 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Jan 30, 2012 - 10:33 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
No bitching, but if someone is complaining of personal insults aimed at them, whilst throwing insults at the same time, I believe I'm in my right to call him on it. Same with tarring all Eurobowl players with the same brush.
As for team tourneys, I'm all for them, but I still haven't seen any compleling reasoning on why it needs to a NAF tourney, instead of just a NAF sanctioned tourney - I see no need for a WC-lite, when there are already at least 3 events out there that could be promoted. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
Kewan |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 30, 2012 - 10:34 AM
|
|
Joined: Sep 13, 2005
Undisclosed
Posts: 29
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Pako wrote:
On the other hand, your comments suggest that Spanish Team selection will remain as was in the past, so this will imply less people could attend to. I should disagree with you then that an Open European Team Tournament is not necessary.
It's my opinion, not spanish team opinion. We don't know what kind of selection system we're going to choose this year, and who is going to be the captain (Lupus come back please)  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Kewan |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 30, 2012 - 11:27 AM
|
|
Joined: Sep 13, 2005
Undisclosed
Posts: 29
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote:
As for team tourneys, I'm all for them, but I still haven't seen any compleling reasoning on why it needs to a NAF tourney, instead of just a NAF sanctioned tourney - I see no need for a WC-lite, when there are already at least 3 events out there that could be promoted.
That's your opinion, and I'm agree with you, but it's not necessary to destroy all their hopes (I mean finish with their ilusions) of this new tourney. NAF comunity must talk and must be heard, then our NAF staff will decide what's the best option, we choose them for making this kind of decisions, no?
Unfortunately, spanish people who plays bloodbowl didn't speak english, high percentage, and Pakulkan words represent the wish of many people, probably they choose a wrong speaker, because there are people in this forum who dislikes Pakulkan, but there are few bloodbowl players in Spain able to defend this idea speaking in english. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Vinz_D |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 30, 2012 - 02:26 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 09, 2005
Netherlands
Posts: 25
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
|
|
Doubleskulls wrote: Generally, I just don't agree that having more tournaments is a bad thing. There is saturation, and people will attend based on where they think they'll get the most enjoyment. People make these choices all the time about how much time and money they want to spend on their hobby - but they are already doing so, so adding another tournament into the mix makes no meaningful difference.
I completely agree with what you're saying here, but the saturation in itself is a danger in itself, as in the current economical situation money will become a much bigger motivator as to what tournament you'd be going towards.
If I look at the size and variety of nations represented at the Dutch Open in 2005 and 2012, you see that the bigger Blood Bowl communities (France, Germany, England) that were generally coming over now let such a tournament pass by, partly (I assume) because there are so many more tournaments now then seven years ago... It isn't a bad thing, but it does mean that a new tournament that aims to be really international has to have an amazing venue, price support, etc. in order to actually get that large variety of represented nations.
So, in that regard, I find myself in the camp of building this idea up from existing team tournaments that have 'proven' themselves and can count on a solid player base that visits the tournament anyway.
Greetz |
_________________
NAF member #6587 or 'that guy who always play Goblins...'
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Sebco |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 30, 2012 - 04:40 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 03, 2004
France
Posts: 466
Location: France
Status: Offline
|
|
Pako wrote:
The main point against this idea is that Eurobowl and WC are going to shrink because diluting the events. I am sorry but any point of view on that is subjective, which it means we are in a endless discussion.
As far as I'm concerned, I'm not "against" your idea. But I do think if a new big team tournament is organized by NAF every four years, it will be a competitor for NAF World Cup. This is only one personal opinion. I can easily admit that's subjective but that's my opinion and I suppose this topic has been created to share our opinions about this possible new event. The more we are to give our opinion, the more it will be easy to evaluate if the Blood Bowl community is interested in such an event.
Pako wrote:
Then you could improve the majors attendance, but in fact they will remain individual, and we all agree people became more motivated and spend more effort to travel to team tournaments.
As I've written it in my previous post, I agree with most of the facts you have described to explain why you wanted to create a new event. I also would like the different European national communities to travel a bit more. And I would say we sometimes only need a few things to have crowd effects. But I'm not convinced in your solution. That's why I was quoting other solutions! 
