raehl, the NCPA and the IAO?

[Baca Loco]

a regular alphabet soup. I spied a story over at Furby's hangout about the NCPA having to do some sort of paint trade at the IAO in order to compete.
Question for Chris--is it true? If so have you heard from the good folks kind enough to give you some paint in the first place? Tell us the whole sordid tale.

 

[raehl]

Hah.

The story might be based a little bit in truth, but beyond that I got a good laugh reading it.

The teams did play for free, and a big thanks to Milt Call for putting the event together and Debra Dion and the IAO crew for accomodating the college teams.

Frankly, even if the story was true, I kinda thought it was non-news. It tried to make a big deal out of the college teams perhaps not having paid the same price for paint as everyone else, kinda glossing over that they were playing in their own, separate one-day prizeless exhibition and still had to pay travel/lodging/etc (although I know at least a few teams had their colleges pick that up.) Nobody was bitching last year when all the Nations Cup teams played for (free?) in their exhibition, so how a potentially similar deal a year later got to be news is beyond me.



- Chris

 

[Baca Loco]

Hah.

Originally posted by raehl
1--The story might be based a little bit in truth...

2--Frankly, even if the story was true...

3--Nobody was bitching last year when all the Nations Cup teams played for (free?) in their exhibition, so how a potentially similar deal a year later got to be news is beyond me.

- Chris

Planning a career in politics, Chris? Sounds like your practicing the art of the non-answer and misdirection.
1--Yes?
2--Which is it? A little bit or just plain true?
3--neither the story or I raised that issue. Perhaps you might direct your attention to the questions raised? Or not.

 

[Robbo]

Hah.

Originally posted by raehl
Nobody was bitching last year when all the Nations Cup teams played for (free?) in their exhibition, so how a potentially similar deal a year later got to be news is beyond me.
- Chris

And you think you can equate the Nation's Cup (Lasoya, Lang, Fraige and Co) unveiling of X-Ball with........... your college ball ( Nobody, nobody and nobody) ?

Ya kiddin me right?

 

[raehl]

Pete: I think I can equate an exhibition with an exhibition as far as costs/difference from the rest of the event goes. I wasn't intending the analogy to run all the way to a comparison of the teams and players.

Although, depending on who you are, the reverse applies - you think you can equate the college teams (Illinois, Purdue, Penn State, and Rutgers) with Nation's Cup (nobody, nobody and nobody) ? It's all perspective. Lasoya doesn't mean **** to anyone who doesn't play paintball (and to some of us who DO play paintball, we'd like to wack him upside the head occasionally ).


Baca:

You can call it being a politician, I tend to view it as only being willing to stick my neck out so far. Or, put another way: What arrangement the college teams might have had, and how they might have secured such an arrangement, isn't the web forum's business.

1. Yes what?
2. Whichever you want to believe.
3. The story implied that the possibility that college teams might have different pricing arrangements than everyone else was some great injustice or something. My point is that even if it were true, it wasn't an issue when that happened last year, and it seems to me the only reason someone tried to make an issue of it this year was so the "paintball insider" would actually have a story.

There was an invite-only exhibition. The exhibition pricing may have been different than the pricing for the open-entry competition for prizes. Why is this interesting?

- Chris

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by raehl
Pete: I think I can equate an exhibition with an exhibition as far as costs/difference from the rest of the event goes. I wasn't intending the analogy to run all the way to a comparison of the teams and players.

Although, depending on who you are, the reverse applies - you think you can equate the college teams (Illinois, Purdue, Penn State, and Rutgers) with Nation's Cup (nobody, nobody and nobody) ? It's all perspective. Lasoya doesn't mean **** to anyone who doesn't play paintball (and to some of us who DO play paintball, we'd like to wack him upside the head occasionally )
- Chris

Well, I sure agree with your last line anyways

PS But that is all I agree with in that post of yours...so don't get too carried away !

 

[raehl]

Back to business as usual.

- Chris

 

[Baca Loco]

Originally posted by raehl

2. Whichever you want to believe.

3. The story implied that the possibility that college teams might have different pricing arrangements than everyone else was some great injustice or something. My point is that even if it were true, it wasn't an issue when that happened last year, and it seems to me the only reason someone tried to make an issue of it this year was so the "paintball insider" would actually have a story.

There was an invite-only exhibition. The exhibition pricing may have been different than the pricing for the open-entry competition for prizes. Why is this interesting?

- Chris

Right, so the story was factually correct. And the reason this was interesting is because the IAO, despite changes to format and venue, is plainly sinking like a lead turd, in part, because they are deemed to be too expensive. Secondly, it's interesting cos here some folks are good enuf to front the NCPA some free paint--and at least reap the benefit of having it used in front of a lot of players and others--but in the end it gets tossed in the back of a truck somewhere. it seems like the only publicity their generosity gained was in the original story. Thirdly, PB players love all sort'a gossip to do with PB stuff. Oh, and fourth, anyone who makes the effort you do to get himself (and his organization) front and center should expect some interest and scrutiny. Doh!

 

[Furby]

And no, I didn't write it.