Why is the new format of clutchfans copying www.espn.com? I want the old format back from clutchcity.net..it was more original and proud, less boring, etc.:
Why don't you start a poll to begin the post...(plz don't start another post) I personally like the design of clutchfan.com.
What do you mean by copying? And what is boring about the new format? Be more specific about what you mean.
why not use the feedback section for comments on the site, that is what it is for Think, read, think, read and think again, then maybe post
Cryten Can't u see what I mean? The clutchfans format has removed its originality ..it turned into a espn.com wannabe and it puts me to sleep; i prefer its predecessor clutchcity's original layout of things
Start your own website then and you can use any format you want. What more do you want? It's a free site that has up-to-date news with a great BBS (not lately however). I don't think it really matters what the format is like, as long as it's easy to use and FREE.
I for one think that the new format looks kicks ass over the old one. The old one was very dated. Ithink if you visit a site as often as we visit clutch, its good for it to change every couple of years.
OMG, after all the work Clutch and others put into it, this is the best "constructive" criticism you had to offer. Dude, that was just wrong and uncalled for.
Hey, he's entitled to his opinion. Actually, ESPN wasn't the inspiration for the format. But, in reality, it is tough to create a news-oriented site that doesn't follow a fairly similar format. Why do ESPN, Fox, CNNSI, NFL.com, NBA.com, etc. all have similarities in layout? Because people are comfortable with that format and they are more apt to read it. I read a survey recently that asked respondents where was the first place they would look on a page for a link to return to the front page of a website. 98 percent of them said top left. When asked if they would think to click the logo at the top of the page to return to the front page, only 5 percent said yes. The lesson here is that people are used to certain things. Websites are a lot like newspapers and magazines when it comes to layout. There is a reason why the New York Times has remained virtually unchanged for over 100 years. People naturally read from top left to bottom right. The general rule is to put the most important information at the top and the most necessary information at top right - ie. a "home" link. The result is relative uniformity among websites which can be boring but much greater usability - in other words, it is easier to use and read. Sure, a funky Flash site with tiny little words, wild colors and crazy animation looks cool, but it doesn't make people want to actually read it. This site is all about the information. If it were a website for an art gallery, that would be a different story. It's not so it has to follow a predictable format to some degree.
I think the site is great. I love the flash used to display the standings, schedule, scores and stats of the players. That is so sweet.
LOL. Well, David Aldridge is a competant journalist, prolific contributor, and tolerable guy. I think that answers your question.
It seems like you used to do more ballsy reporting a few years back, as opposed to focusing on the bbs. That's just what it seems like. And I think that's why most of us came here and stuck around.
Well, you're definitely number one, but unfortunately, not number two. Three, you're kinda schizo! Bottom line? WE NEED SOME NEW KEG NOTES!!!!
