I'm looking at the official game status injury report right now, on Friday afternoon, and Miles Austin is listed as "probable." Flea Flicker right now says he is listed as "questionable." They may change it soon and correct it. But it should NEVER be inaccurate. It should either be accurate, or not there at all.
Flea Flicker also said he was listed as "questionable" yesterday--and the Cowboys' injury report wasn't even out yet then. That's just wrong. If the injury report isn't out yet, then he can't possibly be listed as anything yet.
I've said it before, but let me try this one more time--I love the website, but I hate its inaccurate and misleading injury reports. This has been a constant problem for the last four years, and it hasn't been fixed yet.
And, I predict, injury designations for this Sunday's and Monday's games will remain the same AFTER the games on Flea Flicker, on Tuesday, and Wednesday, and Thursday, since this is the way Flea Flicker has done it in the past, even though those will then be old injury designations for a game that has already occurred, misleading everyone who is not on top of when injury reports are published into thinking that the new injury report has come out and that the players have been again given the same injury designations as they had last week.
I, once again, urge Flea Flicker to consider doing it the way Yahoo does it. For Sunday games, I believe NFL game status injury reports are published on Fridays, and early on Saturday morning, Yahoo puts their little red Ps, Qs, Ds, and Os by the appropriate players, and not before then. After the games are all over, they take away the red letters and WAIT FOR THE NEW INJURY REPORT before posting their red letters again.
If a player has no red letter by his name, you as a fantasy player know one of three things--either the injury report is not yet out that week, it's out but it hasn't been plugged into Yahoo that week, or it's out but the player is not listed on it and is therefore going to play. You can then deduce whether the latter is the correct theory by simply looking around and seeing whether any of the other players playing that day have red letters--if none of them do, it's obviously either the case that the injury report for that day hasn't been published yet or Yahoo hasn't plugged the injury designations in yet.
At Flea Flicker, there is no way to tell what an injury designation means at any given time, and therefore no way to trust any of the injury designations at any time.
Also, each year for the last four years, there has been at least one instance, and in some years there have been several, in which a player's injury designation at Flea Flicker as of Sunday morning was not the same as the one at the NFL website (NFL dot com slash injuries).
I love the website for the most part. This is one thing about it that is not right.
What, I think, most experienced fantasy players would find helpful is just Flea Flicker posting the game status injury report when it comes out, and not beforehand. We know basically what that means. The teams are in the best position to evaluate their own players--not reporters. Some teams are more misleading than others when it comes to injury reports, and we know who they are.
Flea Flicker interpreting some news about the player, or using last week's injury report, or however they do it, and plugging that into the terminology that is used for official game status injury reports, and posting it as if it's supposed to help us make lineup decisions right now, for the upcoming games--that's misleading.
There needs to be footnotes, basically. Where is this "probable," "questionable," or "doubtful" designation coming from? That is what we need to know.
Or, if you want to keep just throwing up these single word descriptions, wait until the game status injury report comes out on Friday, and don't post them until then.
The "Out" and "IR" designations--I'm fine if those work differently. The P, Q, and D need to follow along with the thing they are actually coming from. This is how Yahoo does it. I'm pretty sure this is how ESPN does it. There's a really good reason why. It's just misleading to do it the way Flea Flicker does it. It really needs to be changed.
In our league we use other websites for injury information and just ignore these injury designations at Flea Flicker. As commissioner, I make a point of explaining the problems with the injury designations at Flea Flicker, pointing out specific errors, and telling them not to trust Flea Flicker. But it makes the people in my league not want to play here, and it makes them want to move to one of the many places whose injury designations track the official NFL injury reports, and that don't just throw designations out there before the injury reports come out that week.
I do not want to leave. I like it here. I just wish the injury reporting system would be accurate. There are several ways to make it so. Choose one of them. The way it is now is wrong.
The Miles Austin thing was really just a convenient example. The issue is about the injury reporting system overall. If it is ever inaccurate, even for a moment, we can't use it, because we can't trust it.
The only exception to the last sentence would be if there is actually a game status injury report for the upcoming game published already, and your website hasn't gotten around to posting it yet. That kind of inaccuracy is unlikely to actually mislead anyone, because people understand it's not necessarily going to be an instantaneous thing from the publication of the report to the posting of the injury designation here. But if there is any other kind of inaccuracy at any moment, we can't trust it and we have to use another website for injury reporting. And I as commissioner have to remind everyone not to trust it, over and over again, but inevitably someone does anyway and sometimes that person gets screwed relying on Flea Flicker's inaccurate injury designations, and that can throw off the competitive balance of the entire league and ruin the entire season.
