Researching Pro-Football's History
Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 11:52 pm
ARCHIVE
Researching Pro-Football's History
Started by oldestlivingprofootball, Apr 15 2014 09:57 PM
Page 1 of 2
39 replies to this topic
#1 oldestlivingprofootball
Forum Visitors
Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:57 PM
When I read the post a few days ago about Coy Bacon, that has been deleted, and all this back and forth over a players sack totals, I felt compelled to write my thoughts on this topic. I am in no way saying it is an unworthy discussion, any discussion about pro-football history is good in my book, but I can't wait for the day when some of you realize that there are hundreds of individuals listed on football encyclopedia web sites who are listed as players, when they in fact never played pro football, or were not listed when they did play pro ball. It seems researchers settled on listing someone with a similar name from some source, with no concern as to whether he was actually a player, just to fill a space. This results in incorrect birth dates, death dates, or both. Often, the birth place is wrong also because it has been matched to the wrong person.
Some glaring examples: Michael 'Earl' Nolan ('37-38 Chicago Cardinals). He died in Arizona in 1991. Some have the information of a guy that died in 1981. He was not the player. Vincent Shekleton, who played for the 1922 Racine Legion team is thought to have lived to be 103 years old by some. Not the case as he died in 1958. Then there is Whitmore Babcock, ('26 Canton) who everyone has listed as Sam Babcock and dying in 1970. Whitmore was the NFL player. He died in 1960.
You are all pro-football history buffs to one degree or another or you wouldn't be visiting this forum. I am here to tell you that the discrepancy of a sack total of a particular player is nothing compared to the genuine amount of mistakes, errors, out-right copying and mistruths that are sadly too prevalent on some of these sites with regards to player bios. Once you realize this, the amount of new research and discussion topics you could have with your fellow pro-football history enthusiasts would drastically increase.
For example, do you know that Ted Alflen (1969 Denver) is still alive (he did not die in 1978)? You wouldn't know that if you visited some sites. How about George Zorich? He died in 1967. But according to most sites, even this one, (and I have asked a couple of people over the years to change it but it never happened) he died in 1962. We all have heard stories about a player that has been listed as deceased but were in fact alive. The latest example is Harold Turner of the 1954 Detroit Lions. While I am not sure if he personally cared one way or another for any type of adulation that would come with being a former pro-football player from others besides his family and friends, I suspect he would, at the very least, have liked to be listed as alive on ALL of the football web sites, (some have him dying in 1981). He died in February of this year.
Another example is John Fekete. Did you know John Fekete '46 Bisons died in 2003, not 1988 like all web sites have listed? That is a 15 year discrepancy. An error that might have impacted his life in a variety of ways if more people realized he was still alive. The PFRA organization has been around for a long time, why these errors were not fixed many years ago is something that should be explained by its long time members. Does anyone care? Does anyone even know these errors exist? It is my opinion that this aspect of pro-football's history is extremely important. If you can't get the name/birth/death information correct, how can anyone take the other information you disseminate seriously.
On a side note and since it is fast approaching, each Memorial Day, someone puts out a list showing the pro-football players that have died serving our country. Most of the time, it is just copied from the last list they could find with no research to see if it is correct. It is always wrong, either missing a player, or adding one that should not be on the list. Here is the complete listing Pro-Football War Deaths.
The reason I am here is to let everyone know that these mistakes have been corrected by the OldestLivingProFootball.com web site researchers. The correct information is available, for free and for everyone who wants it. We are down to about 300 NFL and 50 old AFL players that need to be researched. At this point, the majority of the work has been done. We have well over 6,600 players listed in the necrology sections with hundreds of corrections to the established football encyclopedias that have been published in the past and now litter the Internet.
Listen, no person or web site is perfect, on that point I am sure we can all agree. Mistakes do happen, especially with this type of research. All I would ask is for an honest effort in putting the information out to the public. I do not think this has been done in the past.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com
#2 Veeshik_ya
Forum Visitors
Posted 16 April 2014 - 08:32 AM
Zim, not really seeing the connection between sack data and accurate living player stats but...your overall point about accuracy is a good one.
Good luck with that, though. And don't hold your breath for corrections or even an acknowledgement that something might be amiss--they'll put it out "when (they're) damn good and ready."
Personally, I don't think there's any dishonesty going on here. Rather, it's either a defensive reaction to insecurity about the data, or simple hubris. You decide.
The bigger question is your qualifications to make these observations. Do you consider yourself part of the general public? Because if you do, this site isn't for you. And if you haven't watched game film, your factual observations are unworthy.
#3 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 16 April 2014 - 09:07 AM
oldestlivingprofootball, on 15 Apr 2014 - 9:57 PM, said:
The reason I am here is to let everyone know that these mistakes have been corrected by the OldestLivingProFootball.com web site researchers. The correct information is available, for free and for everyone who wants it. We are down to about 300 NFL and 50 old AFL players that need to be researched. At this point, the majority of the work has been done. We have well over 6,600 players listed in the necrology sections with hundreds of corrections to the established football encyclopedias that have been published in the past and now litter the Internet.
Listen, no person or web site is perfect, on that point I am sure we can all agree. Mistakes do happen, especially with this type of research. All I would ask is for an honest effort in putting the information out to the public. I do not think this has been done in the past.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com
And I think those are statements that we would all agree with. I noticed that you pointed out some of the glaring errors that you've noticed and corrected over the years, without having to refer to any particular person, book, or site, and that's a good approach.
Most researchers would agree that there are a lot more resources are readily available now, as compared to the 20th Century. Bob Carroll and the team that put together Total Football did the best with what they had, and they relied heavily on the Social Security Death Index, which was groundbreaking technology in the dial up days. I remember that he commented about all the errors that later researchers corrected from Roger Treat's 1952 Football Encyclopedia. He said that there had been so many, that they were referred to in the community as "Treatisms", but he praised Treat for having started the work at preserving the history of the sport at a time when the NFL was still in its early 30s, and nearly all of its alumni were still alive.
Kudos to you for the way you went about this, and for the copious research of you and your team.
#4 Jeremy Crowhurst
PFRA Member
Posted 16 April 2014 - 11:02 AM
Veeshik_ya, on 16 Apr 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:
The bigger question is your qualifications to make these observations. Do you consider yourself part of the general public? Because if you do, this site isn't for you. And if you haven't watched game film, your factual observations are unworthy.
Wow. Don't you think you should at least cough up your $35 and join PFRA before dropping something like this on the forum?
#5 Moran
PFRA Member
Posted 16 April 2014 - 11:12 AM
Jim I think your point is well taken - mistakes get perpetuated in print and now the replication rate is multiplied by the internet - there is a lot of basic research and fact checking still needed. And it must be frustrating when you do the research and it seems there is resistance to correcting what is already out there.
I first purchased a computer when working on a membership list for our church. We'd type in all the names and then do a count and realize we missed someone. Then we'd type it up again and realize we missed a different person. I wanted a machine that would let me correct just the single omission in the list without retyping the whole thing and the computer did that. So I find it ironic when an error is discovered and people tell you they can't correct it because it's in the computer that way -
Back in 1987 when the newspapers announced the first pension plan for the NFL players who had five seasons prior to 1959 my father called the Giants to get more information - he was put through to Wellington Mara who began the conversation by saying "Hap, we thought you were dead." I can't imagine what would have happened if he called the Cardinals - they probably wouldn't have a record that he ever even played for them. And of course, he couldn't call Pottsville or Frankford. But to the credit of the PFRA, all that information was researched and available. Perseverance furthers.....
#6 Veeshik_ya
Forum Visitors
Posted 16 April 2014 - 11:38 AM
Jeremy Crowhurst, on 16 Apr 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:
Wow. Don't you think you should at least cough up your $35 and join PFRA before dropping something like this on the forum?
Two comments:
A - You're certain I'm not a PFRA member?
B - I didn't drop these comments on the forum. I repeated them. They were made by other posters.
#7 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 16 April 2014 - 12:00 PM
Two comments:
A - You're certain I'm not a PFRA member?
B - I didn't drop these comments on the forum. I repeated them. They were made by other posters.
That's a very good question, and one that merits an explanation for everyone on the Forum.
I'm as certain as the limitations of our registering system will allow. Anyone who is a PFRA Member, but who has been identified as only a Forum Friend, may contact me at pfra@profootballresearchers.org for the mistake to be promptly corrected. We don't ask for anyone to provide their name when registering for the Forum, though we do ask for an e-mail.
