San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 On another note, I'm not a big fan of number polls. (from 1 to 10, how do you feel...?) One man's 10 is another's 5. NYT never gives out top ratings to restaurants. Other papers do. But this is our site. If you want it, we can do it. You could do a thing where 5 is neutral, 10 would be strongly in favor, 0 strongly against, etc. A poll would be best because it tallies responses. The poll format is also good becaue it gives people the ability to clarify their opinion. In a perfect world for me, there would be a limit on how much you can write. Get in, make your point, get out. But that part would be hard because there's no device with which to limit the length of responses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Okay here is my sentiment and it is very similar to what I felt when Gailey was hired: I am cautiously optimistic. It is refreshing to see that we have taken a different path to hiring the HC (not a retread HC). What I worry about is the combined NFL experience of the three head honchos. It has worked well in the recent past for other teams and wish it is finally the Bills turn to have done a slam bang job of choosing the best people. The choice of QB for this upcoming season will dictate the pace and strength of the recovery. As always, my good luck is always with the team and hope this is the beginning of a long and successful tenure for Marrone and Co. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l< j Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I don't think it should necessarily be done on a strict schedule so much as it should be done for any "significant event." For instance, let's say Kelsay or Merriman is cut in the final cutdown of the preseason. That might be a time to do an opinion topic. Or when the Bills sign or lose a free agent would be another example. I disagree (respectfully, of course). Having regular or periodic polls gives a baseline for measurement. Let's say there is a poll done your way, when Kelsay is cut and then eight weeks later Fitz is cut. Or one of our key players asks out of his contract, and then some weeks later, Russ Brandon is seen taking pictures of the LA Coliseum. I think those responses as triggers for the polls would almost answer themselves, whereas it would be good to measure poll responses immediately after those events against poll responses when nothing is going on (so do the regular polling regardless of what goes on). kj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 You could do a thing where 5 is neutral, 10 would be strongly in favor, 0 strongly against, etc. If I have to assign a number, I will do 6 or 7. Call it 6.5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Basically it would be good to have a person who is "The Stadium Wall poller." Justin could quit his job and devote himself full time to this. Scott could pay him a salary. edit: Pollster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Basically it would be good to have a person who is "The Stadium Wall poller." Justin could quit his job and devote himself full time to this. Scott could pay him a salary. edit: Pollster Numark has already volunteered to do analytics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Numark has already volunteered to do analytics Well maybe a TSW polling/analytics department. It can be budgeted for and layered over our discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l< j Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I would also limit the range of responses, from 1 to 5. 1 for strongly negative, 2 for somewhat negative, 3 for neutral, you get the rest. Honestly, I have trouble conceptualizing the difference between a 3 and 4 in these types of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I'm actually a little confused. Apart from mild curiosity, does anybody really care how a majority of fans who happened to be frequenting TSW felt in 2001 when Greg Williams became HC or in 2006 with DJ? This is more than a little silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsrhody Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I'm on board.. lets do it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I'm actually a little confused. Apart from mild curiosity, does anybody really care how a majority of fans who happened to be frequenting TSW felt in 2001 when Greg Williams became HC or in 2006 with DJ? This is more than a little silly. In which case you don't participate. But I like the idea personally. Honestly? I like the idea that people are held more accountable for the opinions they voice here. Especially posters who are loud, opinionated and authoritative. I DON'T like the idea that people can spew stuff and never be held accountable for what they say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddenboy Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I love this idea. the first post in the topic should clearly spell out the structure, to make the whole thread easier to read. For example, it should state something like "In the first sentence, one sentence only, state whether you like or dislike the hire, and rate it on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being "Championship!" and 1 being "stabbing my eyes out with a dagger." Then, in separate paragraphs feel free to discuss the move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tu-Toned Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Maybe we should construct a sentiment meter, kind of like the terrorist threat level. Negative sentiment moves the meter toward red level, positive towards blue, etc... I will get to work on one. Blue is for Labatts, and Red is for our consensus hate towards the Pats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I DON'T like the idea that people can spew stuff and never be held accountable for what they say. Message board and being held accountable in the same sentence = :lol: Put me into the "who gives a ****" category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Message board and being held accountable in the same sentence = :lol: Put me into the "who gives a ****" category. As I said a few posts upthread, then don't participate. But if that's your position, feel free not to reference the "barometer" threads also. BTW, what kind of person doesn't want to be held accountable for what they say? How does that person's character compare to a person who wants to be accountable for what they say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 (edited) As I said a few posts upthread, then don't participate. But if that's your position, feel free not to reference the "barometer" threads also. BTW, what kind of person doesn't want to be held accountable for what they say? How does that person's character compare to a person who wants to be accountable for what they say? What is worse is when you call them out and they try to weasel their way out. If you're were wrong just say you wrong. I was wrong about Coochie and Von Miller, I'm not afraid to say it. I was also correct about a lot of other stuff too. You can't always bat a 1,000. Edited January 11, 2013 by Why So Serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMan Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Ever so slightly higher than congress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Whats worse is when you call them out and they try to weasel their way out. If you were wrong just say you wrong. I was wrong about Coochie and Von Miller, I'm not afraid to say it. I was also right about a lot of other stuff too. You can't bat 1,000 Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 As I said a few posts upthread, then don't participate. But if that's your position, feel free not to reference the "barometer" threads also. BTW, what kind of person doesn't want to be held accountable for what they say? How does that person's character compare to a person who wants to be accountable for what they say? So people posting with ANONYMOUS handles need to be held accountable? Just great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just in Atlanta Posted January 11, 2013 Author Share Posted January 11, 2013 The Terrorist threat level is funny. In a few days after reading these, I'll post the rules. If you have concrete ideas on measuring sentiment like this, please hit me up. (An aside: As per being held accountable for views we now know is stupid, I'll say I hated the CJ Spiller pick.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts