Talk:Brodie Croyle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Brodie Croyle has been listed as one of the Everyday life good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
March 7, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has an assessment summary page.

Contents

[edit] Early discussions

Article probably still needs to be cleaned up a good bit, but it's much better than it was. It mainly had material regarding his injuries. Also it contained statements like this -- "Having expended his redshirt season sitting out previous injuries, it appeared as though Croyle's career might have been finished, but the NCAA decided to grant him an extra year of eligibility because of his injuries." -- No! Not true! This sentence makes three different assertions, each of which is untrue.

Whoops, my bad. I confused him with Jason White, for which I ought to get whacked on the head with a herring. Still, there was no need to delete everything. Sometime very, very soon I'll try to integrate the old content with the new. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 06:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
How do you like it now? Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 06:20, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
It was an uniformative article that only stressed his injuries. The revisions were necessary.

"He declared for the 2006 NFL Draft with high hopes of an early selection. On April 29, 2006, the Chiefs drafted Croyle in the third round." What does that have to do with his collegiate career? No idea why the format was reverted. Can anyone elaborate on which classes he took in college or anything about his grammar school?

Good point--I made a new section for the draft bit. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 06:54, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Sorry. Think I may have reverted that by mistake. Thanks for fixing it again.

Maybe someone should add that his dad owns the high school he went to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.90.70.241 (talk) 15:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Brodie was actually born in Gadsden, Alabama. I know, I was born there too. There are only two hospitals in Etowah County, both of which are located in Gadsden. He was either born at Baptist Hospital (now Gadsden Regional) or Holy Name of Jesus Hospital (now Riverview Regional). There is a difference in hometown and city of birth. Brodie's hometown is Rainbow City, a municipality that is right next to the city of Gadsden, but even his actual home wasn't located in the city limits of anything. I've actually been to his house and the Big Oak Boys Ranch. I don't care what his KC Chiefs bio says. Do some more research before changing his birth city. I suggested to someone to just ask Brodie where he was born. How about we put "city of birth" as well as "hometown?"Atlantabravz (talk) 14:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

As an update, I contacted the Big Oak Boys Ranch. The Executive Secretary asked Brodie's father where Brodie was born. John stated that Brodie was born at the Baptist Hospital in Gadsden, now known as Gadsden Regional Medical Center. Brodie claims Rainbow City as his hometown, but Rainbow City has no hospitals and is pretty much an extension of Gadsden.Atlantabravz (talk) 21:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shula criticism

"Shula received a lot of criticism for leaving his star QB in the game with a large lead, being accused of running up the score" -- While Shula did receive some criticism from college football pundits who always need something to talk about, most experts (including current and former coaches) agree that the criticism was misplaced. Croyle was injured on the first drive of the second half. No coach pulls their QB that early, even with a 31-0 lead. Additionally, Shula exlained that Croyle needed to more game time to work with his young freshman receivers. Also, the criticism wasn't for 'running up the score' it was having the starting QB in the game, thus making him more susceptible to injury.

