Welcome To P8ntballer.com
The Home Of European Paintball
Sign Up & Join In

Okay, on this whole reunification thing...

SteveD

Getting Up Again
Pete, Missy, Nick,

I'm at the Embassy Suites, driving down Thursday morning with a load of paint.

Pete - I'll call, but you'll probably be asleep.

Looking forward to this - I haven't been this close to the playing fields since, hmmmm, for too long.

Later all.
 
D

duffistuta

Guest
Originally posted by SteveD
Pete, Missy, Nick,

I'm at the Embassy Suites, driving down Thursday morning with a load of paint.

Pete - I'll call, but you'll probably be asleep.

Looking forward to this - I haven't been this close to the playing fields since, hmmmm, for too long.

Later all.
He flew out yesterday Steve, he'll be on site all day today.
 

Chicago

New Member
Jan 31, 2005
1,380
0
0
Visit site
Whatever you heard, Furby, I doubt it's the truth (yet) - none of the parties are in agreement and there will be a meeting in the next week or so in Chicago.

There are some interesting proposals on the table, and I did hear at least one unification idea that I think would work for next year.

But I also think this event lessened NPPL's bargaining position. p8ntballer's main page beat me to the punch, but the 7-man this weekend was the most boring pro-level paintball I have ever seen. I pray that they only show one or two episodes, as I can't see how this is going to broadcast any better than the NXL shows - hell, I can't see where they're going to find 8 hours of footage.

Along those lines, you can tell that this wasn't paid for by ESPN - any television production with real investment is going to have out-of-industry sponsor logos on the field. The only banner space was 3 banners for ESPN, plus some paintball banners at the TOP of the field. (Whose bright idea it was to put the paintball company banners 20' in the air instead of on the ground is beyond me.) The money for this show apparently came out of IMG's "new ventures" budget - the "Hey, let's throw some money at something new and see how it works out" vanity budget.

If there is unification, XBall is going to have to be preserved. When you're talking about TV, and you're talking about a format that plays a game every 40-80 seconds, and wins because one team is dead, and one that plays a game in 480 seconds, and wins by a body or two, there's no contest here.

I think a week ago, NPPL had a pretty commanding negotiating position, but this event has killed it. Every vendor I talked to said World Cup was better than here; the PSP format is obviously superior, the reffing here wasn't any better than PSP... they're back to even.
 

Dannefaerd

Platinum Member
Jul 8, 2001
271
0
26
New Zealand
www.whatever.net.nz
But does one event from either party make parity? People can have ups and downs - it's the result over a couple of events that make the difference.

What amazes me is this ... for all the talk of "what format is better for TV" (and yes, even in little old NZ we do get the chance to play both 7 and X) - have any of the major players sat down with ESPN or one of the other major production companies/broadcasters and had a serious conversation about "what sells on TV" and "What makes good viewing" and then gone away with 2 or 3 of the major players and designed a format around that?

Creating a format that we can test and tweak specifically for TV makes more sense to me ... rather than having the standard "this/my format is better than that/your format" arguments that seem to abound the message boards at the moment.

Speaking personally - I don't know what that format will be - but with out the "single point of reference" that other sports offer we are always going to be behind the 8 ball.

Cheers
MD
 

Chicago

New Member
Jan 31, 2005
1,380
0
0
Visit site
Where is the single point of reference in NASCAR? Formula 1?

You're right in the sense that format isn't important - whatever TV wants for format, you can give it to them. The tough part is convincing them that the demographic works.

Except that, for some reason I don't understand, the NPPL/PP people seem incredibly attached to 7-man. I don't know if XBall is the right answer, but I *KNOW* 7-man is definitely the wrong answer, and as long as PP/NPPL insists on running the Pros on 7-man, we're not going to get anywhere.
 

SteveD

Getting Up Again
Chicago,

I brought a group of very experienced xball, college xball and psp 5 man players to their first nppl event this past weekend, and every single one of them said - 7 man is tougher and a lot more fun.

The justifications ranged from 'the reffing is far better', to 'ramping just makes it too easy for inexperienced teams' to 'the fields are more complex', to 'there's a better quality of team' and a variety of other comments related to the above.

Now that they've played their first 7 man, despite a 3-1-4 record, they are very enamored of the format and have decided that they want to concentrate on that format at the expense of any other.

Its just one team, but it may provide some insite into why NPPL is 'wedded' to that format.

***

The event had a few issues, most seemingly related to Hurricane damage affecting power, traffic and some hotels. Those folks who had problems with hotels went through what they did not because hotels were closed, but because rooms are filled with power workers, out-of-state police, tree removal crews and other relief workers.

