TBRW new look

[www.spiritone.com]

Let me know if you have any problems, especially if you use a (relatively) obscure browser or if you have a (relatively) smaller display.

I'll be adding noframes support soon.

Greg, I use 800x600 resolution and this causes the top menu bar to be too long requiring horizontal scrolling to get to the "Index" button (and all of the bottoms of the buttons are cut off by the frame as well).

I like what you did with the 2002-2003 schedule --having the opposition's logo and giving short blurbs on each game. For some reason, each instance where a blurb or boxscore has a team's national ranking the "#" and whatever number follows it is displayed as superscript.

BTW, I'm using IE 5.5 on Win98SE.

Even on my 1024X768 screen, and the browser window taking up 70, 80% of it width wise, the INDEX button is barely on the screen without scrolling. I like the redesign, just make the buttons a bit smaller.

Chimera 0.6 on OS X 10.1.5 .

The superscripted rankings are probably intentional - there are "sup" tags in the source code.

Not your problem per se, but the TBRW? menu bar no longer shows up properly when I access Whelan's TBRW? contributions from slack.net/hockey.

And the Cornell "hitchhiker" blurb could be updated to reflect Lynah's current age (i.e. "more than forty-five years old"

I have shrunk the navbar.

The superscripted rankings are intentional.

I'm working with John on a proper confluence of our pages.

My many minions are, even as we speak, starting to begin to decide when they may think about proposing to research a first draft of the updates. In the meantime, anyone with additional info or changes could simply send them to me at kepler@spiritone.com

If you have a .aol address, please put Hitchhiker Suggestions in the subject line or my filters will burn the email before I ever see it.

Wow. The idea of a .aol TLD is both frightening and curious at the same time....

How come the MAAC schools and the CHA are not included in this listing?

They're included in the calculations; they just don't have RPIs of .500 or better, which is the new definition of "Teams Under Consideration" among whom the pairwise comparisons are performed.

Yeah, but it makes filtering them out much easier

Greg,

Last year you had a wonderful feature called "You be the Committee" which down in its' bowels let the user alter games and add games to the database and see how that affected the pairwise comparison.

Would you consider creating a similar feature that would let users put in games and see how it affects the RPI?

We could start wasting time with this now, and not have to wait until closer to playoffs.

Thanks.

Neil

That's John's feature (as you say, it's excellent), and I would expect that he'll be putting up another one this year, especially if you grease him with a few of those German beers he likes during the RS.