Ethics and Message Boards?

I pose a couple of questions to the board. [i]What is the purpose of a sports boards? Should fans evaluate/state there views about the team performance in their private life, or on message boards, or both? Should fans evaluate players performances on message boards? Should fans evaluate coaches? Should fans evaluate coaches character, and or players character? [/i]

IMO fans have every right to evaluate performaces, ability, and effort of the team they cheer for. They may be wrong in their views but they have every right to do so. This is what makes watching sports so much fun and gives us the opprtunity to learn more by coming together with differnt views.

It seems fairly obvious to me that the hive is agianst this kind of analysis. I think they would answer that the purpose of sports board is propaganda . They do not believe in the evaluation of players in any negative or honest way and most donot in regards to coaches as well. They actually believe they help recruiting by having posts that beg prospects to sign with us. Their practice write ups are always happy faced, they jump up and down about every recruit that we sign, and they get angry if anybody questions the coaches decisions. They have never made any acknowledgment that they were wrong about Gailey or the countless wrong predictions they have made over the years. There is no accountability on that board.

Now BBO is the exact opposite many posters believe anything should and can be posted. Seems they believe coaches and players need to be evaluated. However, there is more accountability with BBO as many have vast differences of views and ethics and call each out all the time.

Here is my take. Welcome to the real world. Everybody is evaluated all the time. It is good for you. Coaches are paid good money there is no reason for the people who buy there product to evaluate them and make there evaluations public. That is good. Players are a little bit more tricky. They are not being payed and they dedicate a ton of energy that the fans enjoy. However, I think it is perfectly ethical to evaluate a player in regards to there performances. It does not mean that the player is any less of a good person. I have met a ton of average football players who are great people. Also anybody who has made a DI team is increadible in comparison to the regualr population.

I think that fans owe players and coaches honesty in there evaluations. As long as they are trying there best to be fair to the player and coach then they should be able to do so.

Now often I hear people say unless you have played football you should not make any statements about performances. I think this is absurd. There are some things that the layman most likley would not know compared to people who have actually played, but there are a ton of things they could know and if you watch enough many things are pretty easy to pick up on. I played football for 9 years of my life and have been watching Tech football for the past 23 years. Even if I did not play those 8 years of football there would be a ton of things that I could speak about with some decent insight. So I don't think you need a degree to talk about football intellegently.

Just wanted to use this icon it is so cool!

Tech Head

If I had my own message board, it would be somewhat like the following with reasonable suggested changes added to the board as required.

The board would allow reasonable discussions of athletes, coaches, and administration. However, there would be no bashing of players or potential recruits. The Reggie Ball incident is a good example of poor attitudes by some Tech fans.

Players practice constantly to do the best they can. There is no need for criticism of a player other than minor reasonable discussions about a players attributes. Examples might be: Sam Jones tends to have trouble holding on to the ball, or Jimmy Jones lacks the speed to play wide receiver, etal.

When a player is not performing up to standards, the coach should be criticized for failing to make substitutions, but there should be no bashing of the player who is giving it all he has. Coaches are paid big money for their expertise and open to much more criticism than a player.

However, no board should allow posters to use the board for an agenda to get rid of a coach. An example of the disgruntled fans who tried to oust Gailey and his AD before Gailey even coached his first down at Tech. Some fans were upset because Mac did not get the job, and were also upset that O'Leary was not rehired once he went to Notre Dame. Some of the fans were upset right from the start that the chaplain of the team was replaced with a chaplain of Gailey's choice, even though that was Gailey's right as Head Coach.

These disgruntled fans tried to fracture the fan base and use the boards to tear down Tech instead of unite the fan base. Some of these same disgruntled fans are now trying to continue to fracture the fan base by discrediting Paul Johnson before he has a chance to coach his first down at Tech. I am sure some individuals have dropped out of the original group as they became aware of its destructive effect on the fan base.

A board of mine would have no trolls who are sometimes used by the owners of some of other boards to post extremely offensive posts just for the purpose of getting responses to boost activity on its board. If a board is doing a good job, it will naturally have a lot of the fan base visiting the site. Trolls and trolling posts are not needed.

A person like 33Jacket who provides good information about the team is the kind of poster who will help a board become successful. His aim is to be a good Tech fan and get as much information as possible to the other good fans.

My board would never allow character assination of players, recruits who did not choose us, nor past coaches. The following is a fact. All coaches who were hired at Tech gave it their best shot as each of them wanted to win for themselves and Tech. Therefore, regardless of their record and mistakes, they diserve respect from Tech Boards for their effort while they were here.

