Is Reunification still in the cards?

[Chicago]

Is that why they need you?
Are you the guy that understands how to bring paintball to the 'masses'?
You must be, otherwise you would not be claiming that the existing people don't understand how to do it. In order for you to know that they don't understand, you must surely know what they are missing. Isn't that what you're saying?

I know what they're missing. It's not hard, you just need to make a few, key long-term decisions. As for whether they need me, I doubt it. The problem isn't that there's a shortage of people who know what's missing, just a shortage of people willing to listen, who are not so incredibly focused on winning right now that they can't seem to make decisions that would lead to certain success a few years from now.

 

[dirtymik]

what is winning? getting on tv?

 

[Chicago]

After PSP Chicago the grass there was ruined. I have a girlfriend that lives in Bollingbrook 3 blocks away from that venue, and what was once green grass, is now destroyed. The NPPL had an option to go on grass in LA, but that grass would have been destroyed also. That would mean either a. Pay for it to be re-surfaced, or b. don't go back. Short term/sighted thinking would say lets just whack it on the grass. But that isn't the smart move.

2nd year PSP was at that location....

4th year at Disney...

Years at pomona...



Spherepoint, this whole stadium thing is part of the problem. NPPL has marketed it as the end-all and be-all of reaching the public, and people have bought into it. While it's certainly better than being in an off location, 5 events per year at stadiums are absolutely not going to do what needs to be done. It's a drop in the bucket. It means a lot more to the psychology of the people playing than it does to the public.

 

[Chicago]

what is winning? getting on tv?

Winning is paintball competition financed by money that does not come from paintball companies.


At least, that's my definition. Others seem to think that 'winning' is getting on television, but I think they're starting to figure out that a television show isn't a magic bullet.

 

[dirtymik]

how do you see that as being part of the problem? [NPPL bringing their events to stadiums] yes playing at a stadium adds to the coolness, but wouldn't it be fair to say that playing at a stadium adds to the profile of the sport itself, rather than playing at venues that are out of the way [thus out of the awareness] of the public at large?

i agree with you that TeeVee isn't a magic bullet. your definition of 'winning' sucks too [nothing personal] because the only group in paintball that should be winning is the player. it is a little hard to see that happening with reunification. the competition player benefitted lots from the split.

 

[SPHEREPOINT]

Missy,
You're absolutely right that immense progress has been made since 2003. I haven't been around forever, but I have played World Cups in cow pastures (I can still feel the fire ants burn) and behind Old Town in the Palms. I remember net blowing up and away in the middle of games, sending the spectators running for cover. I remember the Badlandz when Shock reffed. I remember Cesare getting busted in Pittsburgh (ahhh.. memories). Perhaps blood on hands is a little extreme, but a small group that has great responsibility (no Spider-Man jokes please) is operating in a disjointed fashion from one another. There is no unified front. There is not one set of rules or format. Most of the "big" names involved actually do have good intentions, but they are seemingly often twisted in other concerns that mar their honest intent.
Big stadiums can be a big problem. We are messy, dirty, and "different" from say, Little Leaugers or marching bands. Unlike most sprts- we leave a mark- a big orangeish-yellow pooling mark. Money is a big issue. To boil it down to the base issue, there is not enough money to support two leagues.

 

[Chicago]

how do you see that as being part of the problem? [NPPL bringing their events to stadiums] yes playing at a stadium adds to the coolness, but wouldn't it be fair to say that playing at a stadium adds to the profile of the sport itself, rather than playing at venues that are out of the way [thus out of the awareness] of the public at large?

Being at stadiums is not a problem. Thinking that being at stadiums is the right way to advance the sport is the problem. Whether NPPL or PSP has their 5 events a year at stadiums or soccer complexes makes pretty much zero difference in growing/organizing the sport in a manner that is condusive to attracting outside-industry money. Whether you're in a stadium parking lot or not is the last thing you should be worried about.

i agree with you that TeeVee isn't a magic bullet. your definition of 'winning' sucks too [nothing personal] because the only group in paintball that should be winning is the player. it is a little hard to see that happening with reunification. the competition player benefitted lots from the split.

