Sportspages.com -- Anybody still care?

[Fenian_Bastard]

Thus checketh in the person who's fighting the battle, day after day, across the bloody fields of the Internets.

 

[Double Down]

I'm not sure what the process is for picking your Top 10, Rich, (and let me say up front that I've been picked a few times) but I think it's funny that you have a little note that says "email us if you've got a big story coming out, and we'll try to include it in the Top 10!" Few years ago, a friend of mine did just that. Worked on a story for more than a year, sent you (and your two little helpers) a note, saying it would run Friday, that it was worth checking out, then Friday morning at 4 a.m., he got up and emailed you the links. It didn't make the top 10. Nor did it make the daily links. He thought, well, maybe they just missed it. But I'm pretty proud of this story, he thinks, and it's a two-parter, so the next day, he got up again and emailed you the story again. Again, it failed to make the top 10 or daily links. Didn't meet the Sportspages high standards, I guess.

It did, however, make it into that year's edition of BASW.

For me personally, your site lost credibility when you, time and time again, linked poorly-written columns by people like Laura Vecsey in the top 10. It got so ridiculous, I wondered privately if George Vescey might have been the best man at your wedding. When I first started doing this for a living, I thought the top 10 was a huge honor. The more I read it, the more it felt like the same six columnists every three days on a rotating basis, plus four quick grabs from mid-size papers.

I'd like to make it a destination spot again on my daily web tour, but I'm not sure I ever will. A relationship with SportsJournalists.com would be a good start. But I'd also worry that too many yahoos who are not involved in the business would overrun our little sanctuary here.

 

[Lugnuts]

Honestly? I quit hitting it when I found the stuff posters were linking here much better, generally speaking, than the stuff linked there.

I don't know why you and Webby wouldn't merge. I'd love to see a Top 10 here, along with some blogs and other things.

 

[Bruhman]

Rich:

I still subscribe to the Daily Links, but they don't seem to be as thorough as they once were. I imagine it's difficult for your link-gatherers to commit the time and energy if the payoff is lacking. I have questioned whether to continue subscribing, especially since I get all the nuts-and-bolts links I want thru ESPN Insider Local. But I've counted on SP alerting me to those stories that go beyond a particular team, the stories that I otherwise might never see. If I don't see enough of those on SP, it makes me wonder about continuing.

I don't know what the answer is, but you might want to consider hooking up with SJ. After all, your site sort of led to it.

Best wishes.

 

[21]

Unrelated to Rich J's question, but just a thought:

The front page of SJ seems like a huge piece of undeveloped real estate. Would love to see notable links and news there.

 

[Vic Mackey]

Rich,

I'm curious...Why would you not want to link with this site? Bringing some of your ideas/links here would only make it better. I would think that's a better alternative than seeing eight years of hard work garberated.

I understand that you might not want any part of the forums because of the attack dogs you faced years ago, but I don't know how much of a hassle that would be for you now. There is a hydra-headed moderating system to deal with that, and even Don Skwar's delusions of grandeur couldn't shut down the place.

Re-think it, dude.

 

[henryhenry]

rich - why aren't stories from the big websites in the Top 10 or Daily Links? your focus on print seems anachronistic. the Daily Fix, on the other hand, includes website stories.

 

[Montezuma's Revenge]

As somebody who recently started subscribing to the daily links service, I hope you keep it going. But I would echo that it often does seem to be the same handful of featured players -- some of whom I can't figure out how they got that status. It's got to be hard to have the manpower to be vigilant about finding the best mix of stuff out there.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

If there's a merger, I would highly advise anyone who guards the anonymity closely to bolt... I'd trust Webby with my life. Rich has already proven how quickly he'd ditch the board to save his own ass... That's his right, it's his site...

For Rich's site to work, he has to stay in the good graces of the sports editors who allow him to link to their sites. How someone can charge for the right to link to other sites, I'll never know, but to each his own.

I like Sportspages for the simple reason that any site that drives traffic to our work is a good thing.

 

[shotglass]

I've been quite satisfied not paying for what I get on the Web to this point (outside of the regular donation to Webby) ... and I plan on keeping it that way for quite a while.

 

[SF_Express]

If there's a merger, I would highly advise anyone who guards the anonymity closely to bolt... I'd trust Webby with my life. Rich has already proven how quickly he'd ditch the board to save his own ass... That's his right, it's his site...

For Rich's site to work, he has to stay in the good graces of the sports editors who allow him to link to their sites. How someone can charge for the right to link to other sites, I'll never know, but to each his own.

I like Sportspages for the simple reason that any site that drives traffic to our work is a good thing.

You know, you bring up a good point, in a reverse way.

I might be wrong, but I don't think so. Everybody links to everybody these days, and everybody wants to be linked to. Drives traffic, simple as that. Nobody has to stay in anybody's "good graces" to continue to link to newspaper websites.

 

[Jim Tom Pinch]

I like it. I look at the top 10 links probably five days a week. I'd miss it.