Talk:Roy Shivers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
football Roy Shivers is part of WikiProject College football, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to college football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.See comments
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is part of WikiProject National Football League, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Hawaiʻi, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Hawaiʻi. Please participate by editing the article Roy Shivers, or visit the project page for more details.
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritising and managing its workload.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale.
After rating the article, please provide a short summary to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses. To add the summary, please edit this article's ratings summary page.
WikiProject Hawaii priority open tasks:


This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] See comments
This article is supported by the Sports and games work group.

Edit 1: Saying a citation is needed to show that many of the players Roy brought to Saskatchewan were recruited from his free agent camps in the Southern US is just being nit picky. There is no difinative list of players Roy recruited via his free agent tryout camps available everywhere. Rather, this information is available through many differant Regina Leader-Post articles as well as Riderville.com chats with Roy Shivers and Danny Barrett. As the Leader-Post does not archive beyond 30 days and Riderville.com material is not available to the non-paying public, citations are not available. That does not mean the information is inaccurate. The person making these edits knows full well that Shivers recruited many players through these tryout camps, but he is simply adding a "citation needed" mark to something that he knows has no citation available online simply to cast doubt because he is biased. This goes directly to the NPOV policy. The "citeation needed" mark has been removed. Edit 2: DerekDD added a sentance regarding the 2002 team making the playoffs for the first time since 1997: "However, it was the Riders' strong defensive improvement that was the main catalyst in this regard." This again violates the NPOV policy. The Riders' 2001 defence ranked 3rd for points against allowing 21.4 points per game [1] while the Riders' 2002 defence were again ranked 3rd for points against allowing 21.2 points per game [2]. There is virtually no differance between the Riders' defensive production in 2001 and 2002. All that the sentance does is try and marginalize the importance of the acquisition of quarterback Nealon Greene because the user who made the edit is biased. On the flip side, the Roughriders' offense went from scoring the least amount of points in 2001 at 289 points and the second lowest time of posession [3] to scoring the 3rd least amount of points in 2002 at 401 points and the second best time of posession [4]. The stats conclusively show that it was the offensive production that improved, not the defence, and as the only major player addition in 2002 from 2001 was Nealon Greene, the assertion that he was the spark that got the Riders in the playoffs for the first time since 1997 is valid. I reverted the edit back to the way it was. Edit 3: I already provided the citation showing the Riders were out of debt. DerekDD took it out; I'm putting it back. Edit 4: I again took out the part regarding the crossover rule. It is being used to influence how the fact that the Riders made the playoffs 4 times in a row is perceived, and it is being used to create a negative perception. This is a biographical piece, not an editorial. The relevant fact is that the Roughriders made the playoffs 4 times in a row. Making the playoffs via the crossover rule is just as valid of a way to make the playoffs as any other way. Edit 5: I removed all the stuff talking about players entering in to their option year or outright free agency from the "Controversy and a Mixed Record." If it's relevant, it belongs in the section dealing with Roy's firing. Edit 6: I removed the "citation needed" tag from the part about the Riders offering Henry the richest contract in team history. This was revealed numerous times in the Leader-Post at the time the negotiations between the Riders and Burris were taking place. Again, the Leader-Post does not archive past 30 days. --Roughriderfan 04:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] The Following Are All From the Comments Page Reproduced Here, Including What Roughriderfan Calls Marty York, a Columnist

This article has retracted key quotes from Shivers, and doesn't detail what lead to his being fired, the Henry Burris situation properly, etc etc.

The only alleged quote from Shivers that was retracted was the alleged quote from the metronews website where the alleged quote has Shivers saying he is the best GM in CFL history. This quote was in a Marty York article, a proven liar and rumor mongerer. You should know better. Any time Roy ever says anything remotely controversial, it is quoted in various media outlets from coast to coast. Yet somehow the only source of a quote where Shivers allegedly proclaims himself "greatest GM in the history of the CFL" is Marty York. Unless you can provide an alternate source with that quote, the authenticity of the quote as it exists on the metro news website is more than questionable. Secondly, your version of the Henry Burris situation is what wasn't proper. I simply put in the correct account of what happened. -Roughriderfan.

Further edits. I find it interesting that a citation is needed to show that the Riders eliminated their 3 million dollar debt while you would post that many players chafed under Roy's scrutiny. There is no way you could possibly substanciate that. I didn't even bother with a "citation needed" remark. There is no citation in existance for that. The Riders' record under Shivers of signing key players to contract extensions speaks for itself. The successes far outnumber the failures. This indicates a good relationship between Roy and his players. Also, I edited out the part about saying the Riders had to resort to the crossover rule in 2 of their 4 playoff appearances. That goes directly to neutrality. In other words, you are clearly not being neutral. The crossover rule is just as valid a way of making the playoffs as finishing 1st, 2nd or 3rd is. This is a biographical piece. Not a playground for you to push your bias. It doesn't matter that you think the crossover is a bad way to make the playoffs. There are no asterixes next to teams that make the playoffs via the crossover rule. Fact: the Riders have made the playoffs the last 4 years. -Roughriderfan.


