Rivals.com operation

[ToddMish]

I know they've probably been hit by the economy, too, but anybody have any ideas what's going on with folks/operation at Rivals.com?

I've sent e-mails and left voicemails with 5 or 6 of their editors about every three or four weeks since January, including Tom Bergeron, about joining them as a publisher of one of their high school sites that's basically been sitting dormant for a year or more.

And nobody has shown me the professional courtesy of any kind of response or explanation.

I thought they ran a much better operation than that.

Any input/ideas welcome.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Go have a kid, raise him to be a football star, and then in 18 years they'll give you any kind of journalistic fellatio you want as long as you promise them the "scoop" of where that kid is giving a soft verbal. Otherwise they have no use for you.

 

[BrianGriffin]

I know they've probably been hit by the economy, too, but anybody have any ideas what's going on with folks/operation at Rivals.com?

I've sent e-mails and left voicemails with 5 or 6 of their editors about every three or four weeks since January, including Tom Bergeron, about joining them as a publisher of one of their high school sites that's basically been sitting dormant for a year or more.

And nobody has shown me the professional courtesy of any kind of response or explanation.

I thought they ran a much better operation than that.

Any input/ideas welcome.

Just a rumor, but word on the street is that Rivals is falling apart at the top. I hear its headquarters has been shut down and the head honchos are working from home. It exists, but it's in deep trouble.

But that's just what I hear.

The extension of that is they let the people who knew how to run the operation walk out the door and form 247, which is evidently kicking Rivals' butts and making it another wasted investment for Yahoo.

 

[AndrewPaPreps]

What you've heard on the street is wrong.

Disclosure: I run one of the high school sites, as evidenced by the user name.

We just had a publisher conference in Las Vegas, hosted by Yahoo and with several other sponsors. Close to 200 publishers attended. We're putting forth several initiatives that will strengthen our standing as a network and as individual sites.

There have been some changes, yes, in the location of some people. But the network's core are its site publishers, and none of them work at the headquarters. We have a ton of support at Yahoo, have established several new partnerships, and the goal of the conference was actually to lay out new plans moving forward and to build on the already strong relationship between Yahoo and Rivals. We're trending up, not down.

Seriously, a lot of this stuff is bad blood from those who are competing against Rivals. We're not going anywhere.

 

[BrianGriffin]

What you've heard on the street is wrong.

Disclosure: I run one of the high school sites, as evidenced by the user name.

We just had a publisher conference in Las Vegas, hosted by Yahoo and with several other sponsors. Close to 200 publishers attended. We're putting forth several initiatives that will strengthen our standing as a network and as individual sites.

There have been some changes, yes, in the location of some people. But the network's core are its site publishers, and none of them work at the headquarters. We have a ton of support at Yahoo, have established several new partnerships, and the goal of the conference was actually to lay out new plans moving forward and to build on the already strong relationship between Yahoo and Rivals. We're trending up, not down.

Seriously, a lot of this stuff is bad blood from those who are competing against Rivals. We're not going anywhere.

Then I stand corrected. I have no dog in this hunt, I was just passing along the water cooler conversation from yesterday.

 

[AndrewPaPreps]

I know they've probably been hit by the economy, too, but anybody have any ideas what's going on with folks/operation at Rivals.com?

I've sent e-mails and left voicemails with 5 or 6 of their editors about every three or four weeks since January, including Tom Bergeron, about joining them as a publisher of one of their high school sites that's basically been sitting dormant for a year or more.

And nobody has shown me the professional courtesy of any kind of response or explanation.

I thought they ran a much better operation than that.

Any input/ideas welcome.

Not sure who all you've contacted, but Tom's pretty good about answering emails. Sure you have the right address?

And I'm not sure which high school site you're referring to. Last I checked, they're all either very active or have at least been active within the last month or two.

 

[AndrewPaPreps]

What you've heard on the street is wrong.

Disclosure: I run one of the high school sites, as evidenced by the user name.

We just had a publisher conference in Las Vegas, hosted by Yahoo and with several other sponsors. Close to 200 publishers attended. We're putting forth several initiatives that will strengthen our standing as a network and as individual sites.

There have been some changes, yes, in the location of some people. But the network's core are its site publishers, and none of them work at the headquarters. We have a ton of support at Yahoo, have established several new partnerships, and the goal of the conference was actually to lay out new plans moving forward and to build on the already strong relationship between Yahoo and Rivals. We're trending up, not down.

Seriously, a lot of this stuff is bad blood from those who are competing against Rivals. We're not going anywhere.

Then I stand corrected. I have no dog in this hunt, I was just passing along the water cooler conversation from yesterday.

