pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[U][B]UPDATE:[/B][/U] [I]The owner of PFR weighed in below with more info on the new layout. Turns out I [U]may[/U] have been a bit reactionary. It's not "awful" (sorry about that), but it does need some tweaking till it's as usable as the old version.
[/I]
Anyone seen the new site? It's awful. It takes forever to load, and it's too cluttered now.

[URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/"]Pro-Football-Reference.com - Professional Football Statistics and History[/URL]

I like the new player pages better than the old ones, but it's a pain in the ass to navigate to them.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

The old style was no frills, but it was easy to navigate. Sometimes less is more.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

As a web designer, this makes me cry.

Nifty data model and nice content, but the most godawful interface I've seen in years.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

Yeah I'm noticing some really slow loading times. Hopefully just some bugs they will work through.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=mheisig;395101]As a web designer, this makes me cry.

Nifty data model and nice content, but the most godawful interface I've seen in years.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the feedback.

What issues do you have with the site design specifically? The front page is still going through some design interations, and is probably two or three iterations from a final design. Our challenge is to bring forward the dozens of additions we've made to the site.

Just curious, What comments and changes would you make to these pages?
Sorry, the spam catcher won't let me post links.
The team index, the Redskin index and 1991 team pages, the Art Monk page.

We try to incorporate whatever feedback we can use.

I know that a lot of people liked the simpler preformatted text layout, which is the way I've designed for years. There were a couple of reasons for changing to tables. You can sort the tables very easily. Click any table header and the table sorts. It is more usable for mobile devices and for sight-impaired users as well.

I just don't see that big of a difference between the stats pages on ESPN and PFR.
Is it the green color?

Also, I apologize for the slow load times. Our ad company needs to pick up the pace. We'll get on them about that.

sean

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;395080]I like the new player pages better than the old ones, but it's a pain in the ass to navigate to them.[/QUOTE]

onlydarksets,

What info are you looking for that you are having difficulty finding? What makes them hard to navigate? There is A LOT more data on the pages now, would you like to see some of it removed?

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

First, there is too much info on the main page. The old layout was basically one-click to get to the information you needed. Now you need to find it on the left, then at least 1-2 more clicks to get to it.

Second, it looks like you can't look at year-over-year anymore. The old site let you see, for example, the TD leaders for all years on a single page. Is that still there?

Finally, the search function now looks at the ENTIRE name (including middle). I'd prefer the default search not be that detailed, and then have an advanced search if it doesn't turn up.

Aside from navigation, the pages take FOREVER to load.

On the plus, once you actually find the detail page you need, it seems like there is more data. I like the hover-highlight, too. It's a bit cluttered, though - it would help to have vertical delineations between the types of stats. For example, CP's rushing/receiving stats and then also within the defensive stats:
[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PortCl00.htm]Clinton Portis Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com[/url]

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

OK - I just noticed you can click to dynamically sort on the headers. VERY nice!

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

Is there a feature that lets you compare players by looking at their stats side by side?

Otherwise, really great work with this site overall. The information is invaluable.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;395129]First, there is too much info on the main page. The old layout was basically one-click to get to the information you needed. Now you need to find it on the left, then at least 1-2 more clicks to get to it.

Second, it looks like you can't look at year-over-year anymore. The old site let you see, for example, the TD leaders for all years on a single page. Is that still there?

Finally, the search function now looks at the ENTIRE name (including middle). I'd prefer the default search not be that detailed, and then have an advanced search if it doesn't turn up.

Aside from navigation, the pages take FOREVER to load.

On the plus, once you actually find the detail page you need, it seems like there is more data. I like the hover-highlight, too. It's a bit cluttered, though - it would help to have vertical delineations between the types of stats. For example, CP's rushing/receiving stats and then also within the defensive stats:
[/QUOTE]

The year-over-year leaders have not yet been added to the new site, but I'll bump them up the list.

Almost all of the links that were on the old front page are still on the new front page, just in a different area. For example to get to the Redskins index you go to the standings and click the F.E. in the column next to Redskins.

Positional player indices weren't carried forward (because I didn't realize they were popular), and will be added back.

I apologize for the slowness. It is unacceptable and we'll either get it fixed or remove the ads until our ad company fixes it.