If a person's e-mail address corresponds with the list of e-mail addresses that we have for the current PFRA members, then the person is correctly identified as a member. However, a few of the members haven't provided an e-mail contact when joining or renewing, and others have changed their contact information. I'll correct any oversight brought to my attention.
#8 Jeremy Crowhurst
PFRA Member
Posted 16 April 2014 - 09:44 PM
Veeshik_ya, on 16 Apr 2014 - 11:38 AM, said:
Two comments:
A - You're certain I'm not a PFRA member?
B - I didn't drop these comments on the forum. I repeated them. They were made by other posters.
That's a cop-out. You told the guy his factual observations are unworthy unless he's watching game film. Exactly what game film should he be watching to help clarify his knowledge on when a bunch of players from the 20's and 30's died?
As for your membership, you're posting as a non-member who's made 44 prior posts. I don't know whose role it is to tell anyone that they shouldn't be on this site, but it certainly isn't for you to be saying that.
#9 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 17 April 2014 - 09:23 AM
This has now become a moot point. In response to the above, it's my role to tell someone that they shouldn't be on this site. Let me make it clear-- people who are not members of the PFRA are welcome at the Forum. But if you overstay that welcome, don't expect to stay.
The PFRA members are the hosts. Their dues are the lion's share of the PFRA budget, out of which we pay for the internet service that makes the PFRA Forum possible. Those of you who are Forum Friends are our guests, and your participation here is a privilege, not a right. For those of you who aren't members, we hope that you'll join. You'll find that it's your chance to share your knowledge with a much larger audience, and to be part of a network that includes authors of a lot of the books you've read, and even the publishers.
Our only expectation of non-members is that they work at getting along with people. So, enjoy the Forum, and if you have a problem with it, please feel free to tell me.
#10 Jeffrey Miller
PFRA Member
Posted 17 April 2014 - 11:08 AM
Sometimes this place just ain't no fun no more ...
#11 Ken Crippen
Administrator
Posted 17 April 2014 - 03:25 PM
I add to Mark's point and to get in before people start screaming about their first amendment rights, you agree to the Terms of Service (TOS) when you register. You are essentially agreeing to act in a civilized manner. If you fail to act in a civilized manner, the owners of the site have the right to warn/temporarily suspend/permanently expel any user for violations of the TOS as they see fit. We also have the ability to identity and notify your ISP of any flagrant behavior. Only once have we had to take things to the extreme, when a user threatened violence because we refused to allow him to post YouTube videos. His emails were promptly sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
#12 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 17 April 2014 - 05:09 PM
And the Terms of Service are more interesting to read than most TOS write-ups, which usually look like a finance agreement.
http://www.pfraforum...tion=boardrules
Most of us skipped straight to the "I accept" button when we registered, of course, but presenting a serious subject doesn't have to be boring. One sentence I liked, which bears repeating, is
"If you can't keep your comments within the framework of these rules - GO ELSEWHERE!"
Good advice back in 2008 and now.
#13 Moran
PFRA Member
Posted 17 April 2014 - 10:49 PM
Thank you, Administrators, for administering the site and keeping it civil.
By the way, I notice under my name it says Forum Friend - how does that get changed to PFRA member? I didn't see a way to manage that in my profile - Mike Moran
#14 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 18 April 2014 - 09:07 AM
My apologies, Mike-- consider it done, literally.
#15 Tod Maher
PFRA Member
Posted 19 April 2014 - 07:43 PM
oldestlivingprofootball, on 15 Apr 2014 - 9:57 PM, said:
Another example is John Fekete. Did you know John Fekete '46 Bisons died in 2003, not 1988 like all web sites have listed? That is a 15 year discrepancy. An error that might have impacted his life in a variety of ways if more people realized he was still alive. The PFRA organization has been around for a long time, why these errors were not fixed many years ago is something that should be explained by its long time members. Does anyone care? Does anyone even know these errors exist? It is my opinion that this aspect of pro-football's history is extremely important. If you can't get the name/birth/death information correct, how can anyone take the other information you disseminate seriously.
Fekete died in Sun City, California not Arizona. Also, his full name is John A. Fekete, Jr. (Michael is the middle name of the misidentified 1988 deceased person).
