2056 Mid-Season PPT Tracker Updated

[CTBrewCrew]

Please review and let me know if I have missed anything.

~Mike

[Dington]

You can view tracker here: http://montybrewster.net/forums/viewtop ... 32&t=23887

[aaronweiner]

Mine isn't close. Double check please.

[jiminyhopkins]

cool thanks man (50th post)

[pandan]

Apologies if I am misreading the tracker, but where are the player spotlights/features counted under? Not seeing any column or breakout of where the points for mine came from. Thanks for your help.

[BaseClogger]

Looks good for me

[recte44]

@CTBrewCrew pretty sure Shaw doesn't have 61 TN

[DaveB]

Looks good

[CTBrewCrew]

Apologies if I am misreading the tracker, but where are the player spotlights/features counted under? Not seeing any column or breakout of where the points for mine came from. Thanks for your help.

Let me take a look.....it helps if all are prefaced with a season or year (i.e. 56.x or 2056. etc). How many did you do?

[CTBrewCrew]

@CTBrewCrew pretty sure Shaw doesn't have 61 TN

Fixed - he had 0. Took from wrong column. All set now. Thanks for the 2nd set of eyes!

[CTBrewCrew]

Apologies if I am misreading the tracker, but where are the player spotlights/features counted under? Not seeing any column or breakout of where the points for mine came from. Thanks for your help.

Let me take a look.....it helps if all are prefaced with a season or year (i.e. 56.x or 2056. etc). How many did you do?

Fixed.

[pandan]

Apologies if I am misreading the tracker, but where are the player spotlights/features counted under? Not seeing any column or breakout of where the points for mine came from. Thanks for your help.

Let me take a look.....it helps if all are prefaced with a season or year (i.e. 56.x or 2056. etc). How many did you do?

I wrote two. But I don't see a column where this value would go.

[aaronweiner]

Mine isn't close. Double check please.

I can see that you have updated this somewhat. Mine is still not correct.

[CTBrewCrew]

Mine isn't close. Double check please.

I can see that you have updated this somewhat. Mine is still not correct.

What did I miss?

[aaronweiner]

Mine isn't close. Double check please.

I can see that you have updated this somewhat. Mine is still not correct.

My TN is wrong, you gave me a repeat feature and I’m not checking my post count but I’m gonna ask you double check.

[JimSlade]

Maybe I'm reading this tracker wrong, but it looks like you've got me down for 4 TNs when I have posted 5 so far. Thanks.

[CTBrewCrew]

I can see that you have updated this somewhat. Mine is still not correct.

My TN is wrong, you gave me a repeat feature and I’m not checking my post count but I’m gonna ask you double check.

Ill dbl check u tomorrow morning. Ur repeat feature would be the 1st round draft analysis featue

[CTBrewCrew]

Maybe I'm reading this tracker wrong, but it looks like you've got me down for 4 TNs when I have posted 5 so far. Thanks.

You okay - it depends on when i did it. The 5th (and anything else) will be caught at EOY. I will still check it in the morning

[aaronweiner]

My TN is wrong, you gave me a repeat feature and I’m not checking my post count but I’m gonna ask you double check.

Ill dbl check u tomorrow morning. Ur repeat feature would be the 1st round draft analysis featue

That's not what a repeat feature means. It means things that repeat in-season like the "Walkoff Watch" or the "Defensive Plays Above Average," things that repeat and are formulaic dozens of times a year, not something that's fully newly written every year. That's to add content while preventing people from over-milking short form features, not for full-length, brand-new material.

I figured that might be your formulation, and I understand and appreciate the misinterpretation. We're not quibbling over a lot of points anyway but it should be a feature, not a repeat feature; otherwise we'd have to give repeat feature points to things, say, in the Media Guide because there was also one of those last year.

[CTBrewCrew]

Yup let me change that for you. Thats what i though a reoccurring feature was