[edit] Cite Your Sources, Roughriderfan

I cite ALL my sources in the changes and every one of them is important in determing the general managership of Roy Shivers: why the Board of Directors fired Shivers, the status of free agents (13 unsigned, 30 in option year in 2007), the fact we are presently overbudget for next years salary cap, the crossover playoff rule and how its a recent introduction into the CFL(this is important because you compared our previous playoff drought to us making the playoffs the last four seasons; this is correct but your bias allows you to omit the change in playoff format. I find this important as we would have MISSED the playoffs two of those four years if there were no crossover). You say Shivers' successes outnumber his failures regarding player resignings yet you fail to address this issue of 13 impending free-agents unsigned for next year, as well as the 30 going into their option years. No action is taking place on these yet you casually pass over this fact that I SOURCE. Also, your previous mentioning of Shivers wiping out our team debt? Yes we were in the hole and I left that in, but you imply Shivers financial acumen was responsible for the wiping off of this debt? Funny how you omit the two most important factors; the revenue generated from our hosting the Grey Cup, and the forgiven loan by the Sask. Provincial government. Why no mention of these? I mention them and source them. You have yet to cite your sources. Please do. Cite them and those citations will be removed.

User:DerekDD 21:21, 24 August 2006


Almost every source you "cite" leads to a blank page! My point about contract extensions is SOURCED, about the 13 impending free agents and 30 players in their option years not being signed yet for 2007. If you take that key point out, a point of contention between Shivers and the Rider organization (which is SOURCED), it will be article vandalism.

Compare this to your sourcing of the contracts being signed:

[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]

All the above lead to BLANK PAGES with no information. Source that please and I will leave your point about him being respected by players leading to contract extensions. And quit removing things I can back up with actual sources, not blank pages. If you have other reasons why you think Shivers was fired, source them and add to the article. Don't subtract things you don't like that are an actual reality and can be backed up with sources.

DerekDD 01:06, 25 August 2006


[edit] Player Status Going in to 2007 Irrelevant

The typical contract length in the CFL is a 1 year and an option contract, which means in any given year most teams will have many players in the option year of their contract. Just because you can cite that 30 players are in their option year next year does not make that fact relevant. Unless you can demonstrate that that is way out of the ordinary for a CFL team, I do not see the relevance. The option year only allows players the opportunity to check out the NFL. 5 years ago when these players were much younger and with more players trying the NFL on even the slightest chance, the Riders having 30 players going in to their option year would worry me. Given the average age of the players on this team and the trend of players NOT signing in the NFL unless they get a respectable signing bonus, I'm not sure how relevant it is that we have 30 players going in to their option year. You contradict all that by pointing out the Riders need to cut salary to get under $3.8 million. Every team not named the Winnipeg Blue Bombers is going to need to cut salary to get under $3.8 million. If the Riders need to cut salary, why all this fuss about the number of free agents next year? This is a time of transition. All throughout the league, veterans will either be taking pay cuts or they will be released. There will be a huge free agency pool, and it will be a buyer's market, and these free agent veterans will have to either sign for less or retire. Besides, you did not put the part about free agent players and option year players in the section regarding the firing of Roy. Put that stuff in that section. And do not lecture me about removing things I don't like. Your attempt at minimalizing Nealon Greene's importance in the team reaching the playoffs in 2002 screams of bias. Check the stats: the Riders' defence in 2002 was virtually identical in production as the defence was in 2001. To suggest that the differance between being an uncompetitive non-playoff team in 2001 and being a competitive playoff team in 2002 was down to a defence that really didn't improve or change from 2001 to 2002 is bias, plain and simple. I suggest you go back and read the first version of this article before I showed up to inject some perspective and neutraility and then reconsider whether or not you should be lecturing people about their neutrality.