#16 oldestlivingprofootball
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 April 2014 - 09:12 PM
Mark, thank you for your initial comments. While I had hoped my posting would have generated some more thought provoking responses by some of your other long time members, I guess I was mistaken. There are more responses about "how to act on this web site" rather than on the original post. However, I am glad that at least one other web site has taken the information I have presented and made a few changes and has done some further research.
I know that I have opened myself up to criticism and for the "gotcha moment" that some might take joy in doing by making a post like I did, but I would like you to know that I have no problem when someone points out an error on my site. Usually, I will fix it within 24 hours, if not sooner... after I do my own research to verify the information of course. I do not know everything and I do not pretend to know everything, my ultimate goal is to get the information correct, in all places.
Mr. Maher, thank you for the update on the state where Mr. Fekete died. I have his obit and it does say California, I guess Arizona just came out as I typed. I did not know about his middle name though. Thank you for that information. Thanks for changing his death date to 2003 on your site as well, hopefully others will follow your lead. As I have stated to you privately, working together, along with everyone else who cares, we can make pro-football history as complete as humanly possible.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com
#17 John Turney
PFRA Member
Posted 19 April 2014 - 10:11 PM
Why would people criticize you or have a gotcha moment? Most of the people here do not do that. They respect and admire the work of others. The PFRA is composed of members that have very diverse interests, kind of a niche, thing. While I like and enjoy your sight, it's not in my skill set to do what you do but maybe it is for others.
I wish you well but I know I am not capable of helping, if that's what you were asking . . .but maybe some will.
#18 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 22 April 2014 - 11:19 AM
oldestlivingprofootball, on 15 Apr 2014 - 9:57 PM, said:
The PFRA organization has been around for a long time, why these errors were not fixed many years ago is something that should be explained by its long time members. Does anyone care? Does anyone even know these errors exist? It is my opinion that this aspect of pro-football's history is extremely important. If you can't get the name/birth/death information correct, how can anyone take the other information you disseminate seriously.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com
I guess I'll criticize him, since I don't think that his criticisms of PFRA are entirely fair. I missed the is part of the initial posting quoted above (fifth sentence onward in paragraph five of eight), which includes the "If you can't get this right, how can anyone take you seriously" thing.
I'm not aware that PFRA has ever maintained a player registry.
Starting in 1998, our magazine began an annual listing of players who had passed away in each previous year before. Unfortunately, the compilers were not aware of the death of Mr. Fekete in 2003, and his name was not on the 2004 list, but the images of prior issues cannot be rewritten. These lists are compiled from reports from our members (and even from non-members who can post at the topic at the very top of the PFRA Forum list (this year, it's ("2014 Player Deaths"). So, in answer to the "Does anyone care?" question, yes, we care. Granted, Zimmerman is way better than we are at keeping track of such things, and we're glad that he takes the time to do it, but I take issue with an unfounded accusation.
#19 Mark
PFRA Member
Posted 22 April 2014 - 12:17 PM
Mark L. Ford, on 22 Apr 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:
I guess I'll criticize him, since I don't think that his criticisms of PFRA are entirely fair. I missed the is part of the initial posting quoted above (fifth sentence onward in paragraph five of eight), which includes the "If you can't get this right, how can anyone take you seriously" thing.
I'm not aware that PFRA has ever maintained a player registry.
Starting in 1998, our magazine began an annual listing of players who had passed away in each previous year before. Unfortunately, the compilers were not aware of the death of Mr. Fekete in 2003, and his name was not on the 2004 list, but the images of prior issues cannot be rewritten. These lists are compiled from reports from our members (and even from non-members who can post at the topic at the very top of the PFRA Forum list (this year, it's ("2014 Player Deaths")
So, in answer to the "Does anyone care?" question, yes, we care. Granted, Zimmerman is way better than we are at keeping track of such things, and we're glad that he takes the time to do it, but I take issue with an unfounded accusation.
When I read his criticism I was also baffled but then it occurred to me maybe he was under the impression that the PFRA was associated with Pro Football Reference.
#20 nicefellow31
PFRA Member
Posted 22 April 2014 - 01:36 PM
Moran, on 17 Apr 2014 - 10:49 PM, said:
Thank you, Administrators, for administering the site and keeping it civil.
By the way, I notice under my name it says Forum Friend - how does that get changed to PFRA member? I didn't see a way to manage that in my profile - Mike Moran
Same for me. How did you fix it?
