BuffaloBill Posted October 20, 2008 Posted October 20, 2008 Personally, I liked the old one better. The new look and structure gives it the feel that the Bills are catering to the media vs. catering to the fans. Not sure why they changed.
Lori Posted October 20, 2008 Posted October 20, 2008 Catering to the media? In what way? I'm genuinely curious as to your perceptions on this ... especially because the password-protected, media-only part of the site didn't get a makeover.
BuffaloBill Posted October 20, 2008 Author Posted October 20, 2008 Catering to the media? In what way? I'm genuinely curious as to your perceptions on this ... especially because the password-protected, media-only part of the site didn't get a makeover. To your point perhaps I should have said - it is much easier to navigate to materials (typically Chris Brown's articles) that seem to be quoted nearly verbatim in the local press. I have no access to the media lounge and was simply trying to look at it from a fan perspective. The new site to me is simply not well laid out.
IDBillzFan Posted October 20, 2008 Posted October 20, 2008 I like the look, but for some reason, it takes a lot long for it to load...particularly the large image at the top of the page. It may be on my end, but nothing else drags like that.
The Cincinnati Kid Posted October 20, 2008 Posted October 20, 2008 Its a league wide format that all the teams will be moving to in the near future. The Bills were selected as the first team to get theirs up and running.
Boomer860 Posted October 20, 2008 Posted October 20, 2008 Looks great ,but because of the large graphics it takes too long to load. most of the other teams sites are the same loaded sites graphics and flash. I would like to see some comments from people who have dialup , I wonder if the page loads at all for them.
mcjeff215 Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Looks great ,but because of the large graphics it takes too long to load. most of the other teams sites are the same loaded sites graphics and flash.I would like to see some comments from people who have dialup , I wonder if the page loads at all for them. I really dislike anything flash. Musician sites are notorious for using it too much. It makes certain parts of a site difficult to bookmark in addition to the load times. I don't like being railroaded into something "interactive." I'm also annoyed with the CNN site as half the links on the front page lead to videos. I want the option of being able to just look at good old fashioned text sometimes, without the whiz-bang flash and movies.
Bleed Bills Blue Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Yes, it's stupid slow, and I hate that. The new look is ok, but I haven't warmed up to the navigation of it yet for some reason...guess I will with time. Nice pix, though. I've also noticed that I can't find the schedules/W-L records for the past few years, as I could before. BTW, what is that gray blob that sometimes loads initially above the players at the top of the page? It looks like the prevailing sky in WNY between November and March, but I think it might be Niagara Falls?
MattyT Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 BTW, what is that gray blob that sometimes loads initially above the players at the top of the page? It looks like the prevailing sky in WNY between November and March, but I think it might be Niagara Falls? I'm pretty sure that it's a close-up of buffalo fur...for some inexplicable reason.
Bleed Bills Blue Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 I'm pretty sure that it's a close-up of buffalo fur...for some inexplicable reason. Yeah, could be, I suppose...the color's wrong, though.
Beerball Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 I like the look, but for some reason, it takes a lot long for it to load...particularly the large image at the top of the page. It may be on my end, but nothing else drags like that. Same thing here, takes forever for the homepage to load. Moving page to page also takes longer for me Also...used to be drop down menus where you could choose a 'sub folder'. For instance, if you hovered over Team the drop down would include coaches, roster, depth chart etc. etc. etc. Now you have to click on Team, wait for the team page to load and then choose the subject. Waste of time (IMO). Not a biggie, but I liked the old depth chart. Now all we have is a list of players. Overall...not impressed with the changes.
Buffalo_soul-dier Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Personally, I liked the old one better. The new look and structure gives it the feel that the Bills are catering to the media vs. catering to the fans. Not sure why they changed. when did fans and the media become mutually exclusive?
The Dean Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 While I'm not impressed with the new site, the old one was terrible. The media content (as was mentioned) is front and center, in the new site. The top navigation tools are horrible, but at least there is almost a mini site-map on the bottom of the front page that helps with navigation.
aussiew Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 I like the new layout. But I hope they hurry up with the Bills Bars locations. No one else has a listing like that one and it has been a wonderful tool for people who have to be out of town on game day.
Lori Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 I like the look, but for some reason, it takes a lot long for it to load...particularly the large image at the top of the page. It may be on my end, but nothing else drags like that. Give me a non-Flash version every time, please and thank you. And to be honest, I'm kind of glad they didn't feel the need to "improve" the media site ... ... yet ...
The Dean Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Give me a non-Flash version every time, please and thank you. And to be honest, I'm kind of glad they didn't feel the need to "improve" the media site ... ... yet ... Flash is great...in its place. But, that place is very limited, IMO.
bowery4 Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 in safari on a mac nothing shows up on the right hand part of the page after it is loaded (which yeah takes too loong) when you try to expand the window to a bigger size. WTF?
jarthur31 Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 I hate sites that don't adhere to open source standards. In this day and age it's utterly stupid to cater to a browser the US Government has deemed a huge security risk. The new site wasn't loading properly with Firefox and still has its bugs this day. At first, it was the videos that wouldn't even start. I didn't have these problems with the other site using Firefox so it can't be my browser as I didn't change any settings. But I do like the new look because it holds alot more info and links on the home page whereas in the old version everything was cramped because they needed to cram in all those ads in there.
KRC Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 It doesn't work in my browser. Seriously, do they actually test these things on multiple platforms before deployment? How can you not do that? It is standard programming practice.
JimmyPage Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Personally, I liked the old one better. The new look and structure gives it the feel that the Bills are catering to the media vs. catering to the fans. Not sure why they changed. I don't know. I don't go there and don't intend to. Is there any reason to visit the Bills site?
Recommended Posts