Search had to be beefed up because we now have 40,000 players (up from about 10,000 previously) in the db. Middle names probably don't need to be in there. I'll look at that.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

My original post was reactionary - you've put a lot of effort into creating [U]the[/U] preeminent NFL stats site out there, and the effort is appreciated (I've updated the OP). Still, I think the dual-column format of the main page is confusing, especially since it's really a dual-row/dual-column format (row 1 has the header; row 2 has the historical in column 1 and the current in column 2). It's also confusing that the header layout is different on the home page than on every other page.

I'd prefer to have 3 rows. I just think it would make more sense.[LIST][*]Row 1: header[*]Row 2: current standings[*]Row 3: historical links[/LIST]No worries on the speed - it takes time, and I think most people understand that. That said, I think you have the right idea to yank the ads until the speed issue gets resolved. It's better than losing the clicks for a couple of months because people go elsewhere.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=sforman71;395121]Thanks for the feedback.

What issues do you have with the site design specifically? The front page is still going through some design interations, and is probably two or three iterations from a final design. Our challenge is to bring forward the dozens of additions we've made to the site.

Just curious, What comments and changes would you make to these pages?
Sorry, the spam catcher won't let me post links.
The team index, the Redskin index and 1991 team pages, the Art Monk page.

We try to incorporate whatever feedback we can use.

I know that a lot of people liked the simpler preformatted text layout, which is the way I've designed for years. There were a couple of reasons for changing to tables. You can sort the tables very easily. Click any table header and the table sorts. It is more usable for mobile devices and for sight-impaired users as well.

I just don't see that big of a difference between the stats pages on ESPN and PFR.
Is it the green color?

Also, I apologize for the slow load times. Our ad company needs to pick up the pace. We'll get on them about that.

sean[/QUOTE]

Sean,

Let me just start off by saying it's pretty damn cool that you would actually come here and solicit feedback. That gives you high marks in my book, not that you'd really care. ;)

I don't usually consult for free, but I think it's cool that you'd come here and actively solicit feedback, so I'll throw in my two cents. I'll highlight some of the larger issues and try not to nitpick too much. As something of a side note, I do user interface design for a large media company, so I may be a bit more picky than most given that I do this kind of crap 60+ hours a week.

[B]1. Navigation[/B]
The primary navigation gets completely lost in the shuffle for several reasons: the black background of "Football History" and "2007 NFL Standings" dominates from a color and size perspective and the eye is drawn there first, there is little to no whitespace or negative space separating the elements, and the navigation is not consistent, i.e. it's in one position on the splash page and in another on interior pages. All of this combines to make the main navigation hard to find, difficult to use, and lacking in continuity. If your navigation has the slightest issue you risk losing your users, lose your users and they're going to go somewhere else.

[B]2. Advertising[/B]
The leaderboard ad spot (the 728x90 at the top) really lacks continuity with the rest of the site and is sort of "floating" by itself. It also does not visually align with any other element on the page and breaks the user's natural eye flow.

[B]3. Visual Precedence[/B]
There is really no apparent hierarchy or precedence with respect anything on the page. What should I do first? Click on Players? Sporting News? Football Memorabilia? Should I search because the search button is one of the larger, more colorful elements? If so what am I searching for? Names? Games? Years? All of the above? Essentially there is no implicit direction as to what the user should, would, or could do on the site, as well as there being no explicit direction like "Hey click here to do such-and-such." The user is, by and large, left to figure out what to do by trial and error.

[B]4. Overall Look and Feel[/B]
To be quite honest, my first thought when the site loaded was that something went wrong and a stylesheet got dropped. It just looked to me like something was broken. After refreshing a few times and looking at the code it became obvious that wasn't the case. Please don't take any offense to this as it's purely constructive professional criticism, but visually the site says to me "I haven't been updated since 1997." The colors are pretty bland and flat, the overall layout and architecture is pretty jumbled and the typography is pretty much nonexistent.

[B]5. Whitespace / Negative Space[/B]
Whitespace is just the space that's between everything - it's not necessarily white, so some just call it "negative space." Everything feels very crammed together - there's very little padding at the outer edges, between text and borders, elements and other elements and around the navigation. It makes it difficult for the eye to separate what's important from what's not and it's tiring.

