Showing posts with label blogs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blogs. Show all posts

Monday, December 28, 2009

Fifteen Hundred

Good morning Fackers. Hopefully everyone had an excellent weekend of food, family, tradition, presents and of course drinking (and if not, Chinese food and movies). It was a busy one for me, starting with a friends party on Wednesday night, then a Christmas Eve Wigilia at my aunt's house, Christmas Day at my Mom's and a huge annual gathering with my father's side of the family yesterday, scheduled squarely over the Giants' game miserable and embarrassing failure. Luckily there was no TV so I was spared the agony.

Amidst all the festivities last year, including a trip up from New York, I managed to find some time to write the first post for this blog (well, technically the second). Fast forward exactly one thousand five hundred posts and you'd arrive at this one.

I didn't have a specific goal in mind when I started Fack Youk other than to write about the Yankees and when we started off, it was much less Bronx-centric than it is now. We didn't have the Casey Stengel banner picture, the knockoff Red Sox font, the motto that turned away countless advertisers, the black and white photo policy and aside from me, the cast of characters here was totally different.

There was a lot I didn't realize about writing back then. I didn't understand that it wasn't as much about what you say but how you say it. And that who is saying it matters even more. The most important thing about maintaining a blog is establishing a voice and not coincidentally, it's the hardest thing to do. A lot harder than I expected.

The humble thing to do would be to say that we've come further than I could have imagined over the past year, but that's not really true. Success is easy to imagine. You write a couple of posts, people like them, you get a few links and it's easy to imagine that in no time you'll be rolling in pageviews and ad revenue. In reality, what look like ramps to untold amounts of traffic are really just spikes that return a certain baseline in a few days (at most). What makes a blog successful is the day to day grind.

As our pal Craig (then only of Shysterball) told me when I reached out to him for advice shortly after this whole thing began:
Work on pacing yourself and putting out regular, predictable content that people can come back to on a regular basis, and soon they'll bookmark you or put you in their reader, and from there things grow steadily.
The thing that I truly could not have imagined is how much content we produced over the past year - over four posts a day, including weekends. Those are the kind of details that you usually gloss over when you set out to accomplish something (even if you don't know what that something is). There was no way I could have possibly fathomed the amount of hours that I'd spend playing the role of Sisyphus in an attempt to put something new and interesting on the top of a web page. It's somewhat ironic that in a medium so instantaneous, true success and progress takes a long time.

Thankfully, the Yankees had about as good of a year as could be expected and have continued with a great offseason thus far, which has made all of the effort put into this blog seem more worthwhile. We all got awfully lucky in that respect.

Last but certainly not least, thanks to everyone for stopping by. There are a ridiculous amount of Yankee blogs out there and the fact that you choose to come here is what makes it worth putting in all the effort. Hopefully this time next year we'll have more to celebrate and be thankful for. In the meantime, we'll continue with the vulgarity and analysis.

Wednesday, December 9, 2009

The Definitive Collection of Curtis Granderson Links

You probably haven't heard anything about it, but yesterday the Yankees made a minor trade for a player named Cletus Glandorstine Kirk Granderstone Kent Gardenerson Kirby Galdenstein Curtis Granderson. If you would like to learn about him or the trade that put him in Pinstripes, here are some helpful resources:

Yankee Blogs:
Joe from River Ave. Blues over at the YES Network.

Cliff from Bronx Banter's predictably excellent synopsis of the deal.

The Yankee Universe looks at how this affects the outfield and DH situation(s).









264 Comments over at the Replacement Level Yankees Blog





Other baseball blogs:









The ESPN Guys:





Other team's blogs:
A great breakdown of Granderson's batted ball data over the past three years.





And from the MSM:

Joel Sherman explains why the Yankees were scouting Granderson at the end of the '09 season




















Thursday, December 3, 2009

TYU Fought The Law And, Well, You Know...

After dedicating a post to another Yankee blog for all the wrong reasons earlier today, we would like to atone for that by lending a helping hand to the fine folks at The Yankee Universe.

