Many members on this site have questioned the accuracy, fairness and the very legitimacy of the Bleacher Report Writer Rankings, and with good reason.

This article is specifically designed to address the ongoing controversy over some of the site's top-ranked writers and whether or not they are deserving of the recognition and accolades they receive.

The most common complaint that I hear with regards to writer rankings is that quality writing is, for the most part, ignored in favor of quantity.

In other words, the more articles someone writes, no matter how sub-par or sometimes even idiotic they are, the writer will automatically be rewarded by B/R administration officials and given approval and recognition for these questionable, at best, literary works.

Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Henry Miller are two amazing writers, and because of their brilliance they are universally recognized as the true geniuses that they are.

So why are they recognized as visionaries and regarded as the best writers of their respective generations? Because their overall talent is taken into account by their literary peers.

Q: What if the Bleacher Report Writer Rankings System was used to determine the overall literary significance of great writers such as these?

A: They would probably have to take a back seat in the rankings order to local hack writers that crank out three or more crappy romance mystery novels a year. You know, the type of books that target bored, zoloft-popping, horny housewives by the dozen and make a great splash with their target audience, but wouldn't be found anywhere near a respectable institution of higher learning.

Thank God that the ranking rules of this site do not apply to our educational system or else we all might wind up reading Peanuts and Marmaduke cartoon captions as we try to earn our MFA's in creative writing.

What I'm trying to say is that the Bleacher Report Ranking System does not, in any way, shape or form resemble the type of standards that we use to measure greatness or success in the non-cyber realm of the "real world". This has got to change.

In all fairness, I feel that the Bleacher Report Administrators do a really amazing job here, but when it comes to the writer rankings there have been too many "loopholes" left open for opportunistic and scurrilous individuals to "beat the system", so to speak. These individuals fully understand that they can diligently scribble a bunch of semi-literate nonsense onto a "paper" and publish it, thus assuring themselves of instant notoriety and literary "success" with regards to the rankings here. This is not how things are supposed to be, even if you use Bleacher Reports own guidelines for writer rankings, as I will clearly demonstrate to you all.

Bleacher Report's criteria for writer rankings are as follows:

 

"While Bleacher Report emphasizes inclusiveness, we recognize that quality is what matters most. That's why our reputation system, Writer Rankings, aims to distinguish the best of the best, by recognizing Top Writers who...

1. Contribute quality analysis by writing and publishing their own articles.
2. Back up their opinions with well-argued responses in the comment threads.
3. Build fanbases by engaging with other site members.

Those who do make it to the higher levels of the Top Writer Rankings are rewarded with more visibility on the network, and greater odds of their work reaching the Front Page.

The net result is a vibrant sports media outlet where expert fans collaborate to produce passionate, polished sportswriting for the pleasure of readers worldwide."

It is painfully obvious that several individuals on this site that are recognized by administration as "top writers" here clearly do not demonstrate the ability to meet at least two of the three main guidelines given to the community with any type of regularity.

They simply crank out little pile of turd after little pile of turd to keep themselves afloat and their positions in the rankings secure until it's time for the next bird dropping to be gleefully excreted. 

I know this may sound a bit harsh to some here, but I'm sure that most of the more dedicated, talented and experienced writers here are probably right there with me on this one.

I won't name any names out of respect. I certainly don't want to call anyone out or embarrass someone unnecessarily, but I think that we all have our own ideas about who the most blatant offenders have been here on this site.

The same principle applies to some of the better writers here who find themselves without anywhere near the recognition of some of these glorified hacks.

In my opinion, there has to be a higher standard applied to the articles that are created here and the writers that write them. That is the only way that true excellence can be measured in a forum like this.

In theory, the Bleacher Report guidelines appear to be pretty sound ones, but the problem is that they don't seem to be applied correctly or diligently by those who enforce the rules here.

Keep in mind, this observation is by no means intended to slight Bleacher Report Administrators. I fully realize that applying these principals can sometime be a very subjective matter, and their job, above all, is to maintain an atmosphere of comfortability and harmony for members here.

That being said, there still has to be some way of making their decisions easier, more objective and less controversial with regards to choosing who represents the best of the talented writers here.

I propose that the "star" system is not utilized enough by members of this site. If someone writes an article, they should be graded "on the record" for it. Those articles that receive more stars will receive more credit than those that are not credited. This rarely seems to happen though.

One of the problems with the star system is that I don't believe that most members even understand why it's there and what it's utility is. Therefore they simply ignore it.

That is why I propose that the star system be abandoned and changed to a letter system with instructions of their purpose and use beside them so they can be understood clearly and fit to be utilized correctly by all. 

Articles can be graded A, B, C, D or E.

As tempted as I am to suggest an F grade, I realize that this would probably only tempt people, like myself, to intentionally belittle certain writers and their articles for no other reason than to publicly shame them, or simply because: it's simply just a sh*t load of fun to do belligerent stuff like that.

No, we have to be a bit more mature here. An A through E system will do just fine. This system will hopefully give writers a good enough reason not to just throw out some rough-drafted pile of dung into cyberspace to pollute all our minds with.

It will also be a guideline for administrators to use for determining who they will reward for their hard work here.

I wrote this article with the hope that a lot of people in the community would share their thoughts on what solutions they think might be acceptable alternatives to the current rankings system, and how we, as a community, can improve on the current situation with regards to writer recognition here.

Please leave a comment and let's solve this problem together as a group.

The collective will of a people is always stronger than the existing difficulties we face. Any problem can be solved diplomatically if we stick together.

- Gilligan Henry Dorpfeld

aka "Skillet"

aka Bleacher Report Hall Monitor and Brown Nose

aka Sheep in Wolves Clothing

aka Mr. Behavior Problem

aka Enemy of All Inorganic Dairy Products

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?