually would have been to my benefit to have him on taxi.



It bothered me as to HOW this could have been done, so I simply raise the question. I'm glad it is resolved. I read the HISTORY stamp. But ALL owners should keep a watch on indiviidual leagues.



But last night, while dealing with the duplication error, Junior was on taxi as I checked it several times. Thanks, Greg for a fast response and I hope this puts the matter to rest.



Enjoy the game tonight guys.



[ September 30, 2008, 01:15 PM: Message edited by: Sack ]

[JohnZ]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:

I have a theory that the lack of confidence in Stats has now trickled down to the core player in the nfbc. I know I personally have gone from thinking the stats complaints were a little picky to being concerned with the integrity of the information and their level of customer service.



My suggestion here is just add your name to the list behind me with hopefully no inflamatory language behind it (Walla Walla).



It arms the NFBC with a better idea of just how big (or small) of an issue this is at this point in time.



Again I would encourage everyone to just simply sign on if you are very concerned. Kent, I understand how this is a fun time to jump on STATS. It's like making fun of Congress right now thanks to the mortgage crisis/meltdown. But I won't debate you that folks have a right to ask for help when an obvious mistake is made.



I won't stop the discussion, but I will ask everyone to think about what the alternatives are. Trust me, I know this industry like the back of my hand and the options for back-end support systems are very limited. Two years ago, there were four companies that were actively soliciting companies to run their games and two of them have left that area of the business and the other one isn't even close to an option for the NFBC.



The back-end support system we get from STATS is very tough to duplicate. If you can find other options that I'm somehow not aware of who can provide better live scoring, better live standings, better FAAB system, custom builds what I request, then send those names to me and I'll make sure they can bid for our 2009 contract. Seriously, I'll do it.



I seriously understand the frustration when things aren't perfect and your post will receive plenty of folks who will list their name here. I understand that. But the key is to improve everything we do here and that's what we're striving for with STATS. I think we have something special going here and the back-end support system makes that possible, but if the stats aren't right then we're done. DONE.



Carry on and I'm sorry I interjected, but I think folks need to realize that there aren't many companies left in the industry who perform the task that STATS does and my options are limited even if I was upset with them beyond repair. And I'm not. [/QUOTE]It might be what you are striving for, but it's definitely not what Stats is striving for.



Also, it isn't fun jumping on stats. It's infuriating. To spend $4500 this year on 4 baseball leagues and get the response I have received from them, which was none, is simply never going to happen again for me.



We all want to win very bad, but many also spend this money for the entertainment value it brings to our lives and I'm not the first to say that ALL the enjoyment was sucked dry by STATS.



There have been numerous problems in both sports that took much longer to fix this year than in year's past. Things that use to take a day or two are now taking weeks to fix.



None of the things things that should auto switch from 2007 to 2008 in FB changed until there were several MB posts.



I keep hearing this "no better option than stats"



Are you kidding me?



You now have two events that I think have sales over $2mil and a partnership with NBC.



Build your own back end. Build it exactly the way you want it. Whatever the cost is now will easily be made up for in the long run w/o a yearly fee to stats, increased growth in the event, and 100% control over the site.



Stats programmers are shoddy at best. Everything is a patchwork and it's like pulling teeth to get them to do something unless it's a dire emergency. It simply is mind boggling to me that the programming is set up in a way that any stats could be double counted and that a week 27 lineup is such a problem. There are very easy safeguards to put in place to prevent this.



Thanks for letting me rant and good luck in the future with all of this.



[ September 30, 2008, 01:19 PM: Message edited by: JohnZ ]

[Greg Ambrosius]

Originally posted by JohnZ:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:

I have a theory that the lack of confidence in Stats has now trickled down to the core player in the nfbc. I know I personally have gone from thinking the stats complaints were a little picky to being concerned with the integrity of the information and their level of customer service.



My suggestion here is just add your name to the list behind me with hopefully no inflamatory language behind it (Walla Walla).



It arms the NFBC with a better idea of just how big (or small) of an issue this is at this point in time.



Again I would encourage everyone to just simply sign on if you are very concerned. Kent, I understand how this is a fun time to jump on STATS. It's like making fun of Congress right now thanks to the mortgage crisis/meltdown. But I won't debate you that folks have a right to ask for help when an obvious mistake is made.



