I think you all better read this !

[raehl]

College Plans

Main league stays 5-man, with an additional X Ball league in the works for more established programs.


College paintball's primary mission is to get new players playing tournament paintball. That means keeping barrier to entry as low as possible. As moving to 7 man or X Ball significantly raises barrier to entry for new players and teams, those are not options for the main league. It's hard enough for new clubs to pull together 5-man teams. Established programs do want to play X Ball though (everyone loved Collegiate Cup) and are better equipped resource-wise to do so, so we're working on various ways for college clubs to get involved in X Ball competition as well. There's been talk of moving at least some of college paintball to a more "sports season" type schedule, with one game per weekend, for quite some time now, and X Ball appears a good way to do that.


- Chris

 

[Robbo]

Well....

Originally posted by raehl
NPPL's big problem is that it doesn't matter. The IDEA behind NPPL is a good one - it's the player's league, and it sanctions the events. If you didn't get sanctioned, then the players wouldn't play your tournaments.

The problem is that the players long ago stopped backing the league, leaving NPPL with nothing to bring to the table. If PSP doesn't get NPPL sanctioning - so what? NPPL failed to find anything of value it could offer to the players or the league. It's become little more than a name. It was pretty clear things were pretty much over back in March when people were asking "Who will the players follow, NPPL or PSP?" - if that question even had to be asked, NPPL had already ceased to fullfill the function it was supposed to.
Now, I think it would be very cool if Chuck ran a 7-man league next year, and if he wants to carry over the NPPL name for it, so be it - but unless Chuck plans on putting himself up for election or something, today's NPPL is pretty much another PSP, not the "old school" NPPL that represented the players.
- Chris

Oh My, Chris, how wrong you are !!!!

Why the hell do you think the PSP would want, what you would call, a redundant organisation with no respect from the players and teams?

The NPPL still has a strong hold on the US team scene and it was this very attribute that made it so necessary for the PSP to usurp the organisation from Chuck, if this indeed has what's happened.
The difference being in this proposed new 7 man series, was that it was to be NPPL structured, along Millennium lines with the involvement of WDP and at least one other huge industry company (I can't name it at the moment) in tow.
Chuck was also courting the Millennium in terms of a partially integrated series which also gave the new circuit even more validation

And if what I am hearing at the moment is true, then the bedrock attraction (The NPPL name) for all those potential teams has now been wrested away (or soon will be) from the very person who was trying to set up the new league.
If you had your finger anywhere near the pulse of US NPPL /PSP teams who have played over the years then you should know the dissatisfaction that is apparent on the circuit has more to do with the promoters than the NPPL.
The NPPL name might not matter to you and I wonder exactly how many you have played in over the years and what experience you have had around a lot of the teams who have played in it but I can tell you something, the PSP would not be wanting to control something that is a spent force, as you put it.
Robbo

 

[raehl]

Chicago NPPL Team meeting attendence:

7.

Minus NCPA reps:

5.

Minus NPPL/PSP Staff:

1. Maybe 2, it was a while ago.


I'm not arguing that there is or isn't dissatisfaction. I'm just saying that the NPPL doesn't represent the players any more than PSP does - as evidenced by the player's willingness to support the organization.

Most everyone is quite happy to just pay their $1750 and play wherever the pros happen to be playing. Of the 1000+ players at a NPPL/PSP event, the vast majority of them are happy to be uninvolved consumers, or at best, involved web forum bitchers. The pulse of players, dissatisfied or not, is generally "lazy".

The reality is people are going to go to LA Open, Chicago Open, and World Cup whether they're NPPL sanctioned or not. Not having NPPL sanctioning didn't stop anyone from going to Las Vegas. If NPPL (read: Chuck) started a different league, they'll get players because they're offering a competing product, in the SAME manner that PSP is, maybe better, maybe worse - but as a business. Not because NPPL (read: Chuck) represents the players, because it doesn't, not anymore, because the players can't be botherred to care.


If Chuck started a new 7-Man league under the NPPL name that would indeed be cool. I'm sure PSP would rather that not happen. I'm sure there are plenty of industry folk who prefer one top-level league over two. That's the battle: One entity in the business or two. But the idea that NPPL is any sort of player's organization anymore is not realistic.


Or put another way, if there are two leagues next year, no more than a handful of people are going to play NPPL over PSP because 'NPPL is the player's league!' They'll pick the event that offers the best value to them - prizes, distance, costs, teams they get to play against, whether they prefer 7 or 10-man, all of those concerns will trump whether one league is "the players league" for pretty much everyone. They'll whine about it on web boards, and the NPPL players will swear up and down that they chose their league because "It represents the players!", but they'll be BSing.


- Chris

 

[KillerOnion]

Ahem, so, is 10 man effectively dead, as in if I show up to Chicago or LA with a team, will there be a 10 man category for us to play in or not?

 

[Rich S]

this all seems messed up and full of conjecture because we don't know all the facts.

but from a timing point of veiw.

us 10 man tourneys take a couple of days and have, say, 100 teams, with a game running on each field about every 20 minutes

euro 7 man tourneys have 3 days and have up to about 100 teams, with a game running on a field about every 15 minutes

x-ball tourney games last 40min playing time so with time out, breaks last about an hour.

so if all tourneys went xball style then most teams would not be able to play and the sport is dead. in america there would have to be a league and match days would have to be every week to get everyone to play, also xball is more expensive as more paint is used. so would all teams now playing 10 man want to play it.

it seems to me that for xball to be played then structured leagues like in football (comparable to both grid iron and soccer) with games running every week and teams playing every few. this will show how good the sport is organised if it works, this could also be done in europe but rules and assistance for, eg travel, may be needed.

for a world series then a final 'world cup' could be held every year alternating in europe and america for a specific number to teams at the top of their league.

sensible thinking needs to be done if xball is the playing future, other wise it can only be done for tournament finals, with soemthing like the WPS showing who is the best team in the world.

this is just a suggestion

 

[Robbo]

Chicago NPPL Team meeting attendence:

Originally posted by raehl
7.