Yes, it should be allowed that a present coach should be discussed on the boards during the season and especiall after several seasons. We should have the right to banter our observance of their coaching and coaching style. They should be held responsible as they are highly paid and the buck stops with them. However, this should be done in reasonable manner and board moderators should insure posters do not go overboard and get out of line.

Now to the ratings of the three major boards; this newest one is not included as it is too new to be rated.

The Hive was the best board around except it was more of a clique, and the clique thought they knew more about football than the other posters joining The Hive. Of course, this attitude is ridiculous as there were many newer posters who knew more about football than some of the clique.

Once the board morphed into its present arrangement, the clique became engulfed in its own self egotism and presently is not a good board.

Stingtalk was an excellent board until one of its co-owners (BeeStorm alias Beeserk) took it upon himself to use the board as a tool to oust Gailey and Braine by allowing the board to be used for under-the-table effort against Gailey, Braine, and any poster who supported Gailey's chance to prove or disprove himself. GTfan always appeared to be okay, but he is shackled by his partner who lacks integrity.

BuzzOff has always been a board that was started with one goal in mind and that was to oust Gailey and Braine and this was prior to Gailey having a chance to prove his worth at Tech. BuzzOff is nothing more than a board of hate. Its owner and some of its posters are the worst kind of Tech fans. Of course there are some good posters on the board, but they are outnumbered by the bad.

Some suggestions to MeetTheMachine: Do not allow bashing of past coaches, recruits who have turned us down, or any players; Reasonable discussions, but not over the line.

The moderators should look at the content of posts to see if there is any attempt to fracture the fan base. It would be good to have an archive of interesting posts by fans or moderators. For instance, I have taken the book "Dodd's Luck" and condensed it into 16 posts. It makes an excellent reading for those who hear of Dodd, but know little about him. It encourages posters to get the book if they can find a copy.

There could be data links to sources that would help the poster in his research. There is a site called the "Data Warehouse" that has every season listed for every school in the nation. A person can look up the records and scores for any team (including Tech) for every year they have played football.

Father Time

ahsoisee wrote:

If I had my own message board, it would be somewhat like the following with reasonable suggested changes added to the board as required.

The board would allow reasonable discussions of athletes, coaches, and administration. However, there would be no bashing of players or potential recruits. The Reggie Ball incident is a good example of poor attitudes by some Tech fans.

Players practice constantly to do the best they can. There is no need for criticism of a player other than minor reasonable discussions about a players attributes. Examples might be: Sam Jones tends to have trouble holding on to the ball, or Jimmy Jones lacks the speed to play wide receiver, etal.

When a player is not performing up to standards, the coach should be criticized for failing to make substitutions, but there should be no bashing of the player who is giving it all he has. Coaches are paid big money for their expertise and open to much more criticism than a player.

However, no board should allow posters to use the board for an agenda to get rid of a coach. An example of the disgruntled fans who tried to oust Gailey and his AD before Gailey even coached his first down at Tech. Some fans were upset because Mac did not get the job, and were also upset that O'Leary was not rehired once he went to Notre Dame. Some of the fans were upset right from the start that the chaplain of the team was replaced with a chaplain of Gailey's choice, even though that was Gailey's right as Head Coach.

These disgruntled fans tried to fracture the fan base and use the boards to tear down Tech instead of unite the fan base. Some of these same disgruntled fans are now trying to continue to fracture the fan base by discrediting Paul Johnson before he has a chance to coach his first down at Tech. I am sure some individuals have dropped out of the original group as they became aware of its destructive effect on the fan base.

A board of mine would have no trolls who are sometimes used by the owners of some of other boards to post extremely offensive posts just for the purpose of getting responses to boost activity on its board. If a board is doing a good job, it will naturally have a lot of the fan base visiting the site. Trolls and trolling posts are not needed.

A person like 33Jacket who provides good information about the team is the kind of poster who will help a board become successful. His aim is to be a good Tech fan and get as much information as possible to the other good fans.

My board would never allow character assination of players, recruits who did not choose us, nor past coaches. The following is a fact. All coaches who were hired at Tech gave it their best shot as each of them wanted to win for themselves and Tech. Therefore, regardless of their record and mistakes, they diserve respect from Tech Boards for their effort while they were here.

Yes, it should be allowed that a present coach should be discussed on the boards during the season and especiall after several seasons. We should have the right to banter our observance of their coaching and coaching style. They should be held responsible as they are highly paid and the buck stops with them. However, this should be done in reasonable manner and board moderators should insure posters do not go overboard and get out of line.

Now to the ratings of the three major boards; this newest one is not included as it is too new to be rated.

The Hive was the best board around except it was more of a clique, and the clique thought they knew more about football than the other posters joining The Hive. Of course, this attitude is ridiculous as there were many newer posters who knew more about football than some of the clique.

