pro-football-reference.com redesign

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by sforman71

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.

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.