One could be to give more attention to the Majors (yes, i know, they aren't team events), another one could be to give also more attention to some existing team events. I don't know how exactly. I have to admit I didn't think about that before.
Maybe could we simply have a few "Master Team" tourneys. No new Majors as 5 seem to be enough, but a new tournament grade between Majors and other tournaments. These tournaments would idealy have a better communication on the NAF website (as for the Majors, see http://www.thenaf.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=5502&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight= , they could have their NAF website special page) and/or maybe special rewards... It could also be a mean to give the chance for countries who have no Majors to now have one more attractive tournament.
Well, all that to say that's not an angry "no" but only a "maybe could we do things differently, trying to improve what do already exist before to create something new".  |
_________________
NAF Membership Director + France NC
Bowl des Neiges XIX : 2022 february 26th & 27th
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2012 - 01:52 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
Vinz_D wrote: So, in that regard, I find myself in the camp of building this idea up from existing team tournaments that have 'proven' themselves and can count on a solid player base that visits the tournament anyway.
I agree. Giving one of the existing team tournaments a "NAF European Open Team Championship" boost every four years seems like a good way to encourage international travel.
If an organising group were going to set up a new tournament to bid from it would have to have a lot going for it to beat an existing annual event. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Pako |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2012 - 02:03 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 15, 2005
Spain
Posts: 471
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
|
|
Sebco wrote: As far as I'm concerned, I'm not "against" your idea. But I do think if a new big team tournament is organized by NAF every four years, it will be a competitor for NAF World Cup. This is only one personal opinion. I can easily admit that's subjective but that's my opinion and I suppose this topic has been created to share our opinions about this possible new event. The more we are to give our opinion, the more it will be easy to evaluate if the Blood Bowl community is interested in such an event.
Sure. And I am also with you in that to promote existing tournaments and to boost up some of them is desirable. Sorry because I understood you propose it as an alternative to team event by itself instead of alternative ways to promote the same feeling. Quite subtle consideration. I missed it. |
Last edited by Pako on Jan 31, 2012 - 02:31 AM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Pako |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2012 - 02:30 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 15, 2005
Spain
Posts: 471
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
|
|
So then, I will list some pros and cons and I hope I could do it in objective resume. Please notice to me if I forgot any issue as I will do it just remembering the general ideas.
EUROPEAN OPEN TEAM TOURNAMENT
+ More inclusive than Eurobowl (all NAF players could attend)
+ New NAF supported event (i.e. could promote more the international traveling)
+ Could get profit on already existing Team Tournaments stuff
+ Could reduce polemics in an hypothetical WC outside Europe
+ Could provide most active players a new NAF Team Event other than every 4 years
+ Similar initiatives running in North America and Australia (question of homogeneity of presented events to the members)
- Is somehow competing with Eurobowl for the "Euro" name and prestige
- Could reduce WC attendance
- To add a new tournament could stress tournament scene (money, too much to offer)
- We could boost other tournaments instead
- NAF should promote, not support, events (one exception each: team and individual are enough)
I guess more or less these are the main topics addressed.
Being in danger to repeat, I guess most of the stuff addressed is in principal subjective (mine included, BTW). This is logical because we are just prospecting the implications of a future possibility. So as Sebco pointed out, the most important thing here IMO is to get massive feedback from players in order to refine the predictions about a European NAF Open. It will give us the most accurate idea of the interest for a new tournament. I would suggest the setting up of polls in main country forums in order to properly pulse this interest.
On the other hand, Longfang and Grumbledook stressed out a quite important point: although Eurobowl team selection became more open, simply by a question of numbers it will never be inclusive (agree, we now have the most inclusive eurobowl we could have, but still is a funnel in the attendance question. This should be a very important point to take into account.
To add on top of this is the time lapse between WCs. It is quite important to know also if NAF players feel that 4 years between every WC level event is too much for wait, or that is exactly the desirable option to promote avidity for coming. In this particular point, players like me could argue that we want to have as many as we could (quite active, traveling players). On the other hand, there should be players that need to save money or that not have such this interest to travel. So then to have a WC level event every year is a madness in time lapse. To have it every four years assures all NAF players that could, would come. But what about every two years?