Roughriderfan 17:44, 25 August 2006


[edit] Edits by DerekDD trying to create a certain perception rather than sticking to facts

DerekDD, it is obvious you don't like Roy Shivers. That doesn't matter, though. Your edits are biased and are trying to push an opinion. This is supposed to be a biographical piece. For example, you use Henry Burris as a tool to create this negative perception. You remove all commentary from me offering a balanced perspective of the situation. Then you start talking about what the fans think. First of all, you cannot possibly quantify what the fans think. You say that many blamed coaching and others blamed Roy. You know, there ARE a lot of fans that don't look to put blame on anybody. Sometimes things happen that are outside of your control. Henry taking the bigger better deal in Calgary is one of those things, and that had a direct impace on the Riders' 2005 season. In any case, you CANNOT QUANTIFY YOUR STATEMENTS. No scientific poll has been done to find out where the Rider fan base stands, so stop with this "many fans think this" and "many fans think that" stuff. Calgary's speed of improvement is also irrelevant. This is a biographical piece on Roy Shivers. Calgary's record is not relevant. The Trevis Smith situation is also irrelevant in the context you used. The decision to do nothing about Smith until charges were laid was not Roy's decision alone. The entire upper hierarchy of the team was involved. It was a collaberative decision that was made after the team talked to the league and also talked to lawyers.


Roughriderfan 19:06, 29 August 2006


[edit] Source Your Additions Properly For the Last Time and Don't Let Your Bias Subtract Info THAT IS SOURCED That You Don't Like, Roughriderfan

Mine is the balanced piece. Almost all your "sources" either lead to BLANK PAGES, or you complain that "the papers don't archive after 30 days," or worse yet, "you had a conversation with Roy Shivers or Danny Barrett." Thats great that you talk to them, but its not a credible source, RF. Whining about a lack of archiving from the Leader-Post doesn't cut it either. I have warned you about your lack of sourcing 3 times now. Have you even attempted to go to the links you posted about "Shivers being respected by his players so they are re-signing with the Riders"? They lead to pages WITH NO INFORMATION. Not only that, but when I quote, AGAIN FROM ACTUAL SOURCES, not supposed "conversations" you had with Danny Barret or Roy Shivers (which you actually admit to as being your sources and cannot be substantiated), about the number of free agents NOT signed for next year, you remove it. The board had a big problem with this; quotes abound in many papers and I use them. You remove everything that isn't fitting into your world view about Shivers. Its blatantly obvious. Not only that, but you'd better cool your rhethoric. What you say about York is slanderous and will get you banned on Wikipedia, calling him a "known liar." Prove it.

Your view on Shivers being responsible for eliminating the crushing Rider debt is silly. The two main factors in this where when we hosted the Grey Cup and the Provincial governments forgiveness of the Rider debt. I sourced that. You didn't. You merely said we were in debt and Shivers got us out of debt. If I would have left that nonsense as it were, someone reading the article after you left it would conclude it was Shivers' doing. I quote the fact that the Riders will be way over the salary cap for next year (more than almost every other team as we are in the top 3 for team salaries), you simply REMOVE THAT SOURCED INFORMATION due to your bias. You don't view that as important? The media covering the Riders sure do. Its in all the papers. I quote them. I give credit to Shivers for taking us past the horrible level we were at before, but its not enough for you when I put balance to the situation. Get a clue; his over-all record was below .500........that is mediocre by any sports organization's standards and that is a major reason why he was fired as the team stagnated and couldn't move past a certain level. This was quoted and sourced once again. Ever hear of Jim Hopson, Shivers' boss? Those exact words came out of his mouth. You pretend that the Rider brass or Rider fans don't compare their own situation in waiting for a consistent winner from Shivers to other teams that vault past us within 2 years? Give me a break. Those words are in the papers. Hopson even used the phrase, "we've stagnated." I include that into the framework of why Shivers was fired, but you don't like it, so you remove it because it doesn't fit into your world view. Truth be damned. It doesn't matter that Hopson is the President and CEO of the Riders to you. If its something you don't like, it goes. Haven't you heard about the necessity to acquire a home playoff game (lots of extra revenue) and that Shivers failed to deliver this in 6.5 years? Its right there in the papers. Hopson set that as a goal.

Everything you have made points on, like say Nealon Greene helping the team to the playoffs versus the defense that year, that gets corrected. Good job on that. Thats what you are supposed to do. You backed up what you say with facts on that point. I actually learned from that fact about Greene and what he did that year. Where you go wrong and are KNOWINGLY BIASED is for instance, the Trevis Smith and Kenton Keith incidents. You are gallingly biased especially when it comes to Trevis Smith. This was a hugely embarrassing moment for in Riders' history under Shivers tenure as GM. You realize how many editorials were written on this so don't act as if you don't know. If you READ CAREFULLY, I take a neutral position on this key point. Yet you still remove it because, depending how you look at it, it may reflect badly somewhat on Shivers. The truth is, you don't want even want this incident that made NATIONAL HEADLINES acknowleged due to your own bias. Like it or not, it stays in as it was a major happening in Riderland while Shivers was general manager. And its sourced. So don't talk to me about bias. When you make a reasonable and sourced point, it stays in.

DerekDD 16:05, 29 August 2006

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/o/y/Talk%7ERoy_Shivers_bcde.html"