Understood.

I've just seen comments on several sites, especially on the competitors, and people are running with every rumor. Nine times out of ten, it's best to stay quiet and let the dogs chase their tails, but this is getting ridiculous.

 

[bluejay42]

This couldn't be further from the truth...the Florida State, Texas, Nebraska, Iowa and Clemson sites all just signed big extensions with Rivals.

The only reason Alabama left is because Shannon Terry owned them and the Tuscaloosa News came in and took their place.

The only reason why the Landmark publishing sites left Rivals was their deal was not renewed and it was a unanimous decision by all involved at Rivals the magazine partnership was not needed anymore. All but one of the seven Landmark sites were manned by Rivals people that all still remain with the company.

Not sure why there's been such an effort to start a smear campaign against Rivals, but they remain as strong as ever with new leader Eric Winter taking things over.

 

[Eric Winter]

My name is Eric Winter and I run the Rivals.com business. If you have any questions, or any needs, please email me directly: [email protected]

Not only are we stronger than ever, we just re-signed 12 of our top 20 publisher sites - with the other eight still in long-term deals.

We did close our nashville office, which was the former HQ of rivals.com

As you can imagine, Yahoo! has scores of offices around the world. But the HQ for Yahoo! Sports (and rivals) is in Santa Monica; thus, it made sense to have it all run from here.

Again, please email me directly: [email protected]

Thanks for letting me bend your ears ...

 

[Fran Curci]

People who were working in Nashville ---- where are they working now?

 

[AndrewPaPreps]

People who were working in Nashville ---- where are they working now?

Some will work from home. Others will move to a Yahoo office in Dallas.

 

[Shaggy]

Lots of good answers on this thread, but I think LongTimeListener has the best one.

 

[dooley_womack1]

It does say something about the juice of this board that the head of Rivals felt the need to come here and clarify

 

[black dude with pompano]

I don't work in the Internet game, but I follow it pretty avidly. There's no doubt Rivals has taken some hits with the quick growth of 247, but that's not unexpected.

Everyone knew the old Rivals folks were going to make a splash when their non-compete clause ran out. They do a great job, have signed up some great journalists (yes, real journalists) and have a very nice infrastructure that is rapidly improving (as far as video, databases, etc.)

I would worry more about the Scout/FoxSports folks being the odd folks out if there's any fallout from 247's growth. Scout had a head start in a lot of markets when the team/recruiting sites started exploding a decade ago. But Rivals and now 247 have been the innovative/growth companies since then, while many of the Scout sites are clunky.

EDIT: One more comment: I do think there are some markets where Rivals bet on the wrong horse, so to speak, and is suffering because of it. This battle is going to be waged on a market-by-market basis as much as a national one.

 

[Jake_Taylor]

About the only thing Scout has going for it is that some sites -- the Kansas site and the UNC site to name a couple -- have a large chunk of fans that have been going to their message boards for more than a decade. They can still get good traffic numbers on sites where people read the message boards out of habit, but they get their ass kicked content wise almost everywhere.

 

[BrianGriffin]

I don't work in the Internet game, but I follow it pretty avidly. There's no doubt Rivals has taken some hits with the quick growth of 247, but that's not unexpected.

Everyone knew the old Rivals folks were going to make a splash when their non-compete clause ran out. They do a great job, have signed up some great journalists (yes, real journalists) and have a very nice infrastructure that is rapidly improving (as far as video, databases, etc.)

I would worry more about the Scout/FoxSports folks being the odd folks out if there's any fallout from 247's growth. Scout had a head start in a lot of markets when the team/recruiting sites started exploding a decade ago. But Rivals and now 247 have been the innovative/growth companies since then, while many of the Scout sites are clunky.

EDIT: One more comment: I do think there are some markets where Rivals bet on the wrong horse, so to speak, and is suffering because of it. This battle is going to be waged on a market-by-market basis as much as a national one.

I'll say this: 247 is making everybody else step up their games. I know in my market, Fox is getting aggressive in headhunting for talent to try to win the market (and, in this business, I'm in a competitive market). If that reflects a national trend, then Scout will be fine. We see here that Rivals is regrouping after the initial hit. 247 is hard at it.

It's a competitive business to be in, one that newspapers need to pay attention to. There's a lot to learn, though not necessarily mimic, from one goes on here.

 

[bluejay42]

I don't work in the Internet game, but I follow it pretty avidly. There's no doubt Rivals has taken some hits with the quick growth of 247, but that's not unexpected.

Everyone knew the old Rivals folks were going to make a splash when their non-compete clause ran out. They do a great job, have signed up some great journalists (yes, real journalists) and have a very nice infrastructure that is rapidly improving (as far as video, databases, etc.)