Page 1 of 2
oldecapecod 11
Researching Pro-Football's History
Started by oldestlivingprofootball, Apr 15 2014 09:57 PM
Page 1 of 2
39 replies to this topic
#1 oldestlivingprofootball
Forum Visitors
Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:57 PM
When I read the post a few days ago about Coy Bacon, that has been deleted, and all this back and forth over a players sack totals, I felt compelled to write my thoughts on this topic. I am in no way saying it is an unworthy discussion, any discussion about pro-football history is good in my book, but I can't wait for the day when some of you realize that there are hundreds of individuals listed on football encyclopedia web sites who are listed as players, when they in fact never played pro football, or were not listed when they did play pro ball. It seems researchers settled on listing someone with a similar name from some source, with no concern as to whether he was actually a player, just to fill a space. This results in incorrect birth dates, death dates, or both. Often, the birth place is wrong also because it has been matched to the wrong person.
Some glaring examples: Michael 'Earl' Nolan ('37-38 Chicago Cardinals). He died in Arizona in 1991. Some have the information of a guy that died in 1981. He was not the player. Vincent Shekleton, who played for the 1922 Racine Legion team is thought to have lived to be 103 years old by some. Not the case as he died in 1958. Then there is Whitmore Babcock, ('26 Canton) who everyone has listed as Sam Babcock and dying in 1970. Whitmore was the NFL player. He died in 1960.
You are all pro-football history buffs to one degree or another or you wouldn't be visiting this forum. I am here to tell you that the discrepancy of a sack total of a particular player is nothing compared to the genuine amount of mistakes, errors, out-right copying and mistruths that are sadly too prevalent on some of these sites with regards to player bios. Once you realize this, the amount of new research and discussion topics you could have with your fellow pro-football history enthusiasts would drastically increase.
For example, do you know that Ted Alflen (1969 Denver) is still alive (he did not die in 1978)? You wouldn't know that if you visited some sites. How about George Zorich? He died in 1967. But according to most sites, even this one, (and I have asked a couple of people over the years to change it but it never happened) he died in 1962. We all have heard stories about a player that has been listed as deceased but were in fact alive. The latest example is Harold Turner of the 1954 Detroit Lions. While I am not sure if he personally cared one way or another for any type of adulation that would come with being a former pro-football player from others besides his family and friends, I suspect he would, at the very least, have liked to be listed as alive on ALL of the football web sites, (some have him dying in 1981). He died in February of this year.
Another example is John Fekete. Did you know John Fekete '46 Bisons died in 2003, not 1988 like all web sites have listed? That is a 15 year discrepancy. An error that might have impacted his life in a variety of ways if more people realized he was still alive. The PFRA organization has been around for a long time, why these errors were not fixed many years ago is something that should be explained by its long time members. Does anyone care? Does anyone even know these errors exist? It is my opinion that this aspect of pro-football's history is extremely important. If you can't get the name/birth/death information correct, how can anyone take the other information you disseminate seriously.
On a side note and since it is fast approaching, each Memorial Day, someone puts out a list showing the pro-football players that have died serving our country. Most of the time, it is just copied from the last list they could find with no research to see if it is correct. It is always wrong, either missing a player, or adding one that should not be on the list. Here is the complete listing Pro-Football War Deaths.
The reason I am here is to let everyone know that these mistakes have been corrected by the OldestLivingProFootball.com web site researchers. The correct information is available, for free and for everyone who wants it. We are down to about 300 NFL and 50 old AFL players that need to be researched. At this point, the majority of the work has been done. We have well over 6,600 players listed in the necrology sections with hundreds of corrections to the established football encyclopedias that have been published in the past and now litter the Internet.
Listen, no person or web site is perfect, on that point I am sure we can all agree. Mistakes do happen, especially with this type of research. All I would ask is for an honest effort in putting the information out to the public. I do not think this has been done in the past.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com
#2 Veeshik_ya
Forum Visitors
Posted 16 April 2014 - 08:32 AM
Zim, not really seeing the connection between sack data and accurate living player stats but...your overall point about accuracy is a good one.
Good luck with that, though. And don't hold your breath for corrections or even an acknowledgement that something might be amiss--they'll put it out "when (they're) damn good and ready."
Personally, I don't think there's any dishonesty going on here. Rather, it's either a defensive reaction to insecurity about the data, or simple hubris. You decide.