Minus NCPA reps:

5.

Minus NPPL/PSP Staff:

1. Maybe 2, it was a while ago.


I'm not arguing that there is or isn't dissatisfaction. I'm just saying that the NPPL doesn't represent the players any more than PSP does - as evidenced by the player's willingness to support the organization.

Most everyone is quite happy to just pay their $1750 and play wherever the pros happen to be playing. Of the 1000+ players at a NPPL/PSP event, the vast majority of them are happy to be uninvolved consumers, or at best, involved web forum bitchers. The pulse of players, dissatisfied or not, is generally "lazy".

The reality is people are going to go to LA Open, Chicago Open, and World Cup whether they're NPPL sanctioned or not. Not having NPPL sanctioning didn't stop anyone from going to Las Vegas. If NPPL (read: Chuck) started a different league, they'll get players because they're offering a competing product, in the SAME manner that PSP is, maybe better, maybe worse - but as a business. Not because NPPL (read: Chuck) represents the players, because it doesn't, not anymore, because the players can't be botherred to care.


If Chuck started a new 7-Man league under the NPPL name that would indeed be cool. I'm sure PSP would rather that not happen. I'm sure there are plenty of industry folk who prefer one top-level league over two. That's the battle: One entity in the business or two. But the idea that NPPL is any sort of player's organization anymore is not realistic.

Or put another way, if there are two leagues next year, no more than a handful of people are going to play NPPL over PSP because 'NPPL is the player's league!' They'll pick the event that offers the best value to them - prizes, distance, costs, teams they get to play against, whether they prefer 7 or 10-man, all of those concerns will trump whether one league is "the players league" for pretty much everyone. They'll whine about it on web boards, and the NPPL players will swear up and down that they chose their league because "It represents the players!", but they'll be BSing.
- Chris

I have no real problem with most of what you say but I differ in interpretation.
Whilst Chuck, or anyone else for that matter could set up a rival circuit and it would have a certain degree of attraction for US teams, the most part being that is a novel alternative.
But when the name of the NPPL is attached to this new series, a whole new perspective is put on things as it is now validated with a tried and tested organisation.
Without the NPPL name association, I doubt the new league would stand much of a chance.
As for you saying the average team does not feel they are represented by the NPPL and yet still turn out to pay their PSP entrance fees, I agree 100% but when a choice is laid before them, I think in their minds at least, it may well be a choice for the lesser of evils.
The manifest dissatisfaction of some of these players may well be seen only on the boards but given a serious alternative, I think you would see a more overt and direct sign of PSP disapproval.

All this is made much more likely, if the NPPL name can be used !

Robbo

 

[raehl]

Yeap.

The value of the NPPL name is brand value, not league value, that was my main point, and I think we agree. NPPL hasn't been a players league for a while now, and it isn't a tried and tested organization - or at least not the organization that was tried and tested... and failed. Chuck is trying to represent the players, but the players arn't giving him any ammunition to fight with. That's not to say Chuck is right ( he is ) and PSP/industry is wrong ( they're not ), just that the players want paintball that is successful in that they like to play it, and PSP/Industry want paintball that is successful in that their businesses can make money.

BOTH of those sides have to win - it can't be one or the other - no players, no customers; no industry, no markers/paint (at reasonable prices anyway). That'll all work out well if the players and industry/promoters push each other to the right mutually beneficial solution, but right now it seems like the players arn't holding up their end of the system.

Course, then again, most of the players have never set foot on a tournament field, so maybe that's not such a big deal.



As for paintball moving to X Ball, it's never going to happen. ORGANIZED paintball may very well do so - but people will still learn paintball in the woods and/or 3-man/5-man games. Just like people learn baseball in the field down the street or football playing two-hand touch in the back yard or play HORSE with a hoop and basketball. Kids play teeball before they play baseball, and lots of adults play softball instead of baseball because the softball is just easier to hit when you're drunk - even if they'd much rather watch "real" baseball on TV


Sports have different forms for different purposes, and paintball will be no exception. The different forms arn't right or wrong, just different.


I actually like the softball-baseball analogy.

5-man is to X Ball as teeball/softball is to baseball.



- Chris

 

[raehl]

Actually Robbo, now that I'm thinking about it...

NPPL can't still be a players organization because if it was, it would be impossible for PSP to take it over.

There, that's much simpler.


- Chris

 

[Robbo]

Actually Robbo, now that I'm thinking about it...

Originally posted by raehl
NPPL can't still be a players organization because if it was, it would be impossible for PSP to take it over.

There, that's much simpler.


- Chris

It may be written down much simpler and consequently understood easier but I'm afraid it is misleading and basically wrong.
Nowhere did I say it was still regarded as a player's organisation, I am merely saying that its presence alongside any new circuit gives it a validation (for whatever reason) that the PSP feel they cannot afford to continue.
Any more than that, well, I will let you and others debate for whatever reason you want because my input has now ceased and my initial point is still intact...
Robbo

 

[raehl]

Well damnit....

I agree.

This is just no good.

- Chris