In response to Hugh – I understand your points and agree with some of them. However, the way we look at the Web seems to be much different than yours. While I agree that the use of video and 3D technology can embellish a Web site – they should only be used if they accomplish an objective, not just for the sole purpose of adding video just to look “current.” To me, that’s like saying that 3D movies are better than classic 2D animation or that overly produced music is better than a stripped-down raw recording. Both mediums can be effective, but good art should be judged by the emotion it evokes, not the technology used to create it.

In addition, we create our flash segments based on the assets we have available. If the client does not have a budget to generate new video, or does not have the video assets already, we try to think outside-the-box and create visuals with the assets that we have. And I think in most all cases, we have been able to do that successfully. Creativity and technology are two completely different components and should never be dependent on one another. The technology we use is always determined from client to client. Our firm believes in the principles of clean design and simplicity, and many of our clients feel the same, which is why they choose to use our services. We believe for marketing to be effective, it has to be unique. The last thing we want to do is make our clients look like everyone else on the Web.

In the case of Ty Lawson, our objective was to create a brand image to help him stand apart from other players. We chose to create a stylized intro (I don’t prefer the term collage) based on the assets we had available. When I say it’s cutting edge, I am not referring to the technology used to create it. I’m referring to the fact that it sets it apart from other athletes sites on the Web because its visual style is unique in the athletic space.

Thank you again for your feedback, Hugh and David. It is much appreciated.

That statement should very clearly mean that:
-the design is superior to any other athlete website.
-that the content strategy is superior to any other athlete website.
-that the technology platform is superior to any other athlete website.
-that the integration of the athlete’s involvement is superior to any other athlete website.
-that the integration of the athlete’s sponsors is superior to any other athlete website.
-that the revenue model is superior to any other athlete website.
-that the integration of social media channels is superior to any other athlete website.
-that the overall experience is superior to any other athlete website.
-that you provide a mobile version of the site and that experience is superior to any other athlete website.
-also expect to see this site receive FWA site of the day, month, and year: because to do all of the above (which is the criteria i would give my own studio before making the statement you did) means this site is going to be truly ground-breaking in the overall interactive space.

Sorry, but based on the article there is no way i can buy that, but to be fair i’ll reserve final judgement until i see it, and i’ll email you directly with my thoughts vs. posting publicly.

As for my comment related to your agency being a true digital play. Again I don’t mean to offend you but collage intros, blogs, etc are the most basic level of content you can have on a website – in fact they go back about 5 years (collage intros are Flash 4.0 really and went out about 6 years ago as well). So i believe my statement was sound, but i meant no offense by it to you or your firm.

I reviewed your agency site and work prior to making the comment. I did look at the work you cited. Again I don’t mean to offend you, but those sites are not cutting edge from design, technology, use of Flash or After Effects or 3D or Video etc., and overall experience.

I’d ask David for his opinion on them as well. David do believe either site is cutting edge? – for example the 5-Star site with 3 main sections and a very old Yahoo store, overall template design (main and subs), no video, no after effects/3D, no SM integration, etc.

Neil, I don’t mean to be-little your work in anyway – i hope Ty’s site is truly ground-breaking because our segment needs it, there are too many template cookie cutters in the sports/athlete category, there is very little new thinking – I’ve been in this digital category for 10+ years and I include myself in that statement so I hope your work for Ty is the breakthrough concept we all need to further inspire new levels of work. But I also have to be honest based on the work i’ve seen and the standard I judge it against.

-Hugh

Thanks for taking the time to post.

I was very careful not to try and assess the work that you’ve completed since obviously, we haven’t seen it, but rather, to comment on what was written with regard to the overall approach. It’s extremely important to me to maintain a civil tone on the blog, and to prompt useful, constructive dialogue concerning the topics covered here.

Hugh fired off a few quick salvos with a little extra zing in them, and while I don’t want to censor anyone unless they’re way out of line, like you, I felt compelled to comment in my defense.

Again, congratulations for being ahead of the curve with your client — as I said in the post, most athletes don’t think about any of these things this early in their careers — and good luck with the web site launch.

Best,

David

Thanks for the post — some good points in there.

With regard to Kathleen Hessert, I wasn’t suggesting that they see her per se or looking to put her on a pedestal. More than anything, I was struck by the simple irony that UNC is not that far from Sports Media Challenge, which has been at the media epicenter of Twitter and its use by athletes. Wasn’t looking to make anything more out of it than that.

On Facebook: My thoughts on this are based on the experience of managing our clients’ sites, and on our own overall branding strategy. Social media tools are powerful, but there’s a tendency for people (i.e. developers) to forget that human beings (i.e. users) can only do/be interested in/follow so many things at one time.

On a side note: Our sites do share core functionality, but to say that they’re templated in the manner that you’re suggesting is misplaced. That said, design is really just one element of the services we provide, and while it’s an important one, there are many other things we do that are not immediately apparent and in many ways, as — if not — more important.

Best,

David

The two facebooks can be argued right or wrong – it’s been done before on facebook and twitter as well. Some athletes have their personal account and one for their website updates – don’t mind some of them. I would probably agree with your point that it’s not necessary, but an argument can be made for two accounts.

Not sure i get the Hessert reference, yes she’s in NC, but why should they see her? She is definitely playing the Shaq card for all it’s worth – more power to her i guess. But if she really was the expert wouldn’t Shaq have had an official site as part of his online activation. The last one he did have was via Sportsline 6-7 years ago and was a templated joke (design, content). She gets public credit for getting Danica on, but anyone can see they made numerous errors on that approach. She (Hessert) got PR for it and is again riding it well for her personal/company gain, but not so sure the strategy has been so solid for Danica – could do a white paper on it actually. Need to be careful in putting her on a pedestal. And how can she be a social media or interactive expert with virtually zero digital background? With Twitter and social media I counter that we’re all students at this point in the game.

I agree Lawson should have some form of official site up now, but waiting for the true launch to brand the site with his team’s colors i have no problem with. The sites from your company are all templated – when you go that route it’s much easier to change out graphics and color schemes on the fly, but the template route is not the answer for all athletes and brands. Just reduces development costs, but that’s what a lot of athletes (er agents) are about.

Hugh