Players benefitted from the split to a point - it certainly motivated people to provide a better product. But that effect is over. Before the split, the sub-par events were the result of the people in charge not putting the events as a priority. Competition made them a priority. But now the events are pretty much as good as they are going to get with the resources available. Competition is not going to make the events better - making more resources available will make the events better, and the best way to get more resources available is to unify the leagues.

The players benefit when the industry isn't footing the bill. The rec players benefit because they're not paying to support a tournament heirarchy. The tournament players benefit because the money is coming from pockets that are much deeper than paintball industry pockets. Pro baseball players are not paid from the money made by Spalding selling baseball gloves. You could never sell enough baseball gloves to do that at anywhere near the levels players are paid now.

 

[dirtymik]

no one said that paintball at stadiums is the way to grow the sport. it most certainly is a way. i say you're wrong about a stadium venue not growing/organizing the sport. it adds to the atmosphere and gives the illusion of being a top notch sport, in person and on tv. don't you think that an event at a stadium/soccer field looks better to outside industry sponsors than does an event at a farm or paintball field?

players are still benefitting to a degree. NPPL is working to improve its ref staff the PSP is working to improve the quality of their events. they benefit in having a range of formats to choose from.

lots of people talk about unification as benefitting the player, but where? you'll still have one league working to get itself on the telly, though under what kind of format? 7 man, 5 man or x-ball? a hybridization of 7man and xball? [bit of a side track here: i say that is what needs to happen to create an all around inviting format to players, spectators, and be tv friendly.] one league may also fall back into the old theory of the event not being a priority.

Pro baseball players are not paid from the money made by Spalding selling baseball gloves. You could never sell enough baseball gloves to do that at anywhere near the levels players are paid now.

i get what you are saying. but where does that money come from?

 

[SPHEREPOINT]

lots of people talk about unification as benefitting the player, but where? you'll still have one league working to get itself on the telly, though under what kind of format? 7 man, 5 man or x-ball? a hybridization of 7man and xball? [bit of a side track here: i say that is what needs to happen to create an all around inviting format to players, spectators, and be tv friendly.]

A unified league under a new format may be the cleansing fire that is the answer. Unification by merging the two current leagues/formats will probably lead to the worst attributes from both being accepted as the new status quo. The answer of unification becomes most complicated because there are two formats. Would we play coached 7 man, first to 5 points or ramping guns 5 man single games with bumpers, spikes, and a dollhouse? Would we be in stadiums or paintball fields? Sometimes I think let's go back to 10-man. I still have my Evolution Cocker (Belsey is God) and my Foxwood camos. My God do I sound old.
What would be the format answer be, if we could start anew right now?

 

[Chicago]

Neither television nor sponsors care what the format is. They know that once they decide to invest in you, the investment will be so great you'll be tripping over yourself to adopt whatever format changes they want.

Bringing this issue up again demonstrates that you don't understand what the outside sponsors, and thus TV looking to sell your program to outside sponsors, is looking for. They are looking for an established market. If you're putting a program on TV attempting to win viewers over with your format you have already failed.

So, the combined league can pick whatever format works best for the players. I think PSP has it right with XBall and 5-man - you've got an inexpensive format that is played Saturday and Sunday only for your 'weekend warrior' players and an extended format for your high-end teams. (I think NPPL has the concept right with semi-auto, but if the unified league goes that route they're going to have to sack up and sell certified chips/boards if it's going to work.)


Personally, I think grass and not stadiums is better. Again, the sponsors don't care where your event is - they care how many people are there to see it. But, the number of impressions the sponsor is going to get from people being at the event is far, far, far smaller than the number of impressions the sponsor is going to get from title sponsorship of an event covered on paintball websites that get tens of thousands of visitors a day plus paintball media that reaches hundreds of thousands of people a month. The sponsor, and the network, simply do not care whether you are in a parking lot or a soccer complex in comparison to everything else.

Let me ask you this:

You want to televise a paintball tournament. You can have it *IN* an NFL stadium, or at a soccer complex with temporary bleachers for 2,000 people. Assume (even though it's not) that cost for each is the same. Which do you choose?