The way it should be is this:
If it's not accurate right now, then there shouldn't be any injury posting at all. And "not accurate right now" includes any P, Q, D when there isn't yet a game status injury report for that team that week. When there isn't any injury status yet, your website should not claim that there is an injury status. It should just have nothing beside the player name.
Alternatively, you could keep the P, Q, or D injury status from last week posted on Tuesday, Wednesday, etc., but in very big bold letters tell everyone "HEY THIS INJURY STATUS WAS FOR THE PREVIOUS GAME--THE ONE FOR THE UPCOMING GAME HASN'T YET BEEN PUBLISHED."
If there is a game status injury report already, it's OK to not have it posted yet because people will understand that that just means you don't have it posted yet because none of the other players will have their injury statuses beside their names either.
An O can be in a practice report, so it makes sense to post an O whenever the practice report says the player is out. P, Q, and D, as far as I can tell, are never in practice reports.
It might make sense to leave an O there for a player that is ever listed as out in either a practice report or a game status report until a report comes out on which the player is no longer listed as O. (This is how all injury designations are done here, though, at least that's how they were done in previous years, and that is misleading.)
IR--makes sense to just leave it there all season obviously.
Yahoo uses another designation, NA, for players that are, say, holding out, or that retired in the middle of the season, or, I think maybe for players that are suspended, in prison, etc. This is a useful thing. They just leave those NAs up there until the player seems likely to play again.
In the grand scheme of things, this is not a big deal because there are other websites that do have accurate injury reporting, and this website, in my opinion, overall, is the best free fantasy football website there is.
Fixing the injury reporting system, and the Message Board, would make it incredibly awesome.
"Alternatively, you could keep the P, Q, or D injury status from last week posted on Tuesday, Wednesday, etc."
That is what should happen in my opinion. The system other system you describe has a problem. If my IR eligibility requires that a player is OUT, and a particular player is OUT for this week's game, it should not be illegal to have him on IR through the waiver period. But if you take away his OUT status then the roster becomes illegal.
Anyone who is OUT should stay out until the NFL injury report says they have a different game status, or they aren't listed at all on the final injury report.
I do think there is way too much creativity and inconsistency with the injury statuses on Fleaflicker.
The IR eligibility issue--that's something I hadn't thought of. We don't use that. We keep track of our IR on paper. But, I sort of know how it works. The commissioner can set the eligibility requirement for IR to P, Q, D, or O, or IR, or to just nothing I believe. So maybe that's why they feel the need to always have some injury status posted.
Yeah, but at least they should tell people when it's for the previous game and when it's for the next game.
They use a site that is right up to date!! Can't go with that when a player might bea game day decision or if they went out during a game. There will be instances like miles austin last week, but all in all, it's accurate!!
"Up to date" sure is an understatement. The first NFL injury report of the week comes out on Wednesday, and it has almost no information. Players don't start showing up on it until Thursday/Friday. So there is no official basis whatsoever to fiddle with injury statuses on Monday and Tuesday and almost never on Wednesday.
FF injuries provider which is RotoWire uses team sites to, not just the NFL injury report, this is where you guys are seeing constant changes as players status change on a daily basis. They become official wed on.
Derrick Ward (ankle) was spotted in a walking boot Wednesday.
With Arian Foster (hamstring) nearing a return and Ben Tate coming on strong, Ward is turning into an afterthought. Even if his sprained right ankle is strong enough for him to play Sunday, he's not looking like a fantasy option.
Foster is listed as "Probable" but as you guys are stating, he should still be listed as "Questionable", but he didn't play on gameday, thus he went to "Out", Monday he went back to "Questionable" but the Texans webite is showing everything that points to him playing cause of Wards injury as per there site, he IS practicing:
RobertKellyFri 9/9/11 4:58 PM
I'm looking at the official game status injury report right now, on Friday afternoon, and Miles Austin is listed as "probable." Flea Flicker right now says he is listed as "questionable." They may change it soon and correct it. But it should NEVER be inaccurate. It should either be accurate, or not there at all.
Flea Flicker also said he was listed as "questionable" yesterday--and the Cowboys' injury report wasn't even out yet then. That's just wrong. If the injury report isn't out yet, then he can't possibly be listed as anything yet.
I've said it before, but let me try this one more time--I love the website, but I hate its inaccurate and misleading injury reports. This has been a constant problem for the last four years, and it hasn't been fixed yet.