The bigger question is your qualifications to make these observations. Do you consider yourself part of the general public? Because if you do, this site isn't for you. And if you haven't watched game film, your factual observations are unworthy.
#3 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 16 April 2014 - 09:07 AM
oldestlivingprofootball, on 15 Apr 2014 - 9:57 PM, said:
The reason I am here is to let everyone know that these mistakes have been corrected by the OldestLivingProFootball.com web site researchers. The correct information is available, for free and for everyone who wants it. We are down to about 300 NFL and 50 old AFL players that need to be researched. At this point, the majority of the work has been done. We have well over 6,600 players listed in the necrology sections with hundreds of corrections to the established football encyclopedias that have been published in the past and now litter the Internet.
Listen, no person or web site is perfect, on that point I am sure we can all agree. Mistakes do happen, especially with this type of research. All I would ask is for an honest effort in putting the information out to the public. I do not think this has been done in the past.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com
And I think those are statements that we would all agree with. I noticed that you pointed out some of the glaring errors that you've noticed and corrected over the years, without having to refer to any particular person, book, or site, and that's a good approach.
Most researchers would agree that there are a lot more resources are readily available now, as compared to the 20th Century. Bob Carroll and the team that put together Total Football did the best with what they had, and they relied heavily on the Social Security Death Index, which was groundbreaking technology in the dial up days. I remember that he commented about all the errors that later researchers corrected from Roger Treat's 1952 Football Encyclopedia. He said that there had been so many, that they were referred to in the community as "Treatisms", but he praised Treat for having started the work at preserving the history of the sport at a time when the NFL was still in its early 30s, and nearly all of its alumni were still alive.
Kudos to you for the way you went about this, and for the copious research of you and your team.
#4 Jeremy Crowhurst
PFRA Member
Posted 16 April 2014 - 11:02 AM
Veeshik_ya, on 16 Apr 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:
The bigger question is your qualifications to make these observations. Do you consider yourself part of the general public? Because if you do, this site isn't for you. And if you haven't watched game film, your factual observations are unworthy.
Wow. Don't you think you should at least cough up your $35 and join PFRA before dropping something like this on the forum?
#5 Moran
PFRA Member
Posted 16 April 2014 - 11:12 AM
Jim I think your point is well taken - mistakes get perpetuated in print and now the replication rate is multiplied by the internet - there is a lot of basic research and fact checking still needed. And it must be frustrating when you do the research and it seems there is resistance to correcting what is already out there.
I first purchased a computer when working on a membership list for our church. We'd type in all the names and then do a count and realize we missed someone. Then we'd type it up again and realize we missed a different person. I wanted a machine that would let me correct just the single omission in the list without retyping the whole thing and the computer did that. So I find it ironic when an error is discovered and people tell you they can't correct it because it's in the computer that way -
Back in 1987 when the newspapers announced the first pension plan for the NFL players who had five seasons prior to 1959 my father called the Giants to get more information - he was put through to Wellington Mara who began the conversation by saying "Hap, we thought you were dead." I can't imagine what would have happened if he called the Cardinals - they probably wouldn't have a record that he ever even played for them. And of course, he couldn't call Pottsville or Frankford. But to the credit of the PFRA, all that information was researched and available. Perseverance furthers.....
#6 Veeshik_ya
Forum Visitors
Posted 16 April 2014 - 11:38 AM
Jeremy Crowhurst, on 16 Apr 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:
Wow. Don't you think you should at least cough up your $35 and join PFRA before dropping something like this on the forum?
Two comments:
A - You're certain I'm not a PFRA member?
B - I didn't drop these comments on the forum. I repeated them. They were made by other posters.
#7 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 16 April 2014 - 12:00 PM
Two comments:
A - You're certain I'm not a PFRA member?
B - I didn't drop these comments on the forum. I repeated them. They were made by other posters.
That's a very good question, and one that merits an explanation for everyone on the Forum.
I'm as certain as the limitations of our registering system will allow. Anyone who is a PFRA Member, but who has been identified as only a Forum Friend, may contact me at pfra@profootballresearchers.org for the mistake to be promptly corrected. We don't ask for anyone to provide their name when registering for the Forum, though we do ask for an e-mail.