Once the board morphed into its present arrangement, the clique became engulfed in its own self egotism and presently is not a good board.

Stingtalk was an excellent board until one of its co-owners (BeeStorm alias Beeserk) took it upon himself to use the board as a tool to oust Gailey and Braine by allowing the board to be used for under-the-table effort against Gailey, Braine, and any poster who supported Gailey's chance to prove or disprove himself. GTfan always appeared to be okay, but he is shackled by his partner who lacks integrity.

BuzzOff has always been a board that was started with one goal in mind and that was to oust Gailey and Braine and this was prior to Gailey having a chance to prove his worth at Tech. BuzzOff is nothing more than a board of hate. Its owner and some of its posters are the worst kind of Tech fans. Of course there are some good posters on the board, but they are outnumbered by the bad.

Some suggestions to MeetTheMachine: Do not allow bashing of past coaches, recruits who have turned us down, or any players; Reasonable discussions, but not over the line.

The moderators should look at the content of posts to see if there is any attempt to fracture the fan base. It would be good to have an archive of interesting posts by fans or moderators. For instance, I have taken the book "Dodd's Luck" and condensed it into 16 posts. It makes an excellent reading for those who hear of Dodd, but know little about him. It encourages posters to get the book if they can find a copy.

There could be data links to sources that would help the poster in his research. There is a site called the "Data Warehouse" that has every season listed for every school in the nation. A person can look up the records and scores for any team (including Tech) for every year they have played football.

Father Time

In ALL that you wrote it comes down to this ... if a fan is disgruntled with a coach and his lack of moving the program forward - it's ALWAYS going to look like you want him fired.

Since when does anyone w/a negative view of something or somebody want to keep that which is negative for the longhaul???????

You are wrong in your view that BOFF was about firing Chan - it was and still is the only place where fans could truly vent their views.

I personally could have cared less about Chan ... they could have let him go after 6 games and I would have been fine with it. The fact that GT decided to keep him ... caused a lot of us to continue to view him as he was - not capable of leading this program and definitely not right for GT.

And, it always was about what we saw on the field each week ... nothing spectacular and surely no improvement from the previous staff. Stagnation reigned in Chan's 6 years here.

To pay that kind of money to that kind of coaching is STEALING!

What a great thread to get player input on internet board purpose.

Of course, I frequent buzzoff and have similar impressions to yours. For me, buzzoff offers more in-depth discussions about the football team, which I find much more interesting than the Hive topics. I prefer debates and analyses to uniform color/come play for us threads.

Yes, a sizable crowd at the Hive (let's not label everyone) believes in keeping the board a rah-rah session and also promote the idea that critical assessments harm recruiting, etc. I personally don't see how a mentally strong recruit would possibly make their decision based on a few fans' opinions. Do you really think any recruit of Alabama/Georgia/Florida would change their mind based on some internet board criticism? A pretty good number of Georgia fans were calling for Richt's head after they were blown out by Tennessee last year. I don't think any recruits immediately jumped off board.

If I'm a strong, confident recruit, I would like the fact fans care enough to delve deeply into analyses of my play. A strong coaching staff should not fail to gather the right men for Tech because of what a few fans say on the boards.

To me, you draw the line on board ethics when you start attacking the coach or players personally. Who really has the expertise to analyze the heart, soul, character of someone from as far away as their home computer? I can understand taking issue with publicly stated philosophies by the coach (i.e. the Georgia game is just another game) and the public persona, but I'm wary of jumping to character decisions.

But, the players'/ex-players' opinions obviously carry way more weight than any fan opinion. So, I sure wish Rhodes/Oliver/any other ex-player would comment on the player perspective of the proper board site philosophy.

I agree with Father Time. I would like to emphasize, however, that idiot name calling and personal attacks should not be allowed. I would also like to observe that our good ole DAWG friends like to get into Tech blogs and write things as if they are Tech fans when in reality they surely are not. There is an example of this right now on an AJC blog. But this is a great site for true Tech supporters. The radio shows have been great.

Personally, I am of the persuasion that the boards are more for the fans than the players or coaches. The football field is the venue for the players and coaches to express their opinions, actions, and frustrations.

The boards are basically for the fans to comment on the performance of the players and coaches. Personally, I do not want the players on the field to decide the inclusion or exclusion of material posted on the boards.

I believe a player or coach has just as much right as any individual poster to place his thoughts on the boards, but his opinions carry no more weight than any other fan who posts on the boards. In fact, without the fans, there would be no boards. You would not have enough posters to merit a board.

The fans have a right on these boards to post their thoughts and opinions within the rules of the board and the blessings of the moderators. If the moderators are wise, they will allow or disallow posts according to the merits of the posts.

Father Time