Right now, it is just before 12:30 p.m. Eastern heading into Sunday of Week 2, and I see Flea Flicker listing DeSean Jackson, Jeremy Maclin, Steve Smith (the Panther), and Hakeem Nicks all as "probable."
They were all listed as "questionable" on this week's official game status injury report.
If your injury reports are referring to what you happen to think of these players' chances of playing, or what someone else thinks, they shouldn't use the same terminology as the official injury reports because that is totally confusing. If you're trying to just report what the official injury status is, then you're very wrong very often.
These players were all "questionable" as of the game status injury report, and they are all "active" as of the inactives report. There is no "probable" about it. The only way in which the word "probable" should have been used this week at any time to describe these players would be if their teams had listed them as "probable." If you want to tell us, "He's listed as questionable but we think he'll probably play," or whatever, fine. Don't just stick the word "probable" by the name of a player who isn't listed as probable though.
I would like you to consider just reporting the facts--to wait until after the game status injury report comes out before putting any of these words beside a player's name, and then just report what the player's official game status is, like a normal fantasy football website would.
These players are not probable. They were questionable, and now they are active.
I love your website. This inaccurate and misleading injury reporting is the worst thing about it.
RobertKellySun 9/16/12 12:31 PM
Right now, it is just before 12:30 p.m. Eastern heading into Sunday of Week 2, and I see Flea Flicker listing DeSean Jackson, Jeremy Maclin, Steve Smith (the Panther), and Hakeem Nicks all as "probable."
They were all listed as "questionable" on this week's official game status injury report.
If your injury reports are referring to what you happen to think of these players' chances of playing, or what someone else thinks, they shouldn't use the same terminology as the official injury reports because that is totally confusing. If you're trying to just report what the official injury status is, then you're very wrong very often.
These players were all "questionable" as of the game status injury report, and they are all "active" as of the inactives report. There is no "probable" about it. The only way in which the word "probable" should have been used this week at any time to describe these players would be if their teams had listed them as "probable." If you want to tell us, "He's listed as questionable but we think he'll probably play," or whatever, fine. Don't just stick the word "probable" by the name of a player who isn't listed as probable though.
I would like you to consider just reporting the facts--to wait until after the game status injury report comes out before putting any of these words beside a player's name, and then just report what the player's official game status is, like a normal fantasy football website would.
These players are not probable. They were questionable, and now they are active.
I love your website. This inaccurate and misleading injury reporting is the worst thing about it.
Thanks,
OOFFL Commissioner