Then we agree
My whole point is that none of the formats are right for tv - and that both organisations (well all 3 organisations now...
... should be looking at alternatvie formats.Nick
And so the downfall of the NXL begins....
- Thread starter BigbOYALA2
- Start date
My whole point is that none of the formats are right for tv - and that both organisations (well all 3 organisations now...
... should be looking at alternatvie formats.Nick
Maybe I'm not quite the industry pundit that most of you dudes are, but....
On the subject of live vs edited footage. One factor that I feel should play a part in developing paintball into an accesable sport is how it is to spectate. That is live and in person as an audience. I feel that event promoters should try harder to pull the punters in and get bums on seats to watch live games. Develop a format/structure that is friendly to spectators as well as the participants of a given event. I'd have thought trying to lay on a bob on spectator event is an easier goal than running from pillar to post of TV execs. Yeah I know Pure Promotions does a good job, but is it good enough?
Better seating for the show fields and more of it, better netting, quick turnarounds between games and points and maybe work further on the holy grail of a focus point.
If you can promote events to spectators and get em packing in then television should be able to grow from here, then as television coverage picks up as does the levels of spectators....and so on and so on
Or something like that
On the subject of live vs edited footage. One factor that I feel should play a part in developing paintball into an accesable sport is how it is to spectate. That is live and in person as an audience. I feel that event promoters should try harder to pull the punters in and get bums on seats to watch live games. Develop a format/structure that is friendly to spectators as well as the participants of a given event. I'd have thought trying to lay on a bob on spectator event is an easier goal than running from pillar to post of TV execs. Yeah I know Pure Promotions does a good job, but is it good enough?
Better seating for the show fields and more of it, better netting, quick turnarounds between games and points and maybe work further on the holy grail of a focus point.
If you can promote events to spectators and get em packing in then television should be able to grow from here, then as television coverage picks up as does the levels of spectators....and so on and so on
Or something like that
Both the MS and NPPL events have full stands at the finals fields dude... so that is not really an issue
Nick
Nick
1) were you in Bitburg (I know you were, saw you there, but still holds)Nick Brockdorff said:Both the MS and NPPL events have full stands at the finals fields dude... so that is not really an issue
Nick
2) in HB when I saw people in the stands they were ALL wearing something pball related, or at least with someone who was. So I don't think the $10 was paid by many passing spectators, they would have made do with the Angel.
1. The MS has already stated that the Bitburg venue would have that problem this year... and that they were working on making that better.... Marseille was great, Paris will be too... and as for Madrid and London, time will tell
2.So, what is the problem with that? - Do you honestly believe that you will get non paintballers to go spectate a paintball event - and pay to get in??
In any other sport (except for the very very major sports), the only spectators are people that play the sport themselves (or have played).... no reason it should be any different in paintball
Nick
I am amazed how so much of the recent conversation regarding How to make Paintball work on TV is about what to change in order for TV to find Pball acceptable. Was it that long ago peeps were horrified at the prospect of Pball being turned into some sorta WWE pseudo sports spectacle?
Granted some of the discussion has been about the logistics of presenting Pball but the underlying assumption remains Pball must change to TV's conception of what they can sell.
Is that a good enough reason to change the game?
Paintball has experienced lots of changes in the past for lots of debateable reasons so maybe this is just the natural extension of that history.
My question is where's the line between Paintball as Sport and TV Freakshow? Is there a line that can't be crossed and if there is what is it?
Don't get me wrong--I want paintball on TV but it needs to be PAINTBALL otherwise what's the point except to make a few peeps who aren't you and aren't me more money with paintball in the end serving only as the vehicle to get them there.
While I'm at it --and closer to the thread's original intent-- there are rumors that at least one of the teams participating in the Smart League Show is already planning on blowing off their NXL obligation to play Chicago. Three guesses but you should only need one.
Is this insanity or simply hubris or some combination of other mental defects? Or is it a signal that in some minds the NXL is already done and where does that leave the PSP? And more to my usual point where does it leave all the teams and players?
Granted some of the discussion has been about the logistics of presenting Pball but the underlying assumption remains Pball must change to TV's conception of what they can sell.
Is that a good enough reason to change the game?
Paintball has experienced lots of changes in the past for lots of debateable reasons so maybe this is just the natural extension of that history.
My question is where's the line between Paintball as Sport and TV Freakshow? Is there a line that can't be crossed and if there is what is it?
Don't get me wrong--I want paintball on TV but it needs to be PAINTBALL otherwise what's the point except to make a few peeps who aren't you and aren't me more money with paintball in the end serving only as the vehicle to get them there.
While I'm at it --and closer to the thread's original intent-- there are rumors that at least one of the teams participating in the Smart League Show is already planning on blowing off their NXL obligation to play Chicago. Three guesses but you should only need one.
Is this insanity or simply hubris or some combination of other mental defects? Or is it a signal that in some minds the NXL is already done and where does that leave the PSP? And more to my usual point where does it leave all the teams and players?
I don't think people are that anxious to "change paintball" irrespective of the consequences... I think people are interested in examining if paintball can be changed without loosing its core values, and make it to tv.
Perfect compromise for all if it can.