[B]6. Deprecated / Outdated Code[/B]
I just gave it a cursory look, but it appears that you're using tables for presenting data that's not tabular in nature which is a real "no-no" nowadays. You're also using inline CSS which is nice in the moment but a real headache later on when you change things. Also, the semantics are ok in some areas and really lacking in others. Lastly, while it's not really right or wrong, the code changes between uppercase and lowercase with very little consistency. To be quite honest I haven't seen all uppercase HTML in years.

Out of curiosity, what is the backened database built on and what language(s) are you using to present the data?

Sean, I hope none of this comes across as overly negative or harsh. To be quite honest if I didn't care and didn't think you have a pretty cool idea going, I wouldn't have just spent the last 20 minutes typing all of this up.

Like I said earlier, the concept is awesome and the data seems almost unparalleled. The options are really limitless as to what you could do with it. It could really use, in my opinion, a serious ground-up reworking of the visual design and information architecture. The sky's the limit, in my humble opinion.

One last thing: a study by UCLA several years ago found that over 80% of internet users will make a judgment about a companies reputation, reliability and capability based solely on the look and feel of their website, and will do so in a matter of seconds. Basically you can have the coolest features, the best data and niftiest business in the world, but if you can present it well pretty much no one will care to even look. On the flip side, present something that people love to look at and can use easily and at the same time have awesome features and data and you'll have so much traffic that advertisers will stab each other in the back just to get featured on your site.

Like it or not we live in a visual world and people judge what they see.

Hence the reason guys like me have jobs ;)

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

on this page:
[URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PortCl00.htm"]Clinton Portis Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com[/URL]

clinton portis's Y/G are messed up (says 277.3 Ypg in washington and 193ypg in denver, which are at least double the yearly ypg, which, of course, makes absolutely no sense). Same issue with receiving yards. career seems right, but the team breakouts are way off.

not sure if that page is wrong or it applies to other pages, but it seems kinda weird.

btw, i do love your site's info... finding stats on the old guys is soo hard elsewhere.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

It's almost right - it's just not dividing by the number of years.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;395080][U][B]UPDATE:[/B][/U] [I]The owner of PFR weighed in below with more info on the new layout. Turns out I [U]may[/U] have been a bit reactionary. It's not "awful" (sorry about that), but it does need some tweaking till it's as usable as the old version.
[/I]
Anyone seen the new site? It's awful. It takes forever to load, and it's too cluttered now.

[URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/"]Pro-Football-Reference.com - Professional Football Statistics and History[/URL]

I like the new player pages better than the old ones, but it's a pain in the ass to navigate to them.[/QUOTE]

Not sure about the rest of you, but my load times are extremely fast. I do have a fast computer, but I have not had any troubles...I don't mind to new look either.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=mheisig;395209]
Sean, I hope none of this comes across as overly negative or harsh. To be quite honest if I didn't care and didn't think you have a pretty cool idea going, I wouldn't have just spent the last 20 minutes typing all of this up.

Like I said earlier, the concept is awesome and the data seems almost unparalleled. The options are really limitless as to what you could do with it. It could really use, in my opinion, a serious ground-up reworking of the visual design and information architecture. The sky's the limit, in my humble opinion.

One last thing: a study by UCLA several years ago found that over 80% of internet users will make a judgment about a companies reputation, reliability and capability based solely on the look and feel of their website,[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the free advice. Are you referring almost entirely about the front page? If so, that's fine. As I've said elsewhere, the front page is going to be iterative and we'll get it right eventually. Given the amount of time I've spent on the front page, I'm not upset that you feel there are issues.

We've spent a lot more time on the interior pages and will get the front back up to speed soon enough. Most of our traffic actually comes in through search engine referrals to non-front page traffic.

I would be curious if you felt there was a lack of navigation throughout the site. Our sites have been cited in Rosenfeld's books, so I'm concerned that you feel there is a problem there.

The inline css is purely on the front page as that is the only place they're needed and changing them won't be a problem there.

We are using stylesheets everywhere else and no tables on those pages, except for, you know, tables.

