More on ESPN.com problems
In case you missed it, I made a post last week about the problems ESPN.com has had with its fantasy baseball leagues. This was the first year the site has offered its fantasy leagues for free, but the site experienced problems with live scoring, free agent pickups and other roster moves at the start of the season.
As a result, 10 days into the season, ESPN.com had to revert all teams back to their Opening Day rosters and change scoring for the first week based on those rosters. For instance, if I didn't have Rich Harden listed as a starter on Opening Day, I wouldn't get credit for his first start. Or if I picked up Akinori Iwamura during the first 10 days, it didn't matter. He was back to being a free agent.
Anyway, I thought I'd share a couple of your comments about ESPN.com's problems:
From 'Rookies:'
Is this the first year that ESPN has offered fantasy baseball? What freaking changed about this year that the waiver system no longer works (or didn't work for the first week and a half). Our league has been in constant turmoil for the first week, and I really don't think there is any excuse that ESPN can provide that would change my mind about not choosing to use their leagues next year when there are so many other free options out there. Good job ESPN!
This isn't the first year ESPN has offered fantasy baseball, but it's the first year it's been free. I'm guessing that drastically increased its number of users -- I used to use Yahoo but jumped on ESPN this season when I found out it was offering live scoring for free.
And Devin:
This "fix" and the problems that led up to it are unacceptable. As ESPN communicated their problems and the fix that ensued I gave them the benefit of the doubt. But after dropping in the standings considerably after this "fix," the recent rash of sloppy writing at ESPN's web site (Fatnasy Baseball? Evin Twin Pitchers? Get a spell checker, please) and a much better fantasy baseball experience with Yahoo and Fox Sports I doubt I'll give ESPN fantasy leagues another chance. Even their interface is sub-standard compared to other options out there. ESPN is slipping as a "leader" in sports.
Devin makes a good point. The typos on ESPN's main fantasy page have been very noticeable. As someone who produces headlines on this site, I would usually be forgiving if it was a minor slip-up that happened once, but that hasn't been the case.
And finally from my fellow league member Brendan:
Great decision to go with ESPN this season. We haven't had ANY problems so far. Way to go.
Can you feel the love?
Comments
This is my first year using ESPN. I've been in a Yahoo league for a few years now, this year I'm in both. I understand it's frustrating, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. It does seem like they did everything they could to fix it, and I think giving us free insider access for baseball and football season is a fair trade-off. I'm not playing for money thought, so my attitude might be different if that was the case. Still, it's one week out of 25. It could've been worse.
Posted by: Julie | April 17, 2007 12:28 PM
I just want to say that you get what you pay for. Free fantasy anything is going to have some issues especially the 1st yaar while they work out the kinks in production mode. Suck on your pacifer and bottle and quiet down while they work to resolve it.
Posted by: Charlie Bakkalakuvua | April 17, 2007 12:53 PM
It seems like fantasy baseball is the step child of most sites now. We've had a disastrous time with TQStats/CDM's pay site, which waited until mid-March to migrate to a new configuration for the site. They slow bled in new features after the drafts /auctions that we relied on previously, can't find active MLB players in their lists, etc. . . My guess is these sites use MLB as a beta-testt time for features and see football (and perhaps other fall sports) as the main feature.
Posted by: jon | April 17, 2007 2:01 PM
I've been doing ESPN fantasy baseball for years. They actually overhauled their system for this season, and I think that's what they had problems with. It's not like this is the same exact system they've been using for the past six years. Even though I was quite annoyed, they fixed it, and right now it's working wonderfully.
Posted by: mafafu | April 17, 2007 2:59 PM
Can you shead some light on why ESPN's free leagues don't have the same roster numbers, the same active positions, or even remotely resembles what they have had for purchase the last several years? They even restricted the number of starts for SPs from 180 to 120! It's a very watered down version of the past. I am in a few but they are not very challenging & most owners seem to be inactive. Conversely, the yahoo fantasy, still free, made customizing available for public leagues, UNLIKE ESPN, & improved their look & operation. I created a couple & copied the former ESPN active rosters, CI, MI, 5 OFers active etc...
Posted by: Brian | April 20, 2007 3:43 PM