Baca's Mailbag, Dec 12

The question(s) that follow are very common. I have heard them repeated for as long as I've been involved in this game and there was a time when I asked most of them. I don't have definitive answers. The best I can do is some observations based on too many years experience. I invite the rest of you slackers to include your take on these questions in the comments.

(A) Ok, What type of back round do most of the pro players or regular tourney player have ??? (B) How do you afford it? is a question I am asked many times over the couse of a season? (C) I see a lot of the newer players having a tough time, when they look at the commitment needed to play on a regular basis. Our team is made up of a mix of people, ages and incomes and we are in a rual area.. (D) We have to buget and save to do what we do. We have no team sponsors and by no means do I think we have money to throw around.. We didnt go to a couple of major event due to the cost of traveling (air fare) How how do most players afford to play ...? (E) Do sponsors make up some of the difference, has it really become a rich man's sport? (F) What your feeling on the paintball landscape and the cost of playing competitive ball?


I'm going to respond to the questions in the order they come up and in order to keep things as clear as possible I've divided the query into sections.
(A)--from an economic perspective there is no type. I joke occasionally about the lack of diverse sports interest and background among tourney players but I doubt it's much different from the generalized norm. I just find it a bit curious since most competitive people are competitive about almost everything, and as kids, tend to try more things--or did a hundred years ago when I was a kid.
(B)--the usual way most players do. By prioritizing their spending in such a way that they can keep playing paintball. Figure out what you can afford and then spend more--is the way it frequently ends up. I'm not even sure it's all that much different, cost-wise, than it used to be. (But I do think there are a couple of contributing factors that are different today than in the past.) Back in the day we shot less paint but it cost a lot more. The last IAO I played Hellfire was $105 bucks a case of 2000 (including tax.) High end guns weren't much cheaper and national events were a larger time commitment, more days off school or work. A serious tourney jones has never been cheap. The biggest difference today is practice costs.
(C)--Nothing new here either although I do think it's tougher to get started in tourney paintball than it once was. My first team had players with money but no time and players with time but no money. Some were super gung ho, others a lot less so. Our biggest issue was getting enough time & money & commitment together for actual events. We were a decent practice team and a lousy competition team.
(D)--Again, not uncommon. So does most everybody else involved in the tourney side of the game. What often happens is one or two guys end up taking on extra financial burdens (to be paid back later) which almost inevitably turn into (more) problems later. Two things are required of a serious team; strong leadership and a plan. And once the plan is agreed to everyone needs to hold up their end--or they get replaced. More problems arise here in that lots of times the team is a mix of friends and ages and resources and that has always been and remains a recipe for frustration more often than not. Nobody wants to be the bad guy, everybody understands the difficulties but if the team is actually going to function there has to be a bottom line commitment from everyone actively involved. The big difference is today the level of commitment is higher lower down the divisional ladder than it once was, or so it seems to me. 
(E)--Sponsors make up some of the difference for very few teams any more. And the lion's share of what remains of real sponsorship, not discount product deals, is product. For example, Team A gets X number of guns from sponsor Q. The guns are for the team with the understanding the extra guns are sold to help fund the team. There are a relative handful of teams that do better than that.
(F)--In many respects very little has changed. Serious competition isn't cheap, it requires some level of commitment. A commitment in time & money. It is what it is. Beyond that I have one serious concern and I think there are a couple of factors in play today that are significantly different from times past.
My fear is decisions about the game's future direction will be based too much on the current rough economic times. Somewhere there's a boundary between keeping the sport alive and killing it in an effort to get more peeps to play.
Having said all that I also think there are things that make it more difficult to compete than in times past: fewer fields dedicated to supporting local team(s); a broadly younger demographic; what practice has become. The first one seems pretty straighforward. Toss into the mix the larger number of younger players and you've got kids without direction and fewer leaders. Fewer leaders and fewer homes that welcome competitive players and teams makes it more difficult to build teams. And somewhere during the last decade the romance of the grind has token hold of all divisions of competition. Which isn't a bad thing but it has upped the ante to competing in virtually every division of play. Kick in scrimming on the event layout and the game--for too many--becomes about reps, practice points played and nearly endless cases of paint shot--and we're talking about so-called introductory levels of play. The entry bar has been raised too high and it's going to be nigh on impossible to lower it. 