We link to TYU with some frequency and if you have been to the site, you've probably noticed that their name is pretty close to the Yankees' charitable organization that sells T-shirts to benefit the Memorial Sloane-Kettering Cancer Center. Well perhaps because their blog shows up higher in Google search results than the charity, or perhaps due to the fact that Randy Levine founded the organization, they received a cease and desist notice from the Yanks today:
Accordingly, demand is hereby made that you immediately cease and desist from using the YANKEE UNIVERSE name and the Logo, any other Yankees Mark and any other MLB Mark in and as the name of your Website, to promote the Website, to seek advertising any other commercial opportunities, in and as the Domain Name, and in any other manner that would cause consumer confusion, dilution of the MLB Marks, or imply any sponsorship or endorsement of your Website or its contents by any MLB Entity.
Since the Yankees are asking in the name of a charity (and since they've had the name since 2006 whereas TYU was created in 2008), the bloggers are going to step aside. Now they have asked the interwebz to help them find a new name for their blog.

There are obviously a ton of Yankee blog names already claimed, and aside from tossing out variants of existing ones like we did on Twitter today, we are trying to think of something else they could use. Here are a few (some from other places), yours in the comments or better yet, at their site.
  • The Pinstripe Post
  • Bronx & Beyond
  • The Yank Think Tank
  • Straight To Twenty Eight
  • The Steinbrenner Doctrine
  • The Yankee University
  • The Bomber's Lounge
  • The Pinstripe Universe
  • Monument Cave
  • The Dead Torre Scrolls
  • The Moshe Pit

Monday, October 19, 2009

The Best Fans In The World?

That's what Mike Lupica is calling Yankees fans this morning:
There aren't fans better than this anywhere in the world. This isn't about whether or not you love the Yankees. This is about Yankee fans.

There are other baseball fans in other cities, of course, Mets fans in this one. There are fans who come out strong for teams who haven't won the way the Yankees won, who don't make the playoffs just about every year the way the Yankees have since Joe Torre first came to town 13 years ago and the winning came back to the Yankees and the Bronx.

But no fans have ever supported a baseball team, the most famous team in this world, the way Yankee fans support theirs.
We constantly hear this praise heaped upon us. Derek Jeter said it in his final speech at the Old Stadium. Michael Kay would like you to believe that Yankee fans are the only ones in baseball that cheer in anticipation of anything. I know I've heard John Sterling say that Yankee fans are the best in the world on the radio broadcast as well. But all of those guys have great reason to pander to fan base, and along with fans themselves trying to compare themselves to followers of other teams, that's all these declarations ever come down to.

It's pretty much impossible to compare fan bases, just as it would be to compare other groups which contain millions of people to each other. Are people from Vermont more laid back then people from New Hampshire? Are Baptists more religious than Evangelists? Are BMW drivers more alert than those who own an Audi? Are people who drink Bud Light cooler than those who drink Coors? (Trick question, they both suck!) The only way to deal with groups that big is to look at them with sweeping generalizations or compare them anecdotally.

The Yankees have some great fans, no doubt, but they also have their fair share of supporters who expect everything and are ready to jump ship two losses into the season. We might have some of the best fans in baseball right now, but that's largely because the ownership and players have given us ample compensation in return for our support. The Yanks only regained their place atop MLB attendance in 2003. There are plenty of factors contributing to how many fans the Yanks draw to games like the logistics of trying to go to a game after work in NYC and price of parking once you get there, but let's not pretend that the Stadium have been selling out through thick and thin.

I'll give you one measure that I find to be interesting, however. There are far more blogs about the Yankees' than any other team. We've got a decent amount linked up over on our Blogshelf, but check out this post by Ross at New Stadium Insider or run down the sidebar at LoHud. There are a huge amount of people that feel compelled to write about the Yankees (most of them for free) and I think that tells us something.

Maybe that something is that the Yankees have been more successful and compelling over the last 15 years than any other team in baseball. And maybe the fact that Yankees fans are so dedicated to the team isn't a function of how great we are as fans, but how successful the team has been over that time. Following the Yankees is easy. The people who follow teams like the Royals, Reds or Pirates through thick and thin are the best fans in baseball, in my opinion.

Friday, September 4, 2009

Interv-YOOOOOUUUUK

Clones! Our boy Youk was on the internet radio show of a certain ESPN-affiliated blowhard who I'm not going to name here. Since his site is behind a pay wall, he probably wouldn't take too kindly to me ripping the interview and posting it on this site, but I'm going to do it anyway. Just for you. So let's keep this between us, alright?