I won't stop the discussion, but I will ask everyone to think about what the alternatives are. Trust me, I know this industry like the back of my hand and the options for back-end support systems are very limited. Two years ago, there were four companies that were actively soliciting companies to run their games and two of them have left that area of the business and the other one isn't even close to an option for the NFBC.



The back-end support system we get from STATS is very tough to duplicate. If you can find other options that I'm somehow not aware of who can provide better live scoring, better live standings, better FAAB system, custom builds what I request, then send those names to me and I'll make sure they can bid for our 2009 contract. Seriously, I'll do it.



I seriously understand the frustration when things aren't perfect and your post will receive plenty of folks who will list their name here. I understand that. But the key is to improve everything we do here and that's what we're striving for with STATS. I think we have something special going here and the back-end support system makes that possible, but if the stats aren't right then we're done. DONE.



Carry on and I'm sorry I interjected, but I think folks need to realize that there aren't many companies left in the industry who perform the task that STATS does and my options are limited even if I was upset with them beyond repair. And I'm not. [/QUOTE]It might be what you are striving for, but it's definitely not what Stats is striving for.



Also, it isn't fun jumping on stats. It's infuriating. To spend $4500 this year on 4 baseball leagues and get the response I have received from them, which was none, is simply never going to happen again for me.



We all want to win very bad, but many also spend this money for the entertainment value it brings to our lives and I'm not the first to say that ALL the enjoyment was sucked dry by STATS.



There have been numerous problems in both sports that took much longer to fix this year than in year's past. Things that use to take a day or two are now taking weeks to fix.



None of the things things that should auto switch from 2007 to 2008 in FB changed until there were several MB posts.



I keep hearing this "no better option than stats"



Are you kidding me?



You now have two events that I think have sales over $2mil and a partnership with NBC.



Build your own back end. Build it exactly the way you want it. Whatever the cost is now will easily be made up for in the long run w/o a yearly fee to stats, increased growth in the event, and 100% control over the site.



Stats programmers are shoddy at best. Everything is a patchwork and it's like pulling teeth to get them to do something unless it's a dire emergency. It simply is mind boggling to me that the programming is set up in a way that any stats could be double counted and that a week 27 lineup is such a problem. There are very easy safeguards to put in place to prevent this.



Thanks for letting me rant and good luck in the future with all of this. [/QUOTE]John, you are a friend and a person in the industry, but you crazy if you think building a back-end system for our two games is economically feasible and correct. I think AFFL.com tried that because they also were tired of the back-end expense.



There is a reason why Allstar isn't doing white label games and why so many other companies are pulling back on this area. Sorry, but it would be a penny wise and a dollar foolish. I know what my expense for this area is and we are working our deal with STATS to make sure we all are incentivized to grow this business. That's the way to go, not hire programmers to start from scratch.



As for fixing the live scoring feature, it's just something that couldn't be done in-season. It's something we need to request for 2009. Mike didn't reply directly to you as a customer and so you are upset. I understand that.



Thanks for your patronage. I know you have other things to deal with going forward. Good luck with all of that.

[Chest Rockwell]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:

I have a theory that the lack of confidence in Stats has now trickled down to the core player in the nfbc. I know I personally have gone from thinking the stats complaints were a little picky to being concerned with the integrity of the information and their level of customer service.



My suggestion here is just add your name to the list behind me with hopefully no inflamatory language behind it (Walla Walla).



It arms the NFBC with a better idea of just how big (or small) of an issue this is at this point in time.



Again I would encourage everyone to just simply sign on if you are very concerned. Kent, I understand how this is a fun time to jump on STATS. It's like making fun of Congress right now thanks to the mortgage crisis/meltdown. But I won't debate you that folks have a right to ask for help when an obvious mistake is made.



I won't stop the discussion, but I will ask everyone to think about what the alternatives are. Trust me, I know this industry like the back of my hand and the options for back-end support systems are very limited. Two years ago, there were four companies that were actively soliciting companies to run their games and two of them have left that area of the business and the other one isn't even close to an option for the NFBC.