This last point is related with the point about diluting Eurobowl and WC attendance. Although this is a real question to be addressed, most of Eurobowl players express their desire to priorize Eurobowl. Could we have a priority list like:
WC>Eurobowl>European Open?
If it is true, the only tournament with such diluted attendance will be European NAF (which in fact is MY biggest concern because I don't believe any of the other two should be affected). There is another point kind of less objective which is "prestige" of Eurobowl.
Although I should concede I don't care so much about this "prestige" (basicly, because to really have it, the best ranked NAF players should attend Eurobowl to have the BB level prestige, which is a question that I am absolutely against) I think we could consider it also.
To end with the resume, if we take into account the possibility of an attendance reduction, we could pay attention do Doubleskulls suggestion of to promote existing team tournaments. I could help the setting up of the European Open by assuring a minimum number of players, but it will also dilute the "NAF" image of the event. We need also to consider that maybe existing team tournaments organizers could be not interested in to organize it (again, feedback will be welcome from those organizers).
I truly believe this will be the best option in the future (an existing team tournament hosting the European Open every 4 years) but maybe not for the first time. The organization in a brand new place could help to promote the image of the event by itself, while in the future (with this image already fixed) it could travel around Europe by existing team tournaments.
However, I guess we still allow independent bids to be considered, just in case there will not be existing tournaments interested on (or capable to host) the tournament. This will be a backup solution to assure it continuity.
To sum up, I think the main problem is to know if there will be the situation 1:
500 people attending WC
230 people attending European Open
Or 2:
270 people attending WC
230 people attending European Open
Which could means in 1 we have 230 people attending both. And in 2 a sharing of the same 500 players between two options.
Again, I will end up with a final remark. I am with all you concerned about the idea because the diluting attendance issue, I was considering it very carefully before posting it and contact with Pippy. But the difference is that I think the only event that will pay it will be the new one. And to avoid it we only need to propose an attractive event to assure NAF players interest. I do believe all we want the best situation for the NAF, and although I finally get different conclusions to myself, I am also concerned about to have a worse instead a better situation with this. But as pointed out, we receive also good feedback about it and could be worthy just to think positive and try it once. Let's see if it fits or not. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Pako |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2012 - 02:53 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 15, 2005
Spain
Posts: 471
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
|
|
I already posted a Poll Topic on spanish forum with 5 options to decide:
 Will you be interested in the organization of a NAF European Team Open every 4 years?
 Yes, I will attend to both, World Cup and NAF European Team Open
Yes, but I will choose to attend to just one event
No, there is already Eurobowl as the European team tournament
No, I think two years between every NAF team tournament is too close
No answer
Hope you will find it unbiased. I will further sum up Yes/No answers, but I think is better to know a little bit more "why" Yes/No is selected. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2012 - 12:22 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 05, 2003
Italy
Posts: 80
Location: Italy
|
|
Pako wrote: I already posted a Poll Topic on spanish forum with 5 options to decide:
Will you be interested in the organization of a NAF European Team Open every 4 years?
Yes, I will attend to both, World Cup and NAF European Team Open
Yes, but I will choose to attend to just one event
No, there is already Eurobowl as the European team tournament
No, I think two years between every NAF team tournament is too close
No answer
Hope you will find it unbiased. I will further sum up Yes/No answers, but I think is better to know a little bit more "why" Yes/No is selected.
Interesting. I have posted the same Poll in the Italian forum.
I'll inform you about the replays.
By the wai I'm for Yes, I will attend to both, World Cup and NAF European Team Open (or nonNaf European Team Open or wathever you'd call european team tournament hosted every 4 year) |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Sebco |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2012 - 01:19 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 03, 2004
France
Posts: 466
Location: France
Status: Offline
|
|
Roller wrote: Pako wrote: I already posted a Poll Topic on spanish forum with 5 options to decide:
Will you be interested in the organization of a NAF European Team Open every 4 years?
Yes, I will attend to both, World Cup and NAF European Team Open
Yes, but I will choose to attend to just one event
No, there is already Eurobowl as the European team tournament
No, I think two years between every NAF team tournament is too close
No answer
Hope you will find it unbiased. I will further sum up Yes/No answers, but I think is better to know a little bit more "why" Yes/No is selected.