I'm guessing the study you are talking about is the Stanford Web Credibility project. I can't post a link since I'm a newbie here.

Do you mean information architecture (folder structure/grouping of pages/linking of one page to the next/workflow, etc) or the front page layout. Would you really group the site pages differently?

We use perl mysql to build the pages. Most everything is static html.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[quote=jsarno;395224]Not sure about the rest of you, but my load times are extremely fast. I do have a fast computer, but I have not had any troubles...I don't mind to new look either.[/quote]

There was initially a problem with the ads taking forever to load (10+ seconds). It does appear to be fixed now.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[quote=sforman71;395121]Thanks for the feedback.

What issues do you have with the site design specifically? The front page is still going through some design interations, and is probably two or three iterations from a final design. Our challenge is to bring forward the dozens of additions we've made to the site.

Just curious, What comments and changes would you make to these pages?
Sorry, the spam catcher won't let me post links.
The team index, the Redskin index and 1991 team pages, the Art Monk page.

We try to incorporate whatever feedback we can use.

I know that a lot of people liked the simpler preformatted text layout, which is the way I've designed for years. There were a couple of reasons for changing to tables. You can sort the tables very easily. Click any table header and the table sorts. It is more usable for mobile devices and for sight-impaired users as well.

I just don't see that big of a difference between the stats pages on ESPN and PFR.
Is it the green color?

Also, I apologize for the slow load times. Our ad company needs to pick up the pace. We'll get on them about that.

sean[/quote]

Thanks for stopping by. Your site is an incredible resource. Keep up the good work!

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=sforman71;395240]Thanks for the free advice. Are you referring almost entirely about the front page? If so, that's fine. As I've said elsewhere, the front page is going to be iterative and we'll get it right eventually. Given the amount of time I've spent on the front page, I'm not upset that you feel there are issues.

We've spent a lot more time on the interior pages and will get the front back up to speed soon enough. Most of our traffic actually comes in through search engine referrals to non-front page traffic.

I would be curious if you felt there was a lack of navigation throughout the site. Our sites have been cited in Rosenfeld's books, so I'm concerned that you feel there is a problem there.

The inline css is purely on the front page as that is the only place they're needed and changing them won't be a problem there.

We are using stylesheets everywhere else and no tables on those pages, except for, you know, tables.

I'm guessing the study you are talking about is the Stanford Web Credibility project. I can't post a link since I'm a newbie here.

Do you mean information architecture (folder structure/grouping of pages/linking of one page to the next/workflow, etc) or the front page layout. Would you really group the site pages differently?

We use perl mysql to build the pages. Most everything is static html.[/QUOTE]

I think there's a bit of a problem if you're essentially viewing the front page and interior pages as almost separate entities. The ultimate goal is to design an interface that's consistent across all pages and allows the user to function identically on any section of the site. Saying that "we'll do it one way here, and a different way there" with respect to an interface is extremely problematic.

Imagine if when you got in your car in the morning and everything was as you expected but when you put the key in the ignition and turned it on, all of a sudden the steering wheel moved 2 feet to the right, the radio was in the roof and the seats moved back a couple of inches. You'd be pretty pissed I would imagine.

I would agree the front page needs a lot more work than the interior pages, though I would still say the interior pages are bland at best.

Getting the global navigation straightened out would be your #1 priority I would think. Fix that and at least people can find their way around regardless of how "pretty" things are. Having the navigation change size and positions from the front page to the interior pages is akin to having the front door handle of your home in a different spot and turn a different direction every time you come home, and then your home builder expecting you to just adjust and enjoy it.

With respect to the information architecture, I've only spent a matter of minutes with your site and I suppose it's entirely possible that the architecture is rock solid but the interface is bad enough that I can't really tell. Not being more familiar with your site, it's hard to say.

I've read some of Rosenfeld's books and they're pretty decent. I'm not sure if he's mentioned this current site design or older ones, but while he is an information architecture pro I would say his grasp of visual design is mediocre at best.

I suppose a lot of this boils down to perception, though I would argue that there are many concrete, well established ideas with respect to visual design and usability. Being a designer I'm going to be pickier and more critical than most. My team just spent the last 18 months redesigning 19 of our sites, 11 of which are currently nominated as finalists for design, architecture and usability categories in their respective media groups. As successful and imitated as our designs have been, I look back now and think to myself, "Man, we can do WAY better than that!"