Some highlights:
  • If you don't already know whose radio show this is, he says his name about 4 seconds into the clip.

  • Youk addresses the Yankees' recent run of success at 3:53

  • They get to the Rick Porcello incident around the 5:00 mark. He claims that he "wasn't being selfish", he was just "making a stand for [him]self", which sounds kinda selfish.

  • The subject of David Wright's helmet pops up at 7:45 which leads Youk to say "I always say that 95% of the reason why people can't play baseball is because they're scared of the ball", which is kind of like saying that 95% of people can't play football because they are scared of getting tackled. Yeah, that and the minor ingredients of athleticism and genetic physical prowess. But you're right, Youk, that can't make up more than 5%. You're just so much braver than everyone else. Dick.

  • Youk refers to the fake Twitter feed that was pretending to be him at 12:40. I'm an idiot.

  • It's long but actually a pretty good interview so have a listen.

Friday, April 10, 2009

Brilliant Insights Into Blogging (From Two People Who Know Nothing About It)

[I know what you're thinking. You are looking over at the scroll bar and saying "Wow, this post is long". It is, but don't let that scare you away. There is an escape hatch about 500 words in]

I must admit, when I dropped some podcast recommendations on Wednesday, I hadn't yet listened to the B.S. Report with special guest Rick Reilly. I read a couple accounts of the interview and didn't think there was anything too objectionable within. I also knew I was going to be busy and work and wanted to leave something substantive up there for the afternoon.

Well, I finally got around to listening to it, and I wholeheartedly retract my lukewarm recommendation.

In lieu our FJM Simmons feature* which comes around every two weeks when ESPN the Magazine ends up jammed in my mailbox, I'm going to transcribe the portion of the BS Report where Bill and Rick talk about blogs. I think it was necessary to put it down in writing to eliminate the ambiguity of trying to remember six minutes of conversation. It took forever, but it should be basically word for word, after stripping out some of their verbal tics.

[*Also because the column in the magazine was quite excellent and there was basically nothing to take issue with]

Reilly is the one who really comes across like an idiot here. Simmons is in interview mode, but Reilly makes almost the exact same cliched, uninformed points that Buzz Bissinger did on Costas Now about a year ago, but in the typical hokey, yuk yuk fashion so brilliantly mocked by Fake Rick Reilly on Twitter.

It only takes a few minutes to listen to the relevant part (24:30-30:00, give or take), so if you are interested, that would be the easiest thing to do. I've transcribed that portion (with a few parts omitted) and I'm going to make my comments in footnote form. That should save the 3 or 4 of you who might find this interesting some reading.

For those who aren't interested in reading the 800 word transcription and 12 subsequent footnotes, I'll sum it up in one paragraph:

Reilly claims the supposed feud between him and Simmons was made up by bloggers, ignoring the fact that ESPN brought him in at roughly four times Simmons salary when he produces a fraction of the content. It might be a one way feud, but it's certainly not made up. They agree that the internet is mean-spirited and say that sometimes bloggers only go for traffic over good content/accuracy (which ironically is pretty inaccurate). Reilly says that he doesn't want to hear some one's criticism if he's never met them before, inadvertently compares himself to a "poor 7th grade girl" and ends with a flourish about why his opinion is more important than that of a person who doesn't have the access that he does.

To which I would like to pose this question: What have you done that was so great with your access, Rick, beside deliver 800 word blowjobs to the people that you got paid to spend time with? Rick Reilly is the epitome of why access doesn't mean a fucking thing. A beat writer? Yes. He needs access. But the only good stuff Reilly has ever done did not result from the ridiculous celebrity-level entree he has been given into the sports world.

You are free to go, the rest of this post is extra credit.

-----

The first twenty minutes consist mostly of the breathless name-dropping and star-fucking that you have come to know Rick Reilly for. That is egregious in it's on right, but the part I really took issue with came a little later.

At right about the 24:30 mark, BS & RR are talking about the difference between their writing styles (mainly column lengths) and how that is a function of Simmons coming up online and Reilly doing so through newspapers and magazines, which leads to this:

Reilly: What I don't get is why people think that there is this feud between us. Because, obviously, we are two completely different styles. But what I dont get is, why can't there be both? What can't I be old school and why can't you be new school? I mean why do they have to fake this whole, "they hate each other"?