Traffic in Miami was brutal due to traffic lights being out and, yes, many of the pro games were boring. I attribute this to the fact that at least some of them have learned a new trick; winning a three game set can be done on body count alone. No need to risk a loss going for the flag when a 3 point advantage will do it just as well.

All in all though, the same 'atmosphere' of an NPPL event prevailed, the weather cooperated for the most part (just a little hot) and a lot of very interesting, exciting games were played.
 

SteveD

Getting Up Again
- and another thing.

sports don't need a 'single point of reference' - but they do need a 'point of focus'.

Baseball has a regular situation occurring that is analogous to paintball - two players squaring off against each other. In paintball its the dorito guy and the snake guy. In baseball its the pitcher and the batter. You've got 8 other guys on the field (plus whatever runners) and the camera needs to show them, but it can regularly focus in on meaningful action - the pitch, the swing, the ball in the air, the outfielder going for it, the runners around the bases.

Foot ball - same thing; pull back for a wide shot of the field, close in for the line of scrimmage, the pass, the catch, the run, the tackle. Again - you don't see everything every play, but you do get enough to illustrate the action.

Paintball lacks individual points of focus that, when taken together, translate into a meaningful picture of the progress of the game.
 

Nick Brockdorff

New Member
Jul 9, 2001
588
0
0
www.uglyducklings.dk
Except that, for some reason I don't understand, the NPPL/PP people seem incredibly attached to 7-man. I don't know if XBall is the right answer, but I *KNOW* 7-man is definitely the wrong answer, and as long as PP/NPPL insists on running the Pros on 7-man, we're not going to get anywhere.
Chicago:

It's a question of pride.

They have spent years telling everyone 7-man is the superior format - and suddenly making a 180 might make them appear foolish - even if it is best for the sport.

I think they would actually suffer very little ridicule, if they WERE to depart from 7-man... if it was done in connection with a greater scheme that was supposed to bring paintball together as a sport.... most people would understand.

That having been said, I don't believe the finals games were boring because it was 7-man - I believe they were because you could suddenly win games with one body more alive - which would obviously change the approach to the game for every team - whoever got that bright idea should be spanked ;)

- Same thing would have happend under similar rules - with 5-man teams.

It DID demonstrate one thing though (and bare in mind I wasn't there - I'm going by reports, scores and experience alone).... whatever number of players is chosen to be on field at major events next year - the FORMAT has to be one that makes it sensible for teams, to go all out to destroy the other team - rather than winning games by bodycount.

- It's about time we get rid of points for eliminations.... and by all means - get rid of the flags also..... "Reach the opponents base (goal) "clean" and you score the point" - end of story.

The justifications ranged from 'the reffing is far better', to 'ramping just makes it too easy for inexperienced teams' to 'the fields are more complex', to 'there's a better quality of team' and a variety of other comments related to the above.
Steve D:

None of the things you mention have much to do with whether teams consist of 5 or 7 players..... every single one of those things could be had in a 5-man format.... although I think you know better than anyone, that "complex fields" is a bitch for a tv production company ;)

Now, I understand you have some old beef with the principals of the PSP.... but I hope that despite that, you can agree that in terms of TV, the fewer players there are onfield at any one time, the easier it is to make a "meaningful" production?

Obviously, we don't want to make paintball an individual sport - that kind of radical change would destroy much of what the sport is about for the vast majority of the tournament players.... but to my mind, 5-man is a step in the right direction compared to 7-man.

Add to that, that a lot of teams in the lower divisions, would have a hard time bringing enough players for an "X-ball like" format, if it was based on 7-man.... and would have a significantly easier time doing it, if it was 5-man.... and that the paint bill would be huge if it was 7-man based on "X-ball" (even the lite version).... which is also a killer for lower ranked teams.

Also - many regional (and in Europe "National") leagues are based on the 5-man format... so if the major events did the same, we would finally have a sport where everyone played the same game, from top to bottom, which would be immensely beneficial to the sport.

If we want to be a "big sport" - the very first step is to ensure that the game the "kids" play at their local field or in their local league - is the same as the Pros they see on TV.... and in deciding on the "new unified format" this one point should be at the forefront of everyones minds.

It's NOT important what the Pro teams think - they'll adapt - they always have and always will.... it's important to streamline paintball all the way down to the lowest levels of the sport.

What we want is, that in the future kids can go to their local event, and play the same field they saw the Pros play at the Huntington Beach event, and try and emulate the moves Oliver Lang did... we want them to be able to play the same format, with the same equipment, under the same rules and on the same bunkers set up in the same way.

Once we get to that point, paintball is ready for serious growth as a sport.... and in the meantime, all we are really doing is squabbling about what some 2.000 paintballers in the US and Europe "want" - and in the larger picture they (we) are really insignificant (or at least SHOULD be).

Nick