And let's be honest here... we as a sport do not have a century of history to take into account, like other sports... heck, we don't even have a decade of history to think about, so as long as the sport is still about 2 teams shooting the crap out of eachother in a stadium setting, and the top league is essentially still playing the same game as the grass roots, I'm happy with whatever change gets us on tv.
Nick
Perfect compromise for all if it can.
And let's be honest here... we as a sport do not have a century of history to take into account, like other sports... heck, we don't even have a decade of history to think about, so as long as the sport is still about 2 teams shooting the crap out of eachother in a stadium setting, and the top league is essentially still playing the same game as the grass roots, I'm happy with whatever change gets us on tv.
Nick
Broz -
would you spend 10 dollars/pounds/euros/polished shells to watch something you'd never heard of? Consider if the 2006 flooberball championships are in town next week - are you going to spend money for something you don't know anything about and may have never heard of? Now if you're already a flooberball fan, that 10 bucks isn't a big deal.
NPPL is working on reserver/paid seating, but that's a secondary source of income and mostly paintballers or family members who are paying for seats.
Baca -
I would guess I'm a pretty Smart guy.... but then look what I do for fun
So what counts as "paintball"? If someone decides that 24 scenario games make more sense to present than Xball or 7man, is that any more or less valid a form of paintball than tournament ball? Or is it 'real paintball' only if it's from NXL or NPPL? is it not 'real paintball' if it doesn't use "professional" players or has scripted elements?
I think the ultimate question is: do the people in charge care enough about the sport (and the long long-term benefits) not to whore it out to make a few buck as the next American Gladiators? Considering the history of some of the people involved and the general greed of the industry, I think there's still cause for concern, but not as much as there was last year. Despite the UAPL's effort to make PM more dramatic, the smoke, lights and trash talk didn't really translate well after the game started. It felt like they realized this and tried to steer away from it in later episodes (I admit I got bored and stopped watching UAPL about two months ago).
Chicago -
I agree that the biggest challenge for PB on TV is how to present it. I'll disagree with you that it matters whether the format is Xball or 7 man or some hybrid format. Good points about the camera angles. However, having cameras over people's shoulders so you can see where the paint is going/coming from is not going to work and oversimplifies the issue. Ultimately, I think it's going to be about using better angles, better editing and better commentating. More active games than Miami would probably help too.
Your point about natural breaks in the action misses the fact that the games will be taped and edited for television. They can add breaks, comments and replays where ever they want, if they take the time to think about.
would you spend 10 dollars/pounds/euros/polished shells to watch something you'd never heard of? Consider if the 2006 flooberball championships are in town next week - are you going to spend money for something you don't know anything about and may have never heard of? Now if you're already a flooberball fan, that 10 bucks isn't a big deal.
NPPL is working on reserver/paid seating, but that's a secondary source of income and mostly paintballers or family members who are paying for seats.
Baca -
I would guess I'm a pretty Smart guy.... but then look what I do for fun
So what counts as "paintball"? If someone decides that 24 scenario games make more sense to present than Xball or 7man, is that any more or less valid a form of paintball than tournament ball? Or is it 'real paintball' only if it's from NXL or NPPL? is it not 'real paintball' if it doesn't use "professional" players or has scripted elements?
I think the ultimate question is: do the people in charge care enough about the sport (and the long long-term benefits) not to whore it out to make a few buck as the next American Gladiators? Considering the history of some of the people involved and the general greed of the industry, I think there's still cause for concern, but not as much as there was last year. Despite the UAPL's effort to make PM more dramatic, the smoke, lights and trash talk didn't really translate well after the game started. It felt like they realized this and tried to steer away from it in later episodes (I admit I got bored and stopped watching UAPL about two months ago).
Chicago -
I agree that the biggest challenge for PB on TV is how to present it. I'll disagree with you that it matters whether the format is Xball or 7 man or some hybrid format. Good points about the camera angles. However, having cameras over people's shoulders so you can see where the paint is going/coming from is not going to work and oversimplifies the issue. Ultimately, I think it's going to be about using better angles, better editing and better commentating. More active games than Miami would probably help too.
Your point about natural breaks in the action misses the fact that the games will be taped and edited for television. They can add breaks, comments and replays where ever they want, if they take the time to think about.
If Paris say, is back across the road in the carpark where the first ill-fated one was, do you think that would be such a success?Nick Brockdorff said:1. The MS has already stated that the Bitburg venue would have that problem this year... and that they were working on making that better.... Marseille was great, Paris will be too... and as for Madrid and London, time will tell
They why hold the damm thing in such a high profile place? If everyone going there is already a paintballer then keep events at an anonymous field in the middle of nowhere - ala PSP Chicago.Nick Brockdorff said:2.So, what is the problem with that? - Do you honestly believe that you will get non paintballers to go spectate a paintball event - and pay to get in??
In any other sport (except for the very very major sports), the only spectators are people that play the sport themselves (or have played).... no reason it should be any different in paintball
Nick
If you are trying to expose the game to the general public then charging them $10 to see something they know nothing about seems to be "misguided". Little Jonny walks past HB and goes "mummy that looks great i really want to see these guy play" and she gets asked for $20 for the priviledge of sitting down, or Johnny has to wade through 5 deep rows of ballers who are stood about watching sunday to attemp to see this great new thing for free.
Which is it?