Simmons: [deep breath] Aaaaahhh, I don't have an answer for that one... (1)

RR: I think you do, because you understand, like some of these guys, it seems like the only way to get attention in a blog, and I'm not saying all blogs are like this, but a lot of them, it seems like the only way to get attention is to rip.

BS: Right...


RR: Is to just rip, rip, rip. There's nothing added, it's all just... the joy of destruction sometimes and I think that's how you get picked up on the blogosphere is by ripping, or coming up with a fake rumor about two people who actually like each other!
(2)

BS: Yeah, you know what, I've found that, the biggest issue I have with the bloggers is that sometimes they'll do anything for traffic.
(3)

BS: And I do think you should have to have some sort of guidelines to it. You know, for instance, there was a blogger who, after I went on a radio station in Boston... they asked me about you, I talk to you on email about it, and I said some comment like "he touches my soul" or whatever. And the blog: "Simmons Rips Reilly!" In print it didn't capture that it was like this totally joking exchange I had with these guys. and it seemed like it was the goal of the blogger was to get picked up by Deadspin and some of these other blogs, so they would subsequently get the traffic. So they didn't care if they were being accurate or not, they just wanted the traffic. And I think that's when you can get into danger. Is when you are going for traffic over actual accuracy. (4)

...

BS: Well do you actually check out the blogs, or no?

RR: We'll I just get people who seem to think that you want to see everything written about you and I really don't, because I understand criticism, I get criticized, I criticize other people, I know that's part of the game. But I don't really want to read people that have never met me. Or some guy that's an actuarial by day and at night is trying to do this blog and is pissed that he never got hired as a sports writer. And so he's gonna take it out on me and other people that
are hired. You know, I don't really need to head his gripes, you know? (5)

...

RR: To me it's a lot like 7th grade girls. Because in the old days, when I was in 7th grade, 7th grade girls all gossiped about each other, right? But the poor girl didn't have to hear it. (6) But now, cause I had a 7th grade girl, they put it on blogs, and they start websites like "I Hate Amber". You know?

...

BS: ...There is a mean-spiritedness that's come up, I guess it's like a snarkyness, and I don't know if I've helped to contribute to that or not, but I hope not.
(7)

RR: But generally they LOVE you, you're part of that new school!
(8) You can imagine what they say about me. Because I didn't come up with that world. And I just don't see the value of a guy who never goes to a game, never meets the athlete, I don't particularly want to hear his opinion. (9)

RR: I've been doing this 31 years, for a living, I feel like I go out there, I'm in the locker rooms, I'm in the clubhouses, I'm meeting these guys, I'm hearing what they are saying, whatever. It seems to me a guy like that has a little more valued opinion than some
schmo who, as I say, is holding down couch springs on his mom's basement. (10)

RR: Having said that though, there are some really funny guys who I know have no access, that are really funny, and good, and I read them.
(11) I think that kind of, you are the leader of those guys who don't want access because you kind of want to be part of that world where you get to just shoot from the hip and you never have to see the guy, the 6'8" 280 pound guy that you totally ripped the day before. (12)

  1. /raises hand... I do, I do, I do, I do!!! It's because ESPN gave Rick Reilly $17M when Bill Simmons was already their top writer/personality and he gets paid about a quarter of that to write about 4 times as much.

  2. Yeah, a total fabrication. Bill Simmons loves the fact that you get paid over $4M a year to write 800 words every two weeks.

  3. Simply not true. I wrote a post a while back (actually concerning Simmons and Max Kellerman) make some erroneous assumptions and taken to task in the comments for it. I had to write a follow-up post to set things straight. I would take it back in a second. You think those 2,500 visits mean a thing if what the people are reading is garbage? The end goal is developing a readership and if what you are writing is inaccurate, who is going to come back to the site?

  4. See above. Traffic means nothing for building a readership if the content isn't good.

  5. No, Rick, I don't know. You don't want to read criticism from people you've never met? You are a writer. Why does someone have to know you as a person to criticize the things you write?

  6. It's funny, because I don't think he set out to make himself the poor 7th grade girl who was getting picked on in that analogy, but that's sure where he ended up.

