49ers Year-by-Year: Improving the Segment

by howtheyscored on Jul 3, 2008 2:50 PM PDT in 49ers Year-by-Year

At this point I've been writing the 49ers Year-by-Year segments for six weeks, and have completed three seasons worth of summaries. They can be found either in the Year-by-Year section of the site accessible on the left margin directly beneath the log-in, or at these links: 1946 Overview, 1946 Season, 1947 Overview, 1947 Season, 1948 Overview, 1948 Season.

Since we're still early in the process, I wanted to make an active play for feedback in order to improve the quality, readability, and participation of future seasons. Personally, I'm a little dissatisfied with the format that I seem to have picked up. I have some concerns that I would like to address and I have some goals that I would like to express.

And I would like any feedback that anybody can give. Let me know if you share any of my concerns, if you have any of your own, or if you just have suggestions for the future?

Some concerns that I have:

Length: Each season is currently running close up 2500 words and two stories. I'd personally like to work around this a little better. I think that each season should ideally take one story just so that it doesn't get so boring. At this rate, it would take over a year and a half just to get to the 80's... there's just no way that anybody is that patient to the get to the glory years.
Repetition: Repetition is good, but it can also be boring. Right now the structure of each season has been VERY rigid. I don't think that is necessarily a problem, but there are aspects within each individual story that are also repetetive. The "Season" segments have been covering every single game. Game after game after game is internally repetitive, and I think it's bound to be a major drag. I think it will be better for me to display the season results and then recap only the significant games.
Not much on the players: I've been pretty focused on the games and their results, but I haven't done much in terms of profiling the more interesting ACTUAL characters of the historical years. Buck Shaw, Frankie Albert, Len Eshmont... less well know (but AWESOME) guys like Alyn Beals and Johnny Strzykalski... I think it would be cool to make these somewhat less generalized and somewhat more personalized.
Response: After six stories, the most glaring thing for me is that nobody is commenting. This isn't in and of itself a bad thing because if nobody coments that DOES NOT mean that nobody is reading (not by a long shot), but one goal that I've always had for these stories is that they would encourage discussion. Since they're not doing that, I can improve some aspect of the process to consequently improve on that goal.

So please, let me know. If you have any ideas, or would like to see anything going forward to make these more entertaining for you, please let me know. I can't please everybody, but I'd like to please as many as possible.

Thanks.

0 recs | Comment 8 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Here's my god honest opinion...

I’m sorry but the 40’s and 50’s are to long ago. I think you should start at the beginning of the Superbowl era. Also for your format, just break it down. Give us the record and a short recap of the season. Give us the people who mattered, who had the best year. Maybe give them awards like Offensive MVP, Defensive MVP, Rookie Honors and such. Gives us the most exciting/important games of that season. Maybe get some pictures or video links relating to your article. Maybe do a list of who was new and who we lost for each season. Heck maybe do a where are they now thing. But seriously, DON’T STRESS yourself out over this type of stuff. Lastly if you want people to comment, give us something to discuss. I have read your articles before, but what is their to talk about, it’s a summary not much to converse over. Pose a question, compare and contrast between past and present, or something. I honestly don’t mean to be rude but gossip is sparked over conflict and mystery.

by StrictlyFootball on Jul 3, 2008 4:15 PM PDT 0 recs

I’m definitely going to be significantly consensing these earlier years (it’ll get much faster in the ‘60s because I actually have an outside obligation to write the ‘50s with a certain amount of depth… though I’ll still try to condense the “posted” versions down to as manageable a size as possible for the sake of the readers). I’m definitely planning on using a format where I list the schedule with the scores and then highlight important games. I’m also DEFINITELY planning on cutting down on the white noise in the transactions stuff. Instead of saying “Here’s the guys they got… here’s the guys who left… and here’s everybody who stayed!” I’ll just stick to significant arrivals and departures (and try not to be too wordy about it).

Or I could even maybe condense it more and instead of focusing on the season so much I can give a brief season overview and then stick to one individual player.