This whole subject has no business being in this article. The only fact that needs to be stated is that Croyle hurt himself. This is not an appropriate location for opinions or criticisms of Mike Shula. 24.22.9.195 00:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
It kind of is, however. The first time that many Americans outside the South heard of Croyle was when he was injured and the national media hounded Shula for running up the score. It was Croyle's main claim to fame until the 2005 season, when he finally came into his own. It's relevant because it shows how he became known to most people. I'll put it back shortly unless you can come up with a better reason, but I'll leave it out for now, alright? Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 05:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I never heard of the controvery and I follow Alabama football very closely (albeit it from far away). The bottom line is it is a matter of opinion, a very minor event and doesn't belong in an encylopedia article. It's about as silly as listing everyone's opinion of his play in every game. 24.22.9.195 00:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Matt - It obviously is a matter of opinion, because so many people disagree with you. I also follow Alabama football closely, and I am familiar with some of the criticism Shula received from a small minority of football pundits. I am also familiar with the majority of football pundits that turned around and told those panty-waist jock sniffers to shut up because they didn't know what they were talking about. Your personal opinion of the incident is irrelevant to the article.
So, my thinking it matters is irrelevant, but your "close following of Alabama football" means that the claims of several "pansy-waist jock sniffers" are irrelevant? Do you see how your argument isn't very convincing? I don't want to be rude or scare you--just trying to explain why I'm unconvinced. I would like to see one link--just one--of a major or semi-major sports website (something on the level of CFBNews.com, SI.com, etc.) who said "Sure, leaving in your star quarterback when you're up by five scores against a team that doesn't even belong on the same field as you is a good idea!" or something of the sort. Please? Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 00:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and could you do me a favor from now on? Please sign your posts with ~~~~ from now on--it makes it easier to tell who exactly is talking. Thanks! Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 00:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
This site is not Sports Illustrated or CF News. Those are news sites that are full of analysis and opinion. This is an encylopedia and the standards are much different, notably it is a site for facts, not opinion. These comments have been posted by 2 different people. I need to create an account... 24.22.9.195 00:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Matt - What you're not understanding is the game of football. Rarely, rarely, rarely do coaches pull their starters at halftime if the team has a big lead. It has nothing to do with wanting to score more points or to prove a point. It has to do with keeping up the momentum into the second half and then turning it over to the second and third stringer. Every single team does it. I see from your profile that you are a WSU fan. I guarantee you that WSU has done this before. As a matter of fact, in the 2005 Nevada game, WSU was ahead by 27 points at halftime, yet starter Alex Brink returned after halftime to start the second half. It wasn't until midway through the 3rd quarter until WSU pulled Brink from the game. A second example - WSU v. Grambling in 2005. WSU continued to keep Alex Brink in the game into the 4th quarter with a 27 point lead. Third example - WSU v. Idaho 2004. Starter Josh Swogger returns in 3rd quarter with a 28 point lead. Fourth example - WSU v. Oregon in 2003. WSU has a 45-16 point lead going into 4th quarter, yet starter Matt Kegel continues to play. 68.221.193.76 02:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, this is not SI or CFBNews. You see, when I read something by someone who works there, I can rest assured that the person there at least knows what they're talking about--because someone is signing their paycheck. On Wikipedia talk pages? Participants don't have that credibility. So, get a credible reference, and your argument will be taken much, much more seriously. See WP:V for a bit more info, if you are so inclined. (By the way, the opinions of notable commentators is frequently considered notable. See Public perception and assessments of George W. Bush for a good example.) Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 00:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Sports media is not always informed. I would say, the better thing to do, is to go look at the box scores of various football games to see what the trend is among college football coaches with regard to keeping starters in past halftime in games with blowout scores. If you do this, you will see that your belief/theory holds no water. See the WSU examples above 68.221.193.76
The George Bush article you mention is for "perception and assessments". I don't see the need for it, but if you want to start a branch for assessments of Brodie Croyle, go ahead. 24.22.9.195 05:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Here are some more examples - AU v. Ball State in 2005. AU leads 42-3. Starting QB Brandon Cox remains in the game until the end of the 3rd quarter.
USC v. WSU in 2005. USC up 38-6 at half. Leinart and Bush return to play in the 3rd quarter.
USC v. UCLA in 2005. UCLA up 52-6 going into the 4th quarter. Leinart still in the game. He's finally taken out when USC gets the extra security of one more TD.
Florida v. UK in 2005. Florida is leading 49-14 at the half, yet QB Chris Leak started the 3rd quarter. He was later pulled in the 3rd, but Urban Meyer put him back in during the 4th.
This may not satisfy you, but it's the truth: just because it's commonplace doesn't mean it isn't running up the score. USC was notorious on the West Coast for doing so, by the by. Washington State did it a few times, too, and if Brink had gotten himself injured against Grambling, I absolutely guarantee that coach Doba would have gotten killed in the local media because of it. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 05:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
These are just some examples. I could put dozens more in here. It's not just 'commonplace' meaning there are a few examples out there. It's what every team does. Even in blow out games, every single football team plays their starters after half time. Go look at the box scores for any football team. The reason why coaches do it has nothing to do with running up the score. This has been explained to you over and over by more people than just me. Your definition of 'running up the score' seems to differ from what everyone else sees as running up the score. 68.221.193.76 12:26, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Running up the score ought to be clear to everyone. As it doesn't appear to be clear here, I'll concede. Your civility and patience have been appreciated. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 23:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2003 record

'Bama went 4-9 in 2003, not 4-7 as listed; correct.

[edit] NFL career

I removed this line "He declared for the 2006 NFL Draft with high hopes of an early selection. ". Every player entering the draft hopes for an early selection so it's not needed. 05:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Full Name

I went ahead and put his full name at the top as just his middle and last didnt seem sufficient, not everyone realizes he and his father share first names.Timeran 18:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot (talk) 18:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA nominee

I just nominated this article. Hopefully I cleaned up enough of it. Plenty of references, but yes, no picture. There previously was a picture, but it was deleted. conman33 (. . .talk) 20:11, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Found picture.conman33 (. . .talk) 20:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Cool. I would review it but it'd look weird cuz I'm part of the chiefs wikiproject. RC-0722 communicator/kills 16:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, we need somebody from outside the WikiProject to review the article. conman33 (. . .talk) 05:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately... RC-0722 communicator/kills 16:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A few suggestions...

