Jump to content


Photo

Crowdsourcing: The Shield


  • Please log in to reply
155 replies to this topic

#41 tigerpride

tigerpride
  • Members
  • 610 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 01:25 PM

Bleacher Report is an awful website. I wouldn't write for them even if I got paid.


Thanks for sharing that. It's the third largest sports site in the country, offers me access to athletes and industry leaders, and pays decently. I can't complain.


It's the third largest sports site in the country because it knows how to work google and got bought by Turner Sports. I don't mean to demean your work and it's know fault of your own, but Bleacher Report is one of the worst sites on the internet. I don't go to it on general principle.

#42 evilclown

evilclown
  • Banned
  • 427 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 May 2013 - 01:41 PM

Bleacher Report is an awful website. I wouldn't write for them even if I got paid.


Thanks for sharing that. It's the third largest sports site in the country, offers me access to athletes and industry leaders, and pays decently. I can't complain.


It's the third largest sports site in the country because it knows how to work google and got bought by Turner Sports. I don't mean to demean your work and it's know fault of your own, but Bleacher Report is one of the worst sites on the internet. I don't go to it on general principle.


You do mean to demean the site and the work of a couple of posters here by extension. If you're going to do so, that's fine. Don't pretend that's not what you're doing though.

It's the third largest sports site because they're good at creating content people want to read and getting it in front of a large audience. The site isn't successful because Turner bought it. Quite the opposite.

#43 BrickHithouse

BrickHithouse
  • Members
  • 677 posts
  • Location:KS

Posted 31 May 2013 - 01:55 PM

I'd write propaganda for Kim Jong Un if it paid good enough. Fuck principles. And anyone that didn't like it could line up and kiss my ass.

#44 Matt D

Matt D

    4:40

  • Members
  • 11168 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 May 2013 - 01:58 PM

Shouldn't you be lauding him for trying to create quality content to improve the site instead of lambasting him for writing on it?

#45 cm funk

cm funk
  • Members
  • 1598 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 02:43 PM

I think the biggest problem with The Shield is they've kind of killed the mystery off by having them on TV so much. One of the reasons they got over as much as they did was they were mysterious and creepy and would just show up whenever they felt like it. They're still having awesome matches on TV, and they're still over, but the whole mystique kind of went out the window for me the more they started wrestling in matches on TV. Which was inevitable, but, they could have done a better job with it At least as a trio they're being kept strong. They should never lose a 6 man tag without good reason and build up behind it. That means Daniel Bryan has to be the guy that beats The Shield, which is what I think they are trying to build to, but who the f knows with this company

#46 Dylan Waco

Dylan Waco
  • Moderators
  • 10222 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 May 2013 - 02:57 PM

Bleacher Report is an awful website. I wouldn't write for them even if I got paid.


This is easy to say when you don't make part of the money you need to feed yourself (let alone your family) from writing. I have shared forums with deplorable people, was once edited by a quasi-fascist (literally), have written for horrible venues (and amazingly some good ones despite my relative lack of talent) and once accepted an absurdly large amount of money to write a middling column about pro wrestling for a short lived website funded by Steve Forbes and Bill Bennett (probably two of the twenty or so living Americans I have the least respect for).

I am not a fan of Bleacher Report really, but it's a good paying gig for some good writers. My guess is evilclown wouldn't be able to afford to write quality books like Shooters or Total MMA if he didn't have a more regular gig. I've had my arguments with Snowden in the past, but shitting on a writer who has produced very good content (and is apparently working on another wrestling book which I would be interested to know the details of) because he chooses to be paid well to write for a high traffic site is fucking stupid.

#47 tigerpride

tigerpride
  • Members
  • 610 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 03:20 PM

I should've written Five Reasons Why Bleacher Report is Awful and turned it into a slideshow

#48 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11352 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 May 2013 - 03:20 PM

As much as I still have a distaste for the site, I think BR has been improving of late. That Savage article by Keith Greenberg, for example, was a substantial piece of investigative writing. And -- for whatever reason -- they allowed him make it look like it had been written by an adult rather than an ADHD-addled 6 year old. I am referring of course to the "slide show" culture of having a 1-page article spread over 12 pages. I don't understand and have never understood why sites do that. Is that a generational thing? Do kids these days just love clicking "next page"?

BR are employing some good, serious writers now. And that Greenberg article shows that it's perfectly possible for them to publish articles all on one page. Snowden's Shield article was pretty good too. No reason why it couldn't have all been on one page like Greenberg's article either. If they did a tiny bit more of that sort of stuff, and allowed their more insightful contributors a space to write at length, all on one page and not in these awful "slide shows", then there's no reason why it couldn't gradually improve as a site.

A lot of my problems with it traditionally have been the shallowness of their top 25 lists and this slide show business. Good knowledgeable writers fix the first one, seemingly the latter is not set in stone.

#49 Johnny Guitar

Johnny Guitar
  • Members
  • 300 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 03:21 PM

I think the biggest problem with The Shield is they've kind of killed the mystery off by having them on TV so much. One of the reasons they got over as much as they did was they were mysterious and creepy and would just show up whenever they felt like it. They're still having awesome matches on TV, and they're still over, but the whole mystique kind of went out the window for me the more they started wrestling in matches on TV.

Which was inevitable, but, they could have done a better job with it

At least as a trio they're being kept strong. They should never lose a 6 man tag without good reason and build up behind it. That means Daniel Bryan has to be the guy that beats The Shield, which is what I think they are trying to build to, but who the f knows with this company


I pretty much agree with this.