The back-end support system we get from STATS is very tough to duplicate. If you can find other options that I'm somehow not aware of who can provide better live scoring, better live standings, better FAAB system, custom builds what I request, then send those names to me and I'll make sure they can bid for our 2009 contract. Seriously, I'll do it.



I seriously understand the frustration when things aren't perfect and your post will receive plenty of folks who will list their name here. I understand that. But the key is to improve everything we do here and that's what we're striving for with STATS. I think we have something special going here and the back-end support system makes that possible, but if the stats aren't right then we're done. DONE.



Carry on and I'm sorry I interjected, but I think folks need to realize that there aren't many companies left in the industry who perform the task that STATS does and my options are limited even if I was upset with them beyond repair. And I'm not. [/QUOTE]I think my point was missed. I have always had respect for how the NFBC has been run as a business. I think you would agree even if you are correct in what you are doing if your core customers have a perception that there is an issue then you have an issue. If that is the case the issue is either corrected, explained away with good logic IE they may not be perfect but they are the best we have, or you simply lose the customer.



In the past I would say we have all heard a lot about stats and I would perceive that as white noise for the most part. My perception is that is changing and your core audience now has concerns. I was trying to create a forum for you all to get your customers to talk directly to you calmly rather than not so calmly in 4 different threads and then after hearing what they have to say formulate a plan or simply reassurance.



You seem to perceive it as I wanted to bash stats and that is simply not the case. Stats/your responses we all can admit have not quieted down this customer base. Some honest dialog directed at solutions rather than venting can only help. Why not let the process run it's course rather than write things like "I will allow this discussion" why on earth would anyone not allow a discussion in which you can learn your customer's perception of your product? or responding to posts in a defensive manner. From our side for the process to work we all have to be big boys and realize the leader of this event (Greg) who has more experience and in my opinion good judgment may end up saying Stats is the way to go. I will feel a lot better about that situation IF I feel like he is open to an honest discussion of the issue.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Due to timing, a majority of our House voted against the bailout package. If this vote had taken place during an off year or even earlier in the year it would have passed easily. They will pass a more pallatable bill for Joe Voter probably later in the week.

My point is that timing is everything. It is near the end of the season and this argument will fade till next year anyway. I regress.

STATS is like an umpire. If it does a good job it becomes just another part of the game. Screw up and all Hell breaks loose.



[ September 30, 2008, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: DOUGHBOYS ]

[DOUGHBOYS]

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

Due to timing, a majority of our House voted against the bailout package. If this vote had taken place during an off year or even earlier in the year it would have passed easily. They will pass a more pallatable bill for Joe Voter probably later in the week.

My point is that timing is everything. It is near the end of the season and this argument will fade till next year anyway. I regress.

STATS is like an umpire. If it does a good job it becomes just another part of the game. Screw up and all Hell breaks loose. I said Hell.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

Due to timing, a majority of our House voted against the bailout package. If this vote had taken place during an off year or even earlier in the year it would have passed easily. They will pass a more pallatable bill for Joe Voter probably later in the week.

My point is that timing is everything. It is near the end of the season and this argument will fade till next year anyway. I regress.

STATS is like an umpire. If it does a good job it becomes just another part of the game. Screw up and all Hell breaks loose. I said Hell. [/QUOTE]That's allowed on these Message Boards.



Agreed. Where was Kent's post about getting tips to hand to STATS before last night? Folks can talk about things we need to improve our site for next year at anytime and of course I'll listen. Five years ago we didn't have Live Standings or a cool free agent bidding system or 30-man rosters or 700 IP or any other changes that have occurred through dialogue on these boards. I'm all ears, but it sure seemed like a good time to "kill the ump."



Now who's up after my pick in the Mock Draft. I'm ready again.



As for the league message boards, they are occurring on the NFFC boards now too so something happened with the profanity filter for all UBB boards. I honestly don't think STATS changed anything, but we have a solution. It might not be a great one, but we've found one.



Again, I'd love a thread to list improvements for 2009. John Z's suggestion to run out the ERA, WHIP and AVG to 5 places on live scoring makes sense. I need to get that request to them next week so we can have it for 2009. Add some more on a separate thread. I'll take them to STATS and improve our game site. That's the goal anyway, right??

