womensprosoccer.com feedback welcome

Hi Everyone,

We’re in the process of re-launching womensprosoccer.com today (Wed, April 16th, 2009). If the new site is not already coming up for you, it should be soon.

In re-launching, we sought to address a lot of the feedback we’ve received from you – a better video experience, more photos, scores featured more prominently, etc.

Please know that this is just Phase 1 of our web project. More cool features are in process such as calling out stats leaders more prominently, giving fans the ability to comment on and rate content, etc.

As you surf the new site, let us know your thoughts – all feedback is welcome.

Tags: website

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by StarCityFan on April 21, 2009 at 9:35am: As kool-aide notes, it's not obvious how to get to the standings. (You have to hover the mouse over the "Standings" button, then ignore that it appears to bring up a menu with two options and click on the "Standings" button itself.) I'd suggest at the very least adding "Standings" to the menu below the "Standings" button.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ron Kessler on April 21, 2009 at 11:47pm: For now, I'll just say I was pleased to see my avatar on the front page :-); ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ron Kessler on April 22, 2009 at 12:07am: StarCityFan said:
As kool-aide notes, it's not obvious how to get to the standings. (You have to hover the mouse over the "Standings" button, then ignore that it appears to bring up a menu with two options and click on the "Standings" button itself.) I'd suggest at the very least adding "Standings" to the menu below the "Standings" button.

I'll reverse this and say it's much tougher to find the statistics - had to roll the cursor over all the tabs to eventually spot them under the standings tab. Either create a separate tab for the stats, or add 'stats' to the schedule tab.

Also, I think Luckenbill's stats appear to be off - Assuming Saves + Goals = SOG, she appears to have 4 fewer saves than she should. The boxscore for the recent Washington/Boston match seems to be the source of the error.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by kool-aide on April 22, 2009 at 7:33am: Ron Kessler said:
Also, I think Luckenbill's stats appear to be off - Assuming Saves + Goals = SOG, she appears to have 4 fewer saves than she should. The boxscore for the recent Washington/Boston match seems to be the source of the error.

Well, your starting assumption is off. Saves + Goals ≠ SOG. Just one example: a field player blocking a SOG (I believe Mitts did just that in the game vs the Freedom).; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ron Kessler on April 22, 2009 at 8:53am: It's not a shot on goal then (it might still count as a shot, but not a SOG).

Save Percentage is probably the single best stat by which to gauge a keeper's performance - If you count defender blocks of shots as SOGs, the stat becomes meaningless.

NHL works the same way, for a shot to be a SOG, it must be saved by the goaltender or go in.

kool-aide said:
Ron Kessler said:
Also, I think Luckenbill's stats appear to be off - Assuming Saves + Goals = SOG, she appears to have 4 fewer saves than she should. The boxscore for the recent Washington/Boston match seems to be the source of the error.

Well, your starting assumption is off. Saves + Goals ≠ SOG. Just one example: a field player blocking a SOG (I believe Mitts did just that in the game vs the Freedom).; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Robyn McNeil on April 22, 2009 at 9:08am: I think a shot on goal is one that is between the posts and the crossbar--one that would have entered the goal if not denied by another player. A shot that is headed off the line by a player that isn't the goalkeeper was still 'on goal', as kool-aide said. The corresponding stat would be a 'blocked shot' by the defender, but it's not a stat that is kept in all leagues. I've seen it in college game write-ups, for example. Maybe someone from the league could chime in with the guidelines that are used?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ron Kessler on April 22, 2009 at 12:53pm: You can credit a defender with a 'blocked shot' without counting it as a SOG (FWIW I don't see a blocked shot stat in WPS's list). I'm certain 'another player' has to be the goalkeeper - otherwise there is no point to having a Save Percentage statistic for goalkeepers. I agree that it would be nice for the league to clarify this and that there is probably no point in debating this until then.

I should note that Barnhart's and Bardsley's stats don't match up either. Luckenbill has either made 4 more saves or faced 4 fewer SOGs. For Barnhart, the number is 2 and for Bardsley it is 1. All the other keepers fit the Saves + Goals = SOG formula. Luckenbill's discrepancy comes entirely from the Freedom match on Saturday, Barnhart's is spread over the matches vs Boston and Sky Blue.

The stats questions don't end there - in Sunday's boxscore Sky Blue is credited with making 6 saves despite just facing 4 Shots on Goal. I don't think anyone can come up with a scenario where this is possible. Look further down to the individual stats and suddenly the two SB keepers faced a combined 7 shots on goal (but only saved 6 without surrendering a goal, explaining the discrepancy for Bardsley above). PLEASE WPS, ensure the integrity of your data.