It hasn't been perfect, but The Shield have been booked strong by modern day WWE standards. And way better than any of us could have imagined.

All 3 guys have done great in their role. WWE need to get over their fixation with jobbing out guys who get over and need
to pay their due's and actually the push the guys who get over.

Yeah there is always going to be some primmadonnas. But the territories and WCW & ECW are dead. TNA and ROH are not cutting the mustard. There's no one left to really pouch talent from.Their going to have to build their own.

#50 cm funk

cm funk
  • Members
  • 1598 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 03:23 PM

Sometimes you have to have principles I wouldn't read or write for them if they offered me a million bucks. I spit on that website. You can justify if however you want, but that is a horrible website. Hope the $$$ is good.

#51 Loss

Loss
  • Admins
  • 43982 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 May 2013 - 03:48 PM

I am considering signing some of you to high-dollar exclusive contracts. Make sure you're on your best behavior, because I am watching.

#52 cm funk

cm funk
  • Members
  • 1598 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 04:08 PM

nice try

#53 Dylan Waco

Dylan Waco
  • Moderators
  • 10222 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 May 2013 - 04:40 PM

Sometimes you have to have principles

I wouldn't read or write for them if they offered me a million bucks. I spit on that website.

You can justify if however you want, but that is a horrible website. Hope the $$$ is good.


Noted, for the next time someone accuses me of being the king of hyperbole

#54 tigerpride

tigerpride
  • Members
  • 610 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 04:44 PM

When do you have the Shield lose a 6-man match? At Summerslam? A gimmick match like Hell in a Cell? I thought Ryback finally triumphantly beating them was the way to go, but his heel turn kills that

#55 cm funk

cm funk
  • Members
  • 1598 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 04:51 PM

Sometimes you have to have principles

I wouldn't read or write for them if they offered me a million bucks. I spit on that website.

You can justify if however you want, but that is a horrible website. Hope the $$$ is good.


Noted, for the next time someone accuses me of being the king of hyperbole


I don't read that site and I would never write for them

what is hyperbolic about that?

because I read and write at PWO?

#56 anarchistxx

anarchistxx
  • Members
  • 1641 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 05:19 PM

what is hyperbolic about that?


The fact that you almost certainly would take a million dollars to write an article for BR.

#57 Bix

Bix
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 6348 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 06:25 PM

As much as I still have a distaste for the site, I think BR has been improving of late. That Savage article by Keith Greenberg, for example, was a substantial piece of investigative writing. And -- for whatever reason -- they allowed him make it look like it had been written by an adult rather than an ADHD-addled 6 year old. I am referring of course to the "slide show" culture of having a 1-page article spread over 12 pages. I don't understand and have never understood why sites do that. Is that a generational thing? Do kids these days just love clicking "next page"?

BR are employing some good, serious writers now. And that Greenberg article shows that it's perfectly possible for them to publish articles all on one page. Snowden's Shield article was pretty good too. No reason why it couldn't have all been on one page like Greenberg's article either. If they did a tiny bit more of that sort of stuff, and allowed their more insightful contributors a space to write at length, all on one page and not in these awful "slide shows", then there's no reason why it couldn't gradually improve as a site.

A lot of my problems with it traditionally have been the shallowness of their top 25 lists and this slide show business. Good knowledgeable writers fix the first one, seemingly the latter is not set in stone.

People like list articles. Slideshows happen to be the best method for delivering list articles in the content management systems used by BR and many other sites. The big exceptions I can think of are Cracked and AV Club. Slideshows are encouraged because they do well, not because it's a big page view boosting scam. Even for non-list content, I think it can work fairly well with the right piece (like Snowden's weekly segment by segment "Raw Report Card"). And like I've said before: BR has by far the best slideshow interface of any site I've used. On most sites I have to wait for a new page to load, but on BR the next slide loads instantly and seamlessly.

If anyone wants to criticize specific writers, specific articles that they felt were embarrassing to be featured, etc, then that's fine. I get why the site can be divisive and that there's not much middle ground as far as how people feel about it. The generalizations, exaggerations (ONE MILLION DOLLARS), slideshow format criticisms from people who seem like they haven't actually read any on BR, and weirdly mean spirited personal insults (again, ONE MILLION DOLLARS), etc. are what I don't really understand at all.

#58 cm funk

cm funk
  • Members
  • 1598 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 06:41 PM

what is hyperbolic about that?


The fact that you almost certainly would take a million dollars to write an article for BR.


No, I wouldn't.

Some of us still live by the rules.

You couldn't pay me just to read that website. I'd probably stab my eyes out first.

#59 Dylan Waco

Dylan Waco
  • Moderators
  • 10222 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 May 2013 - 06:46 PM

what is hyperbolic about that?


The fact that you almost certainly would take a million dollars to write an article for BR.


No, I wouldn't.

Some of us still live by the rules.

You couldn't pay me just to read that website. I'd probably stab my eyes out first.


Rules? What rules?

If you wouldn't take a million dollars to read BR you are either independently wealthy, the most obstinate person on the planet or completely insane.

#60 evilclown

evilclown
  • Banned
  • 427 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 May 2013 - 06:49 PM

what is hyperbolic about that?


The fact that you almost certainly would take a million dollars to write an article for BR.


No, I wouldn't.

Some of us still live by the rules.

You couldn't pay me just to read that website. I'd probably stab my eyes out first.


It seems likely you won't get an offer to write for our site. Or any site. So take comfort in that.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users