  7. Yeah, there is some snarkyness, because you can find plenty of fluff pieces like the the shit Reilly writes in the mainstream media. The internet didn't beget snark. It was always around, it just took a long time for society to circumvent traditional media outlets to connect on that level. Even the meanest drivel written on the shittiest blogs represents, on some level, what people were already saying to each other in bars and in their living rooms. Is some of it repulsive, even to me? Yes. But it's easy to steer clear of it: Don't go on SEC message boards.

  8. Except Simmons isn't part of the new school, as far as anyone in the new school should be concerned. He made his way on the internet, but it was before it was cluttered with a trillion blogs. It's not like he's writing three blog posts a day.

  9. Why does having access make you a real journalist? Rick Reilly is the least objective writer I've ever had the displeasure of reading. He fawns over athletes like he's an US Weekly intern as evidenced by the first half of the podcast.

  10. "As I say". I didn't know Rick Reilly invented the "Mom's basement" cliche... Or maybe he was just taking credit for the "holding down the springs" part. That's creative, Rick. I like what you did there.

  11. I'm sure they would be thrilled to hear what you said about them 8 seconds before that.

  12. Ex-fucking-actly. Bloggers don't have to be afraid that someone is going to kick their ass for telling the truth. They don't have an agenda to push. They don't have people to answer to. Sometimes that's a bad thing, because there are no editors to catch our every typo and maybe we miss some stuff while watching the game at home. But at the same time, I think we do a great job of relating to other fans. The reason why old media types hate blogs is they are not the target audience. Personally, I could give a shit what Murray Chass or Rick Reilly or Mike Lupica thinks about this site. There seem to people some like-minded people out there that find it mildly interesting, and that's good enough for me.

Sunday, March 22, 2009

Because You Can't Put Blogs On Your Bookshelf

It might not have any Tolstoy, Dickens, J.D Salinger, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Hemingway or Nathaniel Hawthorne, but I'm sort of proud of my bookshelf.

If you took the time to look it over, you could probably find out a lot about me. It's a little skewed, because the entire left side holds roughly 19 poker books, but that was a big part of my life for a long time.

Dan Harrington, Phil Gordon, Doyle Brunson, Barry Greenstein, David Sklansky, James McManus and T.J. Cloutier taught me a shitload about poker, objective analysis, and life. Read Harrington On Hold 'Em Vol. I & II and you will destroy any home they will let you sit at it. Both Super Systems are packed with sound strategy for almost any variation of poker you have ever heard of. I would recommend Positively 4th Street to someone who had no interest in no-limit hold 'em because it is so beautifully written.

If you work your way right from there, you'll see a Matt Taibbi book, a dictionary, The Complete Encyclopedia Of Beer (actually quite incomplete), Running the Table, Why Golf?, In Search Of Burning Bush, um, another book (shut up, it was a gift)... John Daly's Autobiography, The World is Flat, New Rules, a Jimi Hendrix biography, Under a Wild Sky, The Devil's Teeth, The Last Voyages of Captain Cook, some Carl Sagan, The Hardball Times '09...

Continue East you'll find some Malcolm Gladwell, Harvey Penick, more Carl Sagan, Moneyball, Anthony Bourdain and Into the Wild. The Orchid Thief and The Heartless Stone are there too.

If a person has the inclination to put together a bookshelf, and you have the time to look it over, it will give you insights into their personality it would take months, if not years, to glean in conversation. Next time you are feeling nosy at someone's apartment, instead of looking through the pill cabinet, check out their bookshelf. It will tell you infinitely more about them.

I wish I had a blogshelf in my room. My bookshelf tells more of a history, while a blogshelf would represent a more current narrative. You'd see River Ave. Blues, the National Football Post, ShysterBall, Kissing Suzy Kolber and figure that I like the Yankees, football, intellectual baseball banter and that I'm an asshole. You might notice 538 and Floating Shawn and guess I voted for Obama. Schiff Happens would be kickin' it, along my most recent addition, HowFresh Eats. Those fellows can tell you about music, food and city living and do it right at my frequency.

Since there is no such thing as a blogshelf, and people don't usually look through each others RSS readers, all of those nuggets are lost to cyberspace.

