Major League Blogging: Relegation Edition
So it's time to address the 2008 Major League Blogging Credibility Table. With Amado Guevara having finally landed in Toronto, let's recap what some people had to say about it. SBI 1st reported on this back on March 18th. Then Soccer Insider and it's "reliable sources" put the brake's on it. Toronto's On Soccer blog said a lot without saying anything at all. And MLS Rumors, citing someone they heard on the radio, said it wouldn't happen.
Now player negotiations are always fluid, but I would be remiss if I didn't award points to SBI for sticking to their guns on this one. At the other end of the spectrum, MLS Rumors and Soccer Insider said the whole thing was a wash so they get nothing on this one points-wise, and Soccer Insider will lose a little something in the Power Rankings.
As for MLS Rumors I think the right thing to do here is to relegate them. This is a decision not taken lightly. An effort was made toward giving them a chance to run with the big boys that they un-humbly made a point of equating themselves with (using a chart full of dubious traffic figures), but at the end of the day when positioned alongside the competition they really are a bit out of their depth. Additionally, they seemed to express some trepidation about their major league status.
Another blog, Sideline Views, also expressed something bordering on disdain for the Cred Table. They're seeking credit for being the the 1st one's out their with Carlos Ruiz's injury. Problem is they want credit for a misdiagnoses; they said the injury was "a right medial collateral ligament sprain" but his surgery was for "tear of the meniscus in his right knee". Now Ray Charles could have seen that his injury was serious and would lead to some bench time so the question is "is writing that enough to give them credit for being the 1st to report?" Personally I think you have to get the injury right, but I will call it a draw and give them 1 point.
Anyway they, along with MLS Rumors, imply that they're not about breaking stories, but then both point out instances where they were the 1st to present some bit of information. It's a puzzling response which leaves the impression that some people are quite serious about playing reporter until someone suggests there may be potential flaws in it; you can't have your cake and eat it to.
And speaking of flaws I will be the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and last person to admit that the Credibility Table --and this blog for that matter-- is flawed. How does everyone feel about a change in formats to the 2008 Major League Blogging Relevance Power Rankings? Or are you opposed on the grounds that the name is just damned unwieldy?
Lastly, the Table is not here to hurt anyone so please don't take it --or me-- too seriously. You'll only end up disappointed.