I would worry more about the Scout/FoxSports folks being the odd folks out if there's any fallout from 247's growth. Scout had a head start in a lot of markets when the team/recruiting sites started exploding a decade ago. But Rivals and now 247 have been the innovative/growth companies since then, while many of the Scout sites are clunky.

EDIT: One more comment: I do think there are some markets where Rivals bet on the wrong horse, so to speak, and is suffering because of it. This battle is going to be waged on a market-by-market basis as much as a national one.

I'll say this: 247 is making everybody else step up their games. I know in my market, Fox is getting aggressive in headhunting for talent to try to win the market (and, in this business, I'm in a competitive market). If that reflects a national trend, then Scout will be fine. We see here that Rivals is regrouping after the initial hit. 247 is hard at it.

It's a competitive business to be in, one that newspapers need to pay attention to. There's a lot to learn, though not necessarily mimic, from one goes on here.

Rivals - 220,000 subs
247 - 30,000 subs (several of which have gotten comped for year 1 at Alabama, Kentucky, etc.)

Say what you want, but Rivals is still a long way ahead and I don't see how 247 can get anywhere close to 220,000 subs.

 

[black dude with pompano]

I don't work in the Internet game, but I follow it pretty avidly. There's no doubt Rivals has taken some hits with the quick growth of 247, but that's not unexpected.

Everyone knew the old Rivals folks were going to make a splash when their non-compete clause ran out. They do a great job, have signed up some great journalists (yes, real journalists) and have a very nice infrastructure that is rapidly improving (as far as video, databases, etc.)

I would worry more about the Scout/FoxSports folks being the odd folks out if there's any fallout from 247's growth. Scout had a head start in a lot of markets when the team/recruiting sites started exploding a decade ago. But Rivals and now 247 have been the innovative/growth companies since then, while many of the Scout sites are clunky.

EDIT: One more comment: I do think there are some markets where Rivals bet on the wrong horse, so to speak, and is suffering because of it. This battle is going to be waged on a market-by-market basis as much as a national one.

I'll say this: 247 is making everybody else step up their games. I know in my market, Fox is getting aggressive in headhunting for talent to try to win the market (and, in this business, I'm in a competitive market). If that reflects a national trend, then Scout will be fine. We see here that Rivals is regrouping after the initial hit. 247 is hard at it.

It's a competitive business to be in, one that newspapers need to pay attention to. There's a lot to learn, though not necessarily mimic, from one goes on here.

Rivals - 220,000 subs
247 - 30,000 subs (several of which have gotten comped for year 1 at Alabama, Kentucky, etc.)

Say what you want, but Rivals is still a long way ahead and I don't see how 247 can get anywhere close to 220,000 subs.

Of course, but you're comparing a company that is, what, barely a year old with one that basically created the industry from scratch.

Rivals is going to be fine, whether it's part of Yahoo or independent, but 247 is going to seriously challenge their growth at every step.

 

[JackS]

What you've heard on the street is wrong.

Disclosure: I run one of the high school sites, as evidenced by the user name.

We just had a publisher conference in Las Vegas, hosted by Yahoo and with several other sponsors. Close to 200 publishers attended. We're putting forth several initiatives that will strengthen our standing as a network and as individual sites.

There have been some changes, yes, in the location of some people. But the network's core are its site publishers, and none of them work at the headquarters. We have a ton of support at Yahoo, have established several new partnerships, and the goal of the conference was actually to lay out new plans moving forward and to build on the already strong relationship between Yahoo and Rivals. We're trending up, not down.

Seriously, a lot of this stuff is bad blood from those who are competing against Rivals. We're not going anywhere.

Then I stand corrected. I have no dog in this hunt, I was just passing along the water cooler conversation from yesterday.

Understood.

I've just seen comments on several sites, especially on the competitors, and people are running with every rumor. Nine times out of ten, it's best to stay quiet and let the dogs chase their tails, but this is getting ridiculous.

Did you stay at the Venetian?

Seriously, don't get too confident. I have no idea what's going on these days, but I was at the 2000 conference in Vegas, sat at the head table with Mike Shanahan, got an award and less than a year later was out on my butt when the whole operation was reorganized after the venture capital ran out and a bunch of people split for Scout.com. Doesn't sound too different than this new scenario. At the very least, I can understand the rumors.

 

[Ace]

Another thing, in this day and age, it is not unusual at all to get nothing but crickets chirping when you apply for a job.

In my experience, if you inquire/apply for a job via email or a website, you get a computer-generated response from about 40 percent of companies.

Nothing from most.

That's the way things are these days.