[sportsbettingman]

What upsets me is I don't think I can recall a time when a solution to a problem started with "STATS discovered that there was an error with..."



It's always the players having to go over everything with a sceptical fine toothed comb that find all the errors...and that seems to show lack of double and triple checking on STATS part.



It may just seem that way to me.



~Lance

[Greg Ambrosius]

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

What upsets me is I don't think I can recall a time when a solution to a problem started with "STATS discovered that there was an error with..."



It's always the players having to go over everything with a sceptical fine toothed comb that find all the errors...and that seems to show lack of double and triple checking on STATS part.



It may just seem that way to me.



~Lance Well, I will say that our owners don't miss a single thing and Ken's e-mail came to me at like 3 am ET, so he caught it before we did. I would hope that STATS would have noticed this mistake this morning, but honestly we sent the request before we could find out. That's always the case because our guys don't miss anything.



I don't disagree, but I had a dozen e-mails before STATS could double or triple check the results this morning. Did I say I love our guys?? They are the most intense in this industry, that's for sure.

[Gordon Gekko]

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

and that seems to show lack of double and triple checking on STATS part.

triple check by stats??? come on!!!



i'll settle for a doublecheck, but i'm not sure even that takes place.

[JohnZ]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

John, you are a friend and a person in the industry, but you crazy if you think building a back-end system for our two games is economically feasible and correct. I think AFFL.com tried that because they also were tired of the back-end expense.



As for fixing the live scoring feature, it's just something that couldn't be done in-season. It's something we need to request for 2009. Mike didn't reply directly to you as a customer and so you are upset. I understand that.



Thanks for your patronage. I know you have other things to deal with going forward. Good luck with all of that. [/quote]


Sorry, I'm not buying that I'm crazy about this until you've done an intense, in depth analysis of the exact costs of doing it yourself.



I have recently done this for mine for an upgrade, and for you to equate it at all to anything affl.com "claimed" is what's crazy.



No clue on what you are referring to in "things to deal with going forward", (as I ALWAYS have a zillion things on my plate ) but let me make it clear that my decision has to do with one thing, no response from Stats to my legitimate concern that you asked me to e-mail them on.



I totally relate to Chest's last response.

[KJ Duke]

Three pages on STATS and I haven't said a word yet ??? Well I'll keep it brief, and try to point out general rather specific problems.



One. They often times don't do what they promise when they promise it, if at all. That is flat out bad customer service. Greg, I know that you know this has happened on many occasions in situations where I've been involved, and no doubt many more times when I haven't. I'm still waiting on things they promised for the NFBC keeper league back in week 1 or earlier. They also told me they'd do FAAB bidding point adjustments for standings in the Waz league several weeks ago. Of course they haven't. Every season in both contests there have issues like these.



Two. As has been pointed out, they are not at all proactive in finding problems, and they're not always fast to respond to them. They also do not communicate with their customers, you and all of us. If they know there is a problem, send out an email to everyone in the contest to let us know that a) they're aware of it, and b) they're working on it and when it might be resolved. Have they ever done this? No.



Three. Show a little pride in their product. They do things haphazardly at times, such as the lineup setting change. No one wanted it, no one liked it, and they didn't even tell you about it. Inexcuseable. And why should you have to TELL them to implement the new and improved FAAB system of the NFBC for NFFC. Isn't that obvious? Yes it is. And our personal home pages are a mess. They know it, you know it, we've complained for 4 years and they don't seem to care even though it is the look of their product and it reflects upon them.



Finally, I give them credit them for being responsive at times. Last Saturday for example,a guy named "Kevin" in their office called me back and let me know what was going on with the live scoring problem. I appreciated that, and there have been other instances this year as well. But they need to provide consistent, not occasionally good, customer service - and they need to communicate consistently when there are issues.



[ September 30, 2008, 11:07 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

[JohnZ]

wow... just wow... All the league standings pages are wrong.



All 4 of my leagues are based off the totals from Week 1.

[Top Dawg]

Stata are screwed up again> Unreal.

[Gordon Gekko]

see new thread.



[ October 01, 2008, 04:25 AM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]