And, I predict, injury designations for this Sunday's and Monday's games will remain the same AFTER the games on Flea Flicker, on Tuesday, and Wednesday, and Thursday, since this is the way Flea Flicker has done it in the past, even though those will then be old injury designations for a game that has already occurred, misleading everyone who is not on top of when injury reports are published into thinking that the new injury report has come out and that the players have been again given the same injury designations as they had last week.
I, once again, urge Flea Flicker to consider doing it the way Yahoo does it. For Sunday games, I believe NFL game status injury reports are published on Fridays, and early on Saturday morning, Yahoo puts their little red Ps, Qs, Ds, and Os by the appropriate players, and not before then. After the games are all over, they take away the red letters and WAIT FOR THE NEW INJURY REPORT before posting their red letters again.
If a player has no red letter by his name, you as a fantasy player know one of three things--either the injury report is not yet out that week, it's out but it hasn't been plugged into Yahoo that week, or it's out but the player is not listed on it and is therefore going to play. You can then deduce whether the latter is the correct theory by simply looking around and seeing whether any of the other players playing that day have red letters--if none of them do, it's obviously either the case that the injury report for that day hasn't been published yet or Yahoo hasn't plugged the injury designations in yet.
At Flea Flicker, there is no way to tell what an injury designation means at any given time, and therefore no way to trust any of the injury designations at any time.
Also, each year for the last four years, there has been at least one instance, and in some years there have been several, in which a player's injury designation at Flea Flicker as of Sunday morning was not the same as the one at the NFL website (NFL dot com slash injuries).
I love the website for the most part. This is one thing about it that is not right.
Thanks,
OOFFL Commissioner
RobertKellyFri 9/16/11 11:57 AM
I think there's a basic disconnect here.
What, I think, most experienced fantasy players would find helpful is just Flea Flicker posting the game status injury report when it comes out, and not beforehand. We know basically what that means. The teams are in the best position to evaluate their own players--not reporters. Some teams are more misleading than others when it comes to injury reports, and we know who they are.
Flea Flicker interpreting some news about the player, or using last week's injury report, or however they do it, and plugging that into the terminology that is used for official game status injury reports, and posting it as if it's supposed to help us make lineup decisions right now, for the upcoming games--that's misleading.
There needs to be footnotes, basically. Where is this "probable," "questionable," or "doubtful" designation coming from? That is what we need to know.
Or, if you want to keep just throwing up these single word descriptions, wait until the game status injury report comes out on Friday, and don't post them until then.
The "Out" and "IR" designations--I'm fine if those work differently. The P, Q, and D need to follow along with the thing they are actually coming from. This is how Yahoo does it. I'm pretty sure this is how ESPN does it. There's a really good reason why. It's just misleading to do it the way Flea Flicker does it. It really needs to be changed.
In our league we use other websites for injury information and just ignore these injury designations at Flea Flicker. As commissioner, I make a point of explaining the problems with the injury designations at Flea Flicker, pointing out specific errors, and telling them not to trust Flea Flicker. But it makes the people in my league not want to play here, and it makes them want to move to one of the many places whose injury designations track the official NFL injury reports, and that don't just throw designations out there before the injury reports come out that week.
I do not want to leave. I like it here. I just wish the injury reporting system would be accurate. There are several ways to make it so. Choose one of them. The way it is now is wrong.
Thanks,
OOFFL Commissioner
FleaMod AdminSat 9/10/11 1:56 PM
Austin is probably, we list him as so now:
dallascowboys.com
Sorry if it wasn't reflecting before (it should have been)
RobertKellySun 9/11/11 11:59 AM
The Miles Austin thing was really just a convenient example. The issue is about the injury reporting system overall. If it is ever inaccurate, even for a moment, we can't use it, because we can't trust it.
The only exception to the last sentence would be if there is actually a game status injury report for the upcoming game published already, and your website hasn't gotten around to posting it yet. That kind of inaccuracy is unlikely to actually mislead anyone, because people understand it's not necessarily going to be an instantaneous thing from the publication of the report to the posting of the injury designation here. But if there is any other kind of inaccuracy at any moment, we can't trust it and we have to use another website for injury reporting. And I as commissioner have to remind everyone not to trust it, over and over again, but inevitably someone does anyway and sometimes that person gets screwed relying on Flea Flicker's inaccurate injury designations, and that can throw off the competitive balance of the entire league and ruin the entire season.