Interesting. I have posted the same Poll in the Italian forum.
I'll inform you about the replays.
I did the same on the main french forum (even if I'm not really convinced by this idea). |
_________________
NAF Membership Director + France NC
Bowl des Neiges XIX : 2022 february 26th & 27th
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
generaljason |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2012 - 02:11 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 04, 2009
British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 439
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Why don't you guys just make Eurobowl a tiered event? Like instead of making another European team event, elevate current Team events (that want to convert) to Eurobowl qualifiers instead? And for countries that don't currently host a team event but participate in Eurobowl - create one for your country. This way everyone in Europe gets a chance to participate at their country's Eurobowl qualifier event, and Eurobowl is never accused of being closed because it's a tiered event. Dice beat committees and elections anyday.
2 cents. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Sebco |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2012 - 02:32 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 03, 2004
France
Posts: 466
Location: France
Status: Offline
|
|
generaljason wrote: Why don't you guys just make Eurobowl a tiered event? Like instead of making another European team event, elevate current Team events (that want to convert) to Eurobowl qualifiers instead? And for countries that don't currently host a team event but participate in Eurobowl - create one for your country. This way everyone in Europe gets a chance to participate at their country's Eurobowl qualifier event, and Eurobowl is never accused of being closed because it's a tiered event. Dice beat committees and elections anyday.
2 cents.
Thats could be another solution but if I understood well, the aim was to have a great team event with a lot of coachs travelling far away from their countries and playing against teams from other countries. A team losing at their national team event and so not being qualified to the new EuroBowl you described would not achieve the orginal goal explained above.
The EuroBowl you described would still be reserved to a limited number of teams and so would not be suitable for Pako and the other ones who thought this new project.
That said, as you, I think if this new project is really launched, we will also have to think about the consequences on EuroBowl (at least thinking about having EuroBowl only each 2 years, so when there isn't World Cup nor Euro Cup). |
_________________
NAF Membership Director + France NC
Bowl des Neiges XIX : 2022 february 26th & 27th
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Grumbledook |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 01, 2012 - 01:14 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 922
Status: Offline
|
|
Another advantage that hasn't been mentioned is that it could be held in the summer, thus making it available to those coaches who can't travel in the Novemeber time slot that eurobowl and the WC have had up till now.
Eurobowl qualifiers that gj suggested I can't see being practical. At least in the UK existing tournaments wouldn't fit that model very well. It would cause far more upheaval than just giving one of the existing large team events a NAF stamp. I would also drop any notion of calling it "Euro", Team Challenge Open works fine. Doubleskulls mentioned there may well be aussie expats who would want to make a small team for example.
If the idea is to make it an open all inclusive team event to as many as possible, drop the euro, have smaller teams of 4 which are easier to get together and host it in a time of the year that doesn't compete with the eurobowl. I don't see it competing with the eurobowl either, coaches willing to travel to that will still go, those who aren't picked on the eurobowl team are then free to choose to attend the team open...
I also don't see the problem with just having the Eurobowl on alternating years either. If you have two teams of four then perhaps the two highest placed teams of four per nation make up the eurobowl team for that country the following year? Then the other eurobowl the year after the WC is picked via different means? Just throwing the idea out there, of course those same players may not, or could not be free to travel for the eurobowl anyway. Could just have the top team at the team open going, and the other four places are made up some other way. Plenty of ways this could all work for the good of the community. |
_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'
Jon
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Pako |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 01, 2012 - 01:15 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 15, 2005
Spain
Posts: 471
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
|
|
I don't think Eurobowl should change.
I could put me on the place of an Eurobowl player and I won't disturb the feeling and friendship carried by Eurobowl by making this tournament a carrot for an increase in competition on former team tournaments.
Qualifiers have a very undesirable side effect: to affect the fair play and good relations in the tournaments.
For this reason, I think Eurobowl could still being the same tournament. It deserves to remain as it was planned at the very beginning of the NAF.
But also Eurobowl players should put them in the place of the rest of NAF players to admit that is worthy that the rest of NAF players could have avidity for something comparable at european level. Be careful and read "comparable" in terms of scale and international variety. I don't mean "competitive". |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