If a person's e-mail address corresponds with the list of e-mail addresses that we have for the current PFRA members, then the person is correctly identified as a member. However, a few of the members haven't provided an e-mail contact when joining or renewing, and others have changed their contact information. I'll correct any oversight brought to my attention.
#8 Jeremy Crowhurst
PFRA Member
Posted 16 April 2014 - 09:44 PM
Veeshik_ya, on 16 Apr 2014 - 11:38 AM, said:
Two comments:
A - You're certain I'm not a PFRA member?
B - I didn't drop these comments on the forum. I repeated them. They were made by other posters.
That's a cop-out. You told the guy his factual observations are unworthy unless he's watching game film. Exactly what game film should he be watching to help clarify his knowledge on when a bunch of players from the 20's and 30's died?
As for your membership, you're posting as a non-member who's made 44 prior posts. I don't know whose role it is to tell anyone that they shouldn't be on this site, but it certainly isn't for you to be saying that.
#9 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 17 April 2014 - 09:23 AM
This has now become a moot point. In response to the above, it's my role to tell someone that they shouldn't be on this site. Let me make it clear-- people who are not members of the PFRA are welcome at the Forum. But if you overstay that welcome, don't expect to stay.
The PFRA members are the hosts. Their dues are the lion's share of the PFRA budget, out of which we pay for the internet service that makes the PFRA Forum possible. Those of you who are Forum Friends are our guests, and your participation here is a privilege, not a right. For those of you who aren't members, we hope that you'll join. You'll find that it's your chance to share your knowledge with a much larger audience, and to be part of a network that includes authors of a lot of the books you've read, and even the publishers.
Our only expectation of non-members is that they work at getting along with people. So, enjoy the Forum, and if you have a problem with it, please feel free to tell me.
#10 Jeffrey Miller
PFRA Member
Posted 17 April 2014 - 11:08 AM
Sometimes this place just ain't no fun no more ...
#11 Ken Crippen
Administrator
Posted 17 April 2014 - 03:25 PM
I add to Mark's point and to get in before people start screaming about their first amendment rights, you agree to the Terms of Service (TOS) when you register. You are essentially agreeing to act in a civilized manner. If you fail to act in a civilized manner, the owners of the site have the right to warn/temporarily suspend/permanently expel any user for violations of the TOS as they see fit. We also have the ability to identity and notify your ISP of any flagrant behavior. Only once have we had to take things to the extreme, when a user threatened violence because we refused to allow him to post YouTube videos. His emails were promptly sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
#12 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 17 April 2014 - 05:09 PM
And the Terms of Service are more interesting to read than most TOS write-ups, which usually look like a finance agreement.
http://www.pfraforum...tion=boardrules
Most of us skipped straight to the "I accept" button when we registered, of course, but presenting a serious subject doesn't have to be boring. One sentence I liked, which bears repeating, is
"If you can't keep your comments within the framework of these rules - GO ELSEWHERE!"
Good advice back in 2008 and now.
#13 Moran
PFRA Member
Posted 17 April 2014 - 10:49 PM
Thank you, Administrators, for administering the site and keeping it civil.
By the way, I notice under my name it says Forum Friend - how does that get changed to PFRA member? I didn't see a way to manage that in my profile - Mike Moran
#14 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 18 April 2014 - 09:07 AM
My apologies, Mike-- consider it done, literally.
#15 Tod Maher
PFRA Member
Posted 19 April 2014 - 07:43 PM
oldestlivingprofootball, on 15 Apr 2014 - 9:57 PM, said:
Another example is John Fekete. Did you know John Fekete '46 Bisons died in 2003, not 1988 like all web sites have listed? That is a 15 year discrepancy. An error that might have impacted his life in a variety of ways if more people realized he was still alive. The PFRA organization has been around for a long time, why these errors were not fixed many years ago is something that should be explained by its long time members. Does anyone care? Does anyone even know these errors exist? It is my opinion that this aspect of pro-football's history is extremely important. If you can't get the name/birth/death information correct, how can anyone take the other information you disseminate seriously.
Fekete died in Sun City, California not Arizona. Also, his full name is John A. Fekete, Jr. (Michael is the middle name of the misidentified 1988 deceased person).