Have you done any usability testing with focus groups or personas at the very least? Just as a casual anecdote I showed the site to three of my colleagues here at work (with about 45 years of combined design experience) and the general reaction was "Yikes, that's bad." I also showed it to my wife at home (not a professional, more of just a casual user) and her reaction was "That's really boring."

Again, I intend no offense. I suppose a lot of this is really only relevant depending on what your goals are. I personally look at the data you have and think that if you could take an interface that from a design and usability standpoint could put ESPN, NFL, Sportsline and Foxsports all to shame, and put that on top of the current data model and you've got a product that could very well dominate the sports data/statistics world online. Pretty exciting if you ask me.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[quote=mheisig;395275]Imagine if when you got in your car in the morning and everything was as you expected but when you put the key in the ignition and turned it on, all of a sudden the steering wheel moved 2 feet to the right, the radio was in the roof and the seats moved back a couple of inches. You'd be pretty pissed I would imagine.[/quote]

Are you kidding? That would be awesome - I'd have a Transformer!

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;395290]Are you kidding? That would be awesome - I'd have a Transformer![/QUOTE]

Yeah, who am I kidding, it'd be sweet! I forgot to mention that a gatling gun pops up out of the dashboard.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;395113]Yeah I'm noticing some really slow loading times. Hopefully just some bugs they will work through.[/QUOTE]

Nothing can be slower than the new NFL.com. I've got time to make a sandwich going from page to page.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;395364]Nothing can be slower than the new NFL.com. I've got time to make a sandwich going from page to page.[/QUOTE]

Strange. It's pretty quick for me.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[quote=That Guy;395214]on this page:
[URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PortCl00.htm"]Clinton Portis Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com[/URL]

clinton portis's Y/G are messed up (says 277.3 Ypg in washington and 193ypg in denver, which are at least double the yearly ypg, which, of course, makes absolutely no sense). Same issue with receiving yards. career seems right, but the team breakouts are way off.

not sure if that page is wrong or it applies to other pages, but it seems kinda weird.

btw, i do love your site's info... finding stats on the old guys is soo hard elsewhere.[/quote]


just bumping, years not dividing correctly, not fixed as of yet.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=That Guy;395509]just bumping, (yards/games) not dividing correctly for teams, not fixed as of yet.[/QUOTE]

We got that fixed. Thank you for the reminder.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

Looks like the navigation and header got a little reworking too - definitely an improvement.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

looking a lot better. keep it up! ;)

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[quote=mheisig;396159]Looks like the navigation and header got a little reworking too - definitely an improvement.[/quote]

I'll second that - consistency is nice!

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

I love it! keep up the good work.

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

thank goodness for websites like profootball reference.com,there used to be another one up to about a couple yrs ago then it just dissappeared,I think it was called profootball statistics.com,but it was great,I liked it better than any site I've seen. It had the teams logos and what their helmets looked like through the yrs,I wish that site was still around.I cant believe the nfl doesnt have their own website with all the stats,what the hell is wrong with them? and I think elias sports bureau knows everything,they need a website also

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[quote=htownskinfan;397257]thank goodness for websites like profootball reference.com,there used to be another one up to about a couple yrs ago then it just dissappeared,I think it was called profootball statistics.com,but it was great,I liked it better than any site I've seen. It had the teams logos and what their helmets looked like through the yrs,I wish that site was still around.I cant believe the nfl doesnt have their own website with all the stats,what the hell is wrong with them? and I think elias sports bureau knows everything,they need a website also[/quote]

Here's a similar site that has a nice collection of helmets through the years:

[url=http://www.nationalchamps.net/Helmet_Project/]The Helmet Project[/url]

Re: pro-football-reference.com redesign
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;397258]Here's a similar site that has a nice collection of helmets through the years:

[url=http://www.nationalchamps.net/Helmet_Project/]The Helmet Project[/url][/QUOTE]

thanks for the info,but thats not the main reason I liked the other site,that was just one of the aspects of it.From what I remember it had more info and better navigation than profootball reference