Baca's Mailbag, Dec 4

A couple of quick notes. Yes, GI has in fact bought Procaps--and the deal is officially done. VFTD was supposed to receive an early copy of the official Press Release (which may still happen)--I foolishly agreed to delay posting in exchange for the presser--but it didn't matter as they proceeded almost immediately to leak the information, AGAIN. This time after having signed all the appropriate documents or at least while in the process of signing them. Let that be a lesson kids. It's one I'ma take to heart. Trust me. (As soon as I realized the cat was out of the bag--this time for good--I did post it on VFTD's Facebook page and will be commented on events of the day there during December.)
Mailbag questions aren't being answered in the order received. It's whatever happens to catch my fancy really. For example today's question provides an opportunity to compare the two major leagues and demonstrate, for the uninitiated, that I'm an equal opportunity hater.

I, along with others I'm sure, was wondering which format you think is better and why. I've been following for a while and can pretty much figure its not going to be the NPPL, but I guess I was wanting to know is what sets the PSP apart as being the premier league (if that is your position).

The obvious answer is Bacaball! (Excepting of course it's only suitable as an expensive spectator-friendly, sports-legitimizing version of competitive paintball that, er, nobody has actually played--yet.)
Between traditional 7-man and Race 2 the simple answer is Race 2 for all the same reasons you've already heard. The big one is of course that the outcome of a match is more likely to be determinative of which team was actually better on a given day. For me, sideline coaching or no coaching is a non-issue. Communication has always been a key element of playing the game and remains so whether or not someone outside the field of play is communicating or not. And for the record I do not believe sideline coaching has nearly the impact that is often attributed to it. (Although at the lower levels it can have more of an impact but that is directly related to the skill & confidence of the players.) But once you start talking about officiating and things like gun rules we're now in the territory that sets the leagues apart from one another.
In one sense the dividing issue for the players seems to be format preference. Which is fine. And if that were the only factor at play I would be (and am) fine with peeps playing what they like. On that count my issues with both leagues, heck, with all leagues, has always been they deliver the best product possible to their customers and since we're talking about tournament paintball "best" means a fair and impartial competitive environment in which to compete. That's my baseline. Everything else is an extra as far as I'm concerned--and secondary. Is it fun to have an unusual or exotic venue? In an unusual or unique location? Absolutely. Do any extras ever make up for a lousy competition? Nope. At least not from my perspective. Your mileage may vary--but I doubt it. In the past when various iterations of the NPPL clearly focused more on delivering an experience instead of a competition--apparently assuming the competition part would handle itself--they ended up in the unenviable positions of always having to try and top themselves and eventually couldn't, no matter how much money they spent. And it cost them on both sides of that equation. It cost them the experience seekers and the serious competitors.
On the other hand there's the path the PSP has followed. The league pays APPA for a registration system that actually works and has the potential to incorporate every tournament player at every level because it's a necessary feature of providing a fair competition. (Does the league still make a few bucks on ID cards? I hope so. I'd hate to think Chris gets all that money--but the point is one league has a real system, the other has another revenue stream.) The PSP pays a salary to the Head of Referees to travel around and train refs and oversee their on field efforts at events in an effort to maintain the highest quality they can manage. The PSP also pays extra for a dedicated crew of refs and their supervision on the Pro field. Is it less than perfect? Sure but the league is willing to spend real money to provide the best officiating they can. And anyone who has been around more than a day or two knows the history of the NPPL, in every version, is fraught with one reffing scandal after another--and not just on the outer fields among the lower divisions--but front and center on the grandstand field. The difference isn't bad luck. It's that one league makes a concerted effort to get it right and the other has different priorities. Same with gun rules. The PSP has clearly defined and enforceable gun rules--whether you like them or not--and as a result significant gun-related penalties are almost unheard of anymore. The NPPL, on the other hand, has a history of unenforceable rules, subjective reffing judgments, arbitrary penalties and widespread cheating. Today's NPPL 3.0 has at least capped their "semi-auto" so they have an enforceable limit (thanks to Virtue) while they continue to turn a blind eye to the ramping they supposedly don't allow. And then there are the rest of the rules. In the PSP there is a clearly defined hierarchy of authority in place to see to it the rules are followed. (Is everybody always happy? Nope, but that isn't the point of the rules.) In the NPPL the rules are inadequate at best and incomplete at worst and the Ultimate Ref's job seems to be making stuff up as he goes along. Does it matter? Most of the time probably not but it is symptomatic of the NPPL's routine practice of half-assing the actual competition while touting what a great job they do at growing and promoting paintball.
Bottom line is what sets the leagues apart in my mind is one is focused on the on-field competition and the other isn't--and never has been.