#16 oldestlivingprofootball
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 April 2014 - 09:12 PM
Mark, thank you for your initial comments. While I had hoped my posting would have generated some more thought provoking responses by some of your other long time members, I guess I was mistaken. There are more responses about "how to act on this web site" rather than on the original post. However, I am glad that at least one other web site has taken the information I have presented and made a few changes and has done some further research.
I know that I have opened myself up to criticism and for the "gotcha moment" that some might take joy in doing by making a post like I did, but I would like you to know that I have no problem when someone points out an error on my site. Usually, I will fix it within 24 hours, if not sooner... after I do my own research to verify the information of course. I do not know everything and I do not pretend to know everything, my ultimate goal is to get the information correct, in all places.
Mr. Maher, thank you for the update on the state where Mr. Fekete died. I have his obit and it does say California, I guess Arizona just came out as I typed. I did not know about his middle name though. Thank you for that information. Thanks for changing his death date to 2003 on your site as well, hopefully others will follow your lead. As I have stated to you privately, working together, along with everyone else who cares, we can make pro-football history as complete as humanly possible.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com
#17 John Turney
PFRA Member
Posted 19 April 2014 - 10:11 PM
Why would people criticize you or have a gotcha moment? Most of the people here do not do that. They respect and admire the work of others. The PFRA is composed of members that have very diverse interests, kind of a niche, thing. While I like and enjoy your sight, it's not in my skill set to do what you do but maybe it is for others.
I wish you well but I know I am not capable of helping, if that's what you were asking . . .but maybe some will.
#18 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 22 April 2014 - 11:19 AM
oldestlivingprofootball, on 15 Apr 2014 - 9:57 PM, said:
The PFRA organization has been around for a long time, why these errors were not fixed many years ago is something that should be explained by its long time members. Does anyone care? Does anyone even know these errors exist? It is my opinion that this aspect of pro-football's history is extremely important. If you can't get the name/birth/death information correct, how can anyone take the other information you disseminate seriously.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com
I guess I'll criticize him, since I don't think that his criticisms of PFRA are entirely fair. I missed the is part of the initial posting quoted above (fifth sentence onward in paragraph five of eight), which includes the "If you can't get this right, how can anyone take you seriously" thing.
I'm not aware that PFRA has ever maintained a player registry.
Starting in 1998, our magazine began an annual listing of players who had passed away in each previous year before. Unfortunately, the compilers were not aware of the death of Mr. Fekete in 2003, and his name was not on the 2004 list, but the images of prior issues cannot be rewritten. These lists are compiled from reports from our members (and even from non-members who can post at the topic at the very top of the PFRA Forum list (this year, it's ("2014 Player Deaths"). So, in answer to the "Does anyone care?" question, yes, we care. Granted, Zimmerman is way better than we are at keeping track of such things, and we're glad that he takes the time to do it, but I take issue with an unfounded accusation.
#19 Mark
PFRA Member
Posted 22 April 2014 - 12:17 PM
Mark L. Ford, on 22 Apr 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:
I guess I'll criticize him, since I don't think that his criticisms of PFRA are entirely fair. I missed the is part of the initial posting quoted above (fifth sentence onward in paragraph five of eight), which includes the "If you can't get this right, how can anyone take you seriously" thing.
I'm not aware that PFRA has ever maintained a player registry.
Starting in 1998, our magazine began an annual listing of players who had passed away in each previous year before. Unfortunately, the compilers were not aware of the death of Mr. Fekete in 2003, and his name was not on the 2004 list, but the images of prior issues cannot be rewritten. These lists are compiled from reports from our members (and even from non-members who can post at the topic at the very top of the PFRA Forum list (this year, it's ("2014 Player Deaths")
So, in answer to the "Does anyone care?" question, yes, we care. Granted, Zimmerman is way better than we are at keeping track of such things, and we're glad that he takes the time to do it, but I take issue with an unfounded accusation.
When I read his criticism I was also baffled but then it occurred to me maybe he was under the impression that the PFRA was associated with Pro Football Reference.
#20 nicefellow31
PFRA Member
Posted 22 April 2014 - 01:36 PM
Moran, on 17 Apr 2014 - 10:49 PM, said:
Thank you, Administrators, for administering the site and keeping it civil.
By the way, I notice under my name it says Forum Friend - how does that get changed to PFRA member? I didn't see a way to manage that in my profile - Mike Moran
Same for me. How did you fix it?
Page 1 of 2
oldecapecod 11