Unfortunately, since I've started writing for this here site, I haven't even been tempted to crack a book. There's no time. At this point in my life, books are for vacations. My attention span is so frayed by RSS Feeds, Twitter, Google Analytics, Facebook, BitTorrent, and the other endless bounties of the internet that the commitment necessary to read a book is too daunting. I used to read books in the morning. Now, my Google Reader is overloaded and the first thing I do when I get up is reach for my iPhone and start chipping away at the unread posts.

Eventually, it might be unrealistic to expect to someone to read 400 pages on a single subject. Why would they? With an endless supply of constantly updated mediums, from which you can select the exact ones that pertain to you, it seems grossly inefficient to spend the time it takes to read a book. As an author, to dedicate months if not years and hundreds of thousands of words to any one topic is so far over my head, it's laughable. However, if you add up all the stuff I've written in this space since Christmas day, I'm guessing it would come pretty close to the length of a book.

But blogs are considered disposable. You coast through a post and it gets marked as read, never to been seen again, unless you so desire. Somehow, we pay $15 for a book, but a blog, which is by your side day in and day out, is considered worthless, monetarily. The argument has been made that since you don't read newspapers or blog posts more than once, you can't charge for them. How many magazine articles have you read more than once? People still pay for then AND they have ads in them.

Charging per post could never work, but blogs have to provide some value. Some are entertaining, some are educational, some funny, others analytical, most are current. Just because people are willing to provide them at no cost doesn't mean that they have no value.

What if blogs charged for their RSS feeds? Would it be worth $1 a month to me to not have to go to a site and check for updates? If you think time is money, then the answer is decidedly "Yes". I constantly hear people talking about the untapped taxable resource that marijuana represents, but it's not like the alcohol industry is dying out. With the foundation of the print media crumbling under our feet, I don't hear nearly enough people proposing ways to monetize the amazing amount of content being written out there on the Long Tail.

I'll put my money where my mouth is. Who wants my dollar per month? Craig, I've already told you I'd pay to read ShysterBall. River Ave. Blues, ditto. I would certainly have to pare down on the number of feeds I subscribe to, but the money those people would make from the subscription fees would make their content better. The best bloggers could make a living from writing and not have to work around a full-time job like many currently do.

You know why HBO is better than regular TV? Because in the late 60's Charles Dolan came up with the idea of a "Green Channel", to which people would pay to subscribe independently of their regular cable system. They had to overcome a massive churn rate initially, but look where the channel is today. 38 million subscribers. They eliminated the bullshit that an advertising-based system exists upon and got people to pay for the content.

Advertising is on the way out. No? You don't think so?

Do you have a DVR? I do, and for $10 a month every channel is HBO to me. I absolutely refuse to watch commercials, which is how they are supposedly "charging" me. The cable company is giving me the technology to basically steal from the channels they provide me. That is a sustainable model? (For the record, I was writing about this three years ago. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Anon.)

If you are like me, you are probably ahead of the curve and are only getting away with this because people who are older than us or less technologically inclined are still sitting through commercials. It won't last forever. People will still buy things without advertising. I pimp plenty of stuff in this space and don't get paid a dime for it. I'm just looking out for you Fackers and when I find something I like I feel the need to pass the word along.

People are so cynical that I don't think advertising makes much of a difference anymore. The communications are slicker, but our ability to tune them out far outpaces marketers ability to reach us. The only thing advertising is good for is awareness, but awareness does not equal purchase interest. Trust me, I work in market research.

I tune out advertising online and I'll take my headphones out during the commercial break on 1050 ESPN Radio too. I'm starting to listen to more podcasts like The Bronx View, KSK, On The DL, and the brand new Deadcast. In some ways, the content is better and there are no commercials. Stack those up and you are approaching a healthy portion of the work week. I'd pay for them too.

I'm not pretending to know where this is going. There are trillion variables and maybe people like Jeff Jarvis and Clay Shirky, who say charging for content will never work, are right. I'm not saying this for my own good, either. I've got a rough idea of how many readers we have and $1 a month from each of them wouldn't even begin to supplant my income, let alone our other contributors. I just think more people who have things that people value should jettison the free spirit of the internet.

Once upon a time there was Napster. Now there is iTunes. They found a way to bridge the gap between Wall Street and the Wild West, and on most levels, it works. There are ways to tame the internet, smart people just have to want to do it.