This is not a Good Article review, as I wouldn't be able to guarantee that I would have time to complete the review. I did look it over quickly today, though, and I saw a few things that would come up as problems during a GA review. In order to help speed up the process, I thought I'd mention them now so that you can get a start on them:

  1. The lead is too short. For an article that is approximately 30 KB, the lead should be at least two decent paragraphs. In addition, the lead should summarize all of the key points of the article. It currently does not mention anything about Croyle's NFL career. See Wikipedia:Lead section for more information.
  2. References must be placed after punctuation. There are several placed in the article in which references are included in the middle of the sentence without punctuation (it is okay if it comes after a comma, but these do not). References should also come immediately after punctuation with no space in between. For an example of what I mean, if you look at the second paragraph of the "Early career" section, there is a space between the period at the end of the first sentence, and there is a reference in the middle of the second sentence.
  3. If two or more references are used in the same location, they should be in numerical order. For example, the references at the end of the "Early career" section should be switched so that 4 comes before 6.
  4. The article is lacking references in quite a few locations. In the "Collegiate career" section, there are no references in the third, fourth or fifth paragraphs. In other paragraphs, some sentences need references added (eg. the end of the "2006" paragraph, the score of the December 9, 2007 game, etc.).
  5. Two of the references don't have access dates listed (Croyle's biography at KCChiefs.com and Croyle's biography at NFL.com).
  6. For the quotation in the box, there should not be an apostrophe at the end of Chiefs, and the reference number should probably not be italicized (in fact, perhaps only the quotation itself should be italicized...I don't honestly know what the guideline is).
  7. This one isn't a big deal, but there are a few redirects in the "Professional career" statistic box. For example, Wonderlic redirects to Wonderlic Test. It makes for a nicer article if the wikilinks are correct.
  8. Where it says "Career Statistics at Alabama" (just before the "Professional career" section), the title of the table ("Career Statistics at Alabama") should stand out more. Perhaps the words should be bold, and I would recommend a colon after "Alabama.")

I hope this helps. Best wishes for your GA review. GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

GA review (see here for criteria)

Needs some prose tweaking and some MOS issues. Also I have concerns about the photograph.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    I've tried to detail the spots I think need work on the prose below.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    A couple of places need source citations.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

I know this looks like a LONG list. However, I looked on the nominators user page and in their contributions, and didn't see that they had done an Good Articles before, so I am going into more detail that usual in order to hopefully help out with understanding what goes into a Good Article. The article itself is pretty good, needs expansion in the lead section and some prose tweaks.

Details:

