Stuff I Like: Yahoo Sports

I don't remember when I stopped defaulting to ESPN.com for my sports news, but it has probably been a decade.  My default is Yahoo Sports, and I haven't looked back. I know I'd stopped visiting ESPN.com almost altogether once they made the site so multimedia heavy - how am I supposed to be clandestinely reading about sports at work when videos are automatically starting?

Recently on OKTC, Clay Travis wrote about how Yahoo Sports became ESPN's biggest competitor (HT: Tom Dienhart).  It's an article that's well worth reading (I don't agree that it's ESPN's biggest competitor, but I do think it's ESPN.com's biggest).  Some of his points are right on the money, but he missed one that I'll get to below.

Fantasy sports
On this, he is 100% correct.  The reason Yahoo is in the position its in today is because of Fantasy sports.  All that traffic that Travis talked about?  It comes from Fantasy. I'd like to believe that it's people checking the ladder at Yahoo's Aussie Rules page, but that's not the case. [after living in Australia, I can attest, this is one of the best sites for AFL updates]

Get good writers developing original content
The stories are good (and I do like fellow UMass-alumnus Dan Wetzel), but there are good writers on SI.com and [sorry] ESPN.com too.  Yahoo keeps pace here, but is not a leader. Travis rightly notes that because Yahoo doesn't have broadcast deals or other such interests, it can maintain independence, which does give them an edge in reporting.

Where Yahoo is a leader is in their investigative reporting.  How did this happen? How did Yahoo Sports uncover some of the biggest stories, especially in college sports (e.g., Reggie Bush, UNC, etc)? There is stellar investigative journalism going on over there, and I'm glad that the guys writing the checks are backing expensive work that takes months or years to develop.

Travis also mentions the sport blogs, which are strong. I've already made it known that Matt Hinton is one of the best out there, and the other blogs are enjoyable to read too (e.g., Dirty Tackle, Big League Stew).  And I agree that buying Rivals.com was a great move.

What I think Travis missed was Yahoo's site simplicity.  It is very easy to get the information you want. The site is light weight and streamlined, more HTML than Flash. Sure, there are some design changes that I'd make, but I still prefer it to ESPN.  When I just want a score, it's fastest to go to Yahoo... and then while I'm there I'll check recruiting, read a blog post, etc.  Maybe I'm wrong here, and people would prefer glitz, but I'm too utilitarian. I'm also not as sold as Travis is that radio is the key for the future, but good luck to them.

Keep up the good work, Yahoo.

Stuff I like: Dr. Saturday

I tend to be critical of the media, particularly those in the sport media.  It's therefore only right that I salute those who I feel are doing a good job.

One of the best college football blogs is written by Matt Hinton: Dr. Saturday (or how I learned to stop worrying and love the BCS).  Below is an explanation of why I like this blog and why other college football fans should be enjoying it too.

1. Good writing. The writing is well structured and easy to read.  Compare that writing with someone like CBS' Gregg Doyel (choppy sentences, written like college sophomore at best) to see the difference in style.  The Dr Saturday articles flow well with sentences move nicely from one to another and are aimed at readers with a high school education.


2. Entertaining writing. It's witty, humorous, and fun, all without being obnoxious.  The writing doesn't say, "Look at me!  I'm witty!", but it still comes through nicely.  The following paragraph about the Cam Newton scandal serves as a brilliant example: "If only explaining the gap in the Watergate tapes had been so easy. (Then again, the general public probably cared a lot less about the fate of Richard Nixon's presidency and reputation than Deep South football fans do right now about Cam Newton's eligibility. The threat of federal indictment is one thing; but the wrath of Paul Finebaum callers is more than anyone can withstand.)"


3. Content. Simply, the stuff is good.  He writes about current issues that are of importance  and interest to college football fans, summarizing games well and breaking down off-the-field issues. The writing is concise, yet the articles are pithy.  And if there isn't enough detail for you in the article, he points you to where you can find more (see point #4 below).  The quantity is also good; the posts are frequent, but not overwhelming.


4. Links. One of the tenets of all blogs is the prevalence of links to other sources, but he is one of the best.  The LPA (links-per-article) average for Dr Saturday has to be among the highest out there (if he were making a similar claim to what I just did, he would have provided links to 3rd-party reports with complete LPA metrics).  Everything he says is supported, and I learn so much by going back to sources referenced or allusions made to past events.  Dr. Saturday has links like law review articles have footnotes.


5. Balance. He presents a fairly objective view of college football.  He isn't overtly pushing an agenda or injecting his own views unnecessarily.  His editorializing is done with full disclosure and comes off as just his view, and if the reader disagrees with it, s/he's welcome to do so without feeling like an idiot [as you're meant to feel if you dare to disagree with the likes of CBS' Dennis Dodd, Fox Sports' Jason Whitlock, etc.]. The Dr Saturday articles are very... pleasant.  Unfortunately, it's controversy that drives clicks, so people like Hinton are at a disadvantage in their field.


6. The blog title.  Hey, it's a clever reference.

Thanks Matt, your blog definitely qualifies as stuff I like.  I hope that others feel the same way too and you can influence future sport writers.