I really want to stick with the early years. I’ll make them go MUCH faster, but I’m really enjoying learning about these guys… so for selfish reasons, I don’t want to give it up. I think maybe a good discussion technique I could use to make these seasons relatable would be to compare them to the legendary teams that we all know and love. See what people have to say about Brodie vs. Montana (when we’re in the Brodie years)... Beals vs. Brent Jones… Simpson vs. Craig… Shaw vs. Siefert… stuff like that. Do you think that kind of thing would make these earlier seasons more interesting?

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 4, 2008 2:11 AM PDT up 0 recs

i.e; Brent Jones vs Vernon Davis

I like the idea of what you suggested two athletes of two different eras versus each other, that would be one option besides profiling an athlete for each year. You can even do both.

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 4, 2008 4:41 PM PDT up 0 recs

Well said Strictly. The biggest thing for me is the years being summarized. Although it is nice to get some Niners history from before I was born, it’s hard for someone like me to get into all that because I wasn’t around and have very limited knowledge of what the game was like during that time period. im not sure, but it seems like alot of us are on the younger side so maybe starting around the Superbowl era would stir more interest. Strictly hit the nail on the head with those ideas, I like the where are they now idea and definitely pose a few questions that will no doubt get some more conversation going. Overall the articles are good, it’s a good thing you are willing to take some constructive criticism to try and make it more entertaining for us.

by 49erLou on Jul 3, 2008 7:25 PM PDT 0 recs

Yeah, I absolutely understand that. I want to keep going with the early years, but I don’t want them to take so long and DO want people to feel more connected to them. Like I said to Strictly above, I think one way might be just to compare them to 80s and 90s teams and ask what people have to say about that. Can you think of any other kind of “tactic” I could use to make these teams more interesting?

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 4, 2008 2:15 AM PDT up 0 recs

Sports Journalism

I do like your journalism pieces, I believe people didn’t comment due to the structure of the year-by-year annals of the 49ers, and partly because most of us were born before that era. I myself find myself skipping the half-century ago annals immersing myself into the present, or the 70’s-80’s eras which some of us can identify with-

But we do need to know the history of the 49ers. In order to be true 49er fans we should familiarize ourselves with the best 49er athletes, pick one player and do a summary of his career, with a captivating story about a certain play the player is renowned for, and then cap the article off with the stats, the win/loss records and who was the head coach that year. For example, if we do annals of the 2000 era, we can share the story about T.O.’s “The Catch II,” and maybe for another year describe Roger Craig’s high-stepping TD runs, those are good examples in regards to describing a player year-by-year.

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 3, 2008 11:13 PM PDT 0 recs

I like the idea of focusing more on individual players for a season than on being so general about the season as a whole. I’ve been toying with the idea of putting of Fanposts that are about specific people or events that I’ve found fascinating (guys like Alyn Beals, Bruno Banducci, Johnny Strzykalski, Buck Shaw, and Tony Morabito have fascinated the hell out of me… but I just haven’t had the time to do it justice… you know Wally Yonamine, the guy who the 49ers broke the asian color line with, was out of football by the next year due to injury, but went on to have a solid career playing baseball for the Seals? I WISH I’d included that kind of thing somewhere in 1948 it’s so awesome to know)...

But the real intrigue just plain lies with the PEOPLE from these years, doesn’t it? It’s about the 49ers, but the 49ers are about the players. I’m learning this….

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 4, 2008 2:21 AM PDT up 0 recs

I definitely think that focusing more on the individual players that made a big impact on the history of the team is a great idea. It’s not that I am uninterested in the 50’s, 60’s and so forth, maybe it is just the fact that I don’t know much about the players who were on those teams, like I know about Rice and Montana and so forth. I feel like im definitely more connected to the teams of the 80’s, 90’s largely because of my respect and familiarity with those players. I like the idea of comparing players from different eras and think that would definitely be a good conversation starter, and I like hearing about unique things that players did or were involved in that I might not have known otherwise. Im excited about the next post now to see how you incorporate our ideas…

by 49erLou on Jul 4, 2008 10:47 AM PDT 0 recs