  • The lead section of the article is way too short for the length of the article. Wikipedia:Lead section suggests that an article of this size have two or three paragraphs in the lead. They should summarize the article. I find it helpful to put a sentence or two from each section, or long paragraph.
  • Another problem with the article is that a lot of the paragraphs are short one or two sentence paragraphs. This gives the prose a very choppy feel, and makes it hard to read. Consider consolidating a number of the paragraphs into longer paragraphs.
  • Abbreviations. WCA, LSU and FSU are abbreviated, when they should be spelled out on the first appearance with the abbreviation in ()'s so the reader knows what the abbreviation means. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Acronyms and abbreviations for more information.
  • Be consistent in your formatting of footnotes. The footnote goes directly after the punctuation, not with a space between. See Wikipedia:Citing sources#Footnotes for details.
  • Change the Career statistics at Alabama to a table to match the rest of the article.
  • Dates. You link some single years, but not others. You link a few dates, but not others. Per Wikipedia:DATE, you need to be consistent. I prefer to link dates because I like to use the autoformat feature, but it is important to be consistent within the article.
  • The article presumes a knowledge of american football that isn't necessarily going to be present in every reader. Especially noticeable in the college section, where you assume folks will know that Seminoles means FSU, the Crimson Tide refers to Alabama University, etc.
  • Try to avoid putting a lot of information in ()'s. Parenthetical remarks interrupt the flow of the prose. It is better to integrate the information into the main text or if it is very off topic, put it in a footnote. Thus, as an example, the high school records could be phrased as "When he graduated, he held Alabama high school records for passing yards in a career with 9323 and for most touchdowns with 105." Other places in the article could benefit from this also.
  • Early years section, second paragraph, second sentence. I assume that footnote four is for the records? It should be at the end of the sentence, since the source also states the amounts of the records.
  • Early years section, last paragraph, the second sentence is awkward, consider rewording to "His high school career ended abruptly in..."
  • Collegiate career section, first paragraph. The second sentence is a run on. Consider changing to something like "Croyle leaned towards playing college football for the Florida State Univeristy Seminoles, in part because of the defensive coordinator there, Mark Richt. On the night before he was going to announce his decision to play for the Seminoles, however, he changed his mind and decided to attend and play for the University of Alabama Crimson Tide instead."
  • Same section and paragraph. Top-flight universities is an opinion, and should either be struck or quoted from some outside source.
  • Same section, second paragraph, last sentence is awkward, consider rewording.
  • The third, fourth and fifth paragraphs of the Collegiate career section are unsourced, and as they deal with living people, they need some sort of citation, especially for the fact that Price was dismissed for off the field conduct. Another problem is that "most memorable passess" is an opinion and needs to be sourced to someone.
  • Need a citation for the MVP award at the Cotton Bowl and the Walter Camp and SEC players of the week awards.
  • Professional career - consider naming the sections "2006 season" "2007 season" "2008 season" so they are not so stubby. This isn't something you must do for the GA status, it's my personal opinion that stubby headings are ugly.
  • Professional career, 2006 subsection, need a citation for the last sentence, as it's an opinion that he preferred the number 12. Also consider expanding this section a bit. It might best to combine some of the information about the draft and the combine in with this section.
  • Same section, 2007 subsection. "the Chiefs were noticeabley becoming a younger squad" is opinion and should have a source for the information. Best would be to directly quote some NFL pundit for the information.
  • Some of the phrasing in the 2007 section is awkward. Examples include "...Green had stated that he was ...", "Huard, who had the second-best passer rating in the 2006 NFL season, only behind the Super Bowl-winning Peyton Manning...", "Croyle's game-ending drive made him 6 for 13 for 83...", "...and Damon Huard, whom was the only active QB on the Chiefs' roster..."
  • Same section and subsection, second paragraph, "Croyle apparently played himself out of contention ... " is opinion and needs some sort of citation for it. As above, best would be to find a reporter or some such pundit to quote directly.
  • Same section and subsection and paragraph, I'm assuming that the big opportunity Croyle got was still in a preason game against New Orleans? Might make that explicit.
  • Same section and subsection, fifth paragraph, first sentence. the sentence leaves you hanging ... "in a 13-10." Was it a win or a loss?
  • Same section, subsection, and paragraph. Consider dropping the "Blackledge was drafted in 1983." sentence as it adds nothing to the information about Croyle.
  • Consider wikilinking Arrowhead Stadium.
  • Need a source for "Kansas City was blown out by Denver by a score of 41-7. Alternatively, you can drop the "blown out" which is opinion, and leave the straight fact which probably wouldnt' be challenged.
  • Personal life, consider combing all this information into one paragraph, and combining the first four sentences into fewer to improve the prose flow.
  • The picture. I'm not sure on the legalities of using NFL game shots, honestly. Doesn't the NFL have rules on the use of their game images? I suggest checking those out before you release a photo of an NFL game under a copyright free license, as the NFL may have rights to the photo. This is from a professional photographer, although I do NOT shoot NFL so I've never investigated the exact rules governing NFL game photos. You don't want to get the NFL mad at you though, so take this as a friendly word of warning to investigate the matter better before releasing an NFL picture as "free".

The article is well referenced and has the basics down. It just needs some prose tweaks and some other issues to be a GA.

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth | Talk 18:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Quick look over...
  • Using Crimson Tide in the lead without explaining that that is the nickname for the University of Alabama, it needs to be explained.
  • Be consistent on linking or not linking dates. Also, per WP:MOSDATE, if you're going to link, you should just link (Month Day) or (Month Day) (Year), not months or years alone. I know it's confusing, it drives me batty at times.
  • Looking better on the short stubby paragraphs. Still a few lurking in the Professional career section.

Looking much better! I didn't go into great depth, but it's definitely showing progress. Ealdgyth | Talk 22:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks good now! Passing it for GA. Ealdgyth | Talk 02:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

[Image:Broncos-Chiefs2007.jpg] is a mistake. I uploaded this photo thinking that it was mine. I have files on my computer including Chiefs photos, and obviously my camera is not that high tech. On my computer, I have a mixed file folder full of photos from each game (from myself and various Fox Sports, SI, ESPN, etc websites), but I did not intend to put this on the internet saying "self made." We need to delete this photo because I think you're right about the NFL and copyrights, and I sure don't want to get slapped with a lawsuit. conman33 (. . .talk) 04:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, technically they can't sue you cuz they can't find you unless your IP is static (non-changing) If you have dial-up or DSL, they can't find you. RC-0722 communicator/kills 04:20, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, but I also don't want to take credit for something that's obviously not mine. It's a hell of a picture, but we should at least look into it more. conman33 (. . .talk) 05:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)