Back to the website - I cannot get into the league stats page over the last couple of days - it's been asking me to log into 'Sitecore' which appears to be your stat admin site. I've gotten into it previously, not sure what changed.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Pott Rocks on April 22, 2009 at 2:30pm: http://fancorner.womensprosoccer.com/forum/topics/but-who-am-i-i-ju...

check that; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by MARDELLE on April 23, 2009 at 8:38pm: Excellent well done web team..!!; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by PADDY O SHAUNESSEY on April 24, 2009 at 9:25pm: DID I COUNT CORRECTLY, 7 TEAMS, AMERICA, YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF. THIS IS THE MOST POWERFUL COUNTRY IN THE WORLD FOR WOMENS SOCCER, YES OTHER COUNTRIES ARE GETTING BETTER, BUT REALLY? MY THOUGHTS ARE OLD SCHOOL/NEW SCHOOL. I RESPECT EVERY WOMAN PLAYING SOCCER, BUT WE REALLY NEED A CHANGE, WE NEED TO SEE MANY MORE KIDS OUT OF COLLEGE PLAYING, HUNGER KIDS JUST OUT OF COLLEGE, NOT SO MUCH THE NAMES WE HAVE BEEN HEARING OVER AND OVER, YES THE OLDER GIRLS ARE GREAT, BUT GIVE SOME NEW FACES A CHANCE, THE OTHER WOMAN CAN COACH NOW, DO OTHER THINGS. GO SCOUT THE COUNTRY FOR NEW YOUNG PLAYERS. WHY CAN WE NOT HAVE A TEAM IN EVERY CAPITAL OF THIS GREAT NATION, AND DONT SAY ITS A MONEY PROBLEM, CAUSE WE KNOW THERE IS PLENTY OF THAT.....I DONT REALLY CARE TO SEE MARTA PLAY, BUT I WOULD PAY TO SEE SOME YOUNG AMERICAN GIRL COMING THROUGH THE RANKS...REMEMBER BRAZIL WANTED TO KICK OUR BUT, EVERYTIME, NOW LETS PAY HER FOR COMING TO AMERICA....AND ALL THE EUROPEANS, GO HOME AND PLAY, I KNOW THAT SOUNDS HARSH, THIS IS WHY WE ARE SO GOOD......OUR MLS IS GETTING SO GOOD, I STAY HOME AND WATCH THAT ON TV NOW....ITS GREAT....SAME FACES ON DIFFERENT TEAMS, HOW ABOUT MAKING 1 GREAT SUPERSTAR TEAM FROM FOREIGN COUNTRIES TO PLAY US, THAT WOULD MAKE 8 TEAMS.....MAKE A TEAM OF ALL AMERICANS FROM COLLEGE. LET UNC PLAY A GAME.........WOULD KICK ALL YOUR BUTS......WE HAVE NO TEAM IN NORTH CAROLINA AREA, WHO DO I GO SEE.....? MORE PLAYERS JUST OUT OF COLLEGE.. GIVE THEM MORE CHANCES, THEY DONT HAVE TO BE THE BEST, LET THEM PLAY, I WROTE A NOTE THE OTHER DAY, I THINK I LOST IN THE SYSTEM SOMEHOW, ITS LATE, I HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT IDEAS, IF YOU DONT THINK IM TOO HARSH, LET ME KNOW. TO ALL YOU THOUSAND OF EXCELLENT PLAYERS, WANTING TO GO PRO, PULLING FOR YOU....THESE GIRLS WOULD PROBALY NOT BE AS EXPENSIVE TO PAY AS ALL THOSE BIG NAMES YOU KNOW. I GOTTA GO,,,,,,,,,,,OSHAUNESSEY; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by StarCityFan on April 24, 2009 at 11:13pm: You want to see random college girls playing soccer, go watch the W-League. They have something like 30 teams, most of which are awful.

And, yes, there's plenty of money in this country, but women's soccer isn't a charity - it needs to make a profit. So you need a city large enough for at least 4,000 fans to show up at games on a regular basis. Carolina could probably manage it (they did back in the WUSA days, at least), but a lot of areas couldn't.

As for North Carolina, the Freedom have played the Tarheels on several occasions and generally beat them comfortably. Even the best college teams don't have more than three or four players capable of performing at the WPS level.

P.S. And PLEASE DON'T WRITE IN ALL CAPS. It's like shouting in a quiet restaurant, and it's a lot harder to read.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Christian lfcredusa on April 25, 2009 at 8:30pm: quite nice. well done

weren't these replies supposed to be about the website?

am I in the wrong thread? haha; ▶ Reply to This