The way it should be is this:
If it's not accurate right now, then there shouldn't be any injury posting at all. And "not accurate right now" includes any P, Q, D when there isn't yet a game status injury report for that team that week. When there isn't any injury status yet, your website should not claim that there is an injury status. It should just have nothing beside the player name.
Alternatively, you could keep the P, Q, or D injury status from last week posted on Tuesday, Wednesday, etc., but in very big bold letters tell everyone "HEY THIS INJURY STATUS WAS FOR THE PREVIOUS GAME--THE ONE FOR THE UPCOMING GAME HASN'T YET BEEN PUBLISHED."
If there is a game status injury report already, it's OK to not have it posted yet because people will understand that that just means you don't have it posted yet because none of the other players will have their injury statuses beside their names either.
An O can be in a practice report, so it makes sense to post an O whenever the practice report says the player is out. P, Q, and D, as far as I can tell, are never in practice reports.
It might make sense to leave an O there for a player that is ever listed as out in either a practice report or a game status report until a report comes out on which the player is no longer listed as O. (This is how all injury designations are done here, though, at least that's how they were done in previous years, and that is misleading.)
IR--makes sense to just leave it there all season obviously.
Yahoo uses another designation, NA, for players that are, say, holding out, or that retired in the middle of the season, or, I think maybe for players that are suspended, in prison, etc. This is a useful thing. They just leave those NAs up there until the player seems likely to play again.
In the grand scheme of things, this is not a big deal because there are other websites that do have accurate injury reporting, and this website, in my opinion, overall, is the best free fantasy football website there is.
Fixing the injury reporting system, and the Message Board, would make it incredibly awesome.
Thanks,
OOFFL Commissioner
McBainWed 9/14/11 11:27 PM
"Alternatively, you could keep the P, Q, or D injury status from last week posted on Tuesday, Wednesday, etc."
That is what should happen in my opinion. The system other system you describe has a problem. If my IR eligibility requires that a player is OUT, and a particular player is OUT for this week's game, it should not be illegal to have him on IR through the waiver period. But if you take away his OUT status then the roster becomes illegal.
Anyone who is OUT should stay out until the NFL injury report says they have a different game status, or they aren't listed at all on the final injury report.
I do think there is way too much creativity and inconsistency with the injury statuses on Fleaflicker.
RobertKellyThu 9/15/11 3:32 AM
The IR eligibility issue--that's something I hadn't thought of. We don't use that. We keep track of our IR on paper. But, I sort of know how it works. The commissioner can set the eligibility requirement for IR to P, Q, D, or O, or IR, or to just nothing I believe. So maybe that's why they feel the need to always have some injury status posted.
Yeah, but at least they should tell people when it's for the previous game and when it's for the next game.
[Deleted User]Thu 9/15/11 8:06 AM
They use a site that is right up to date!! Can't go with that when a player might bea game day decision or if they went out during a game. There will be instances like miles austin last week, but all in all, it's accurate!!
McBainThu 9/15/11 10:17 AM
"Up to date" sure is an understatement. The first NFL injury report of the week comes out on Wednesday, and it has almost no information. Players don't start showing up on it until Thursday/Friday. So there is no official basis whatsoever to fiddle with injury statuses on Monday and Tuesday and almost never on Wednesday.
[Deleted User]Thu 9/15/11 11:36 AM
FF injuries provider which is RotoWire uses team sites to, not just the NFL injury report, this is where you guys are seeing constant changes as players status change on a daily basis. They become official wed on.
[Deleted User]Thu 9/15/11 11:38 AM
here is a example:
Derrick Ward RB HOU
3 Hrs Houston Texans Comment
Derrick Ward (ankle) was spotted in a walking boot Wednesday.
With Arian Foster (hamstring) nearing a return and Ben Tate coming on strong, Ward is turning into an afterthought. Even if his sprained right ankle is strong enough for him to play Sunday, he's not looking like a fantasy option.
This is Wards status as of 3 hours ago
[Deleted User]Thu 9/15/11 11:39 AM
He shows as being "Questionable"
[Deleted User]Thu 9/15/11 11:49 AM
Foster is listed as "Probable" but as you guys are stating, he should still be listed as "Questionable", but he didn't play on gameday, thus he went to "Out", Monday he went back to "Questionable" but the Texans webite is showing everything that points to him playing cause of Wards injury as per there site, he IS practicing:
houstontexans.com
u_fig_eaterThu 9/15/11 11:27 PM
Santonio Holmes is listed as Questionable as of Thu 8:26 PM PST. He is not listed on the official injury report and participated in limited practice.