Baca's Mailbag

Dear Baca (Most of you aren't really that polite)
I watched some of the college webcast this past weekend which I thought was pretty tight. Do you really think the experienced professional crew working on the webcast made changes because of what you said in your post? Isn't that arrogant?
signed
a fan

Dear fan
That's two questions but since one is short ... the answer is yes. Is it possible they managed to muddle through without me? Hey, anything's possible but did you see (or hear) (or read) anyone else suggesting changes simular to the ones actually made? Or anyone else taking credit for it? I rest my case. Besides, it says on the sidebar that I'm almost always right. Who can argue with that?

Dear Baca
I see the NPPL has decided to class up the joint by having a bikini contest. As a Paintball Insider can you--or Mr. Curious--tell us what other kinds of things are being considered to add some maturity and legitimacy to our sporting events? Bum fights? Midget wrestling?
signed
Drooling in Detroit

Dear Drooling
Good catch. After last year's topless painted chicks in Chicago the bikini contest is a big step up in the soft exploitation and objectification of women--if you buy into the politically correct conventional feminist theory--but as men of the world you and I know babes like being objectified, at least the hot ones do, so much so that the NPPL expects them to pay for the privilege. Should be a good time. And the bum fights are out. Apparently there was some concern with the event overlapping Living Legends again that it might confuse any scenario teams from Kentucky and turn into a free for all brawl.

Dear Baca
I miss the posts on major league paintball. As long as I've been reading your blog you did at least weekly posts on the big leagues. Why did you stop?
signed
curious

Dear Curious
That was then and this is now. The general mood was more pessimistic. Everything seemed to be caught in a downward spiral and so there seemed to be some merit in cataloguing that movement more closely. Today nothing has changed all that much but it seems that competitive paintball is no longer in free fall and may be stabilising and the general community mood also seems to be turning. VFTD keeps an eye on all the big league numbers and will continue discuss both the good and the bad as events and circumstances warrant.

Baca's Mailbag

Today's mailbag question comes from a player/coach who has a lot on his plate--around 40 total players competing in a number of different divisions. They routinely practice 3 times a week though not everyone manages every practice. It also sounds like they focus a lot of their efforts around mastering gun skills. (Which isn't a bad thing.) The questions asked amounted to curiosity regarding how a pro team practices and a query for ideas on ways to mix things up and keep them fresh. I can't tell you how pro teams practice but I can tell you how my team practices. And I will include in this post as many links as I can find to past posts discussing specific practice-related routines.
Over the past three seasons our practices have changed from one year to the next. Partly because of ongoing player development and partly because of changes in the format--particularly this year. (This is also an issue with a large club-like group with skills and experience spanning beginners to upper division play.) What the majority needed then isn't what they need now. At first we needed to integrate our incoming experienced players with the core roster of inexperienced players while continuing to develop the inexperienced players. Our drills & practices focused on the critical skills, team building, learning to play together and at the same time individual time to focus on the differing weaknesses within the team. With a smaller group that isn't hard to do in practice--but it's impossible if there isn't an overarching vision or goal for the team. Players can be taught the fundamentals and they can be taught various roles that are part of the game but they can't be taught to be part of a team if that team doesn't have real direction, and it can't, unless there is a singular goal or vision. That goal or vision isn't only about what the team wants to achieve it is also, more importantly, about how the team will achieve it. (More in a minute. Or three.)
This year we are focusing on preparing for the format change--and continuing to inch closer to our vision. Our drill keys are laning off the break, running & gunning & edge control. (And again.) We are preparing for the new length PSP field & how the new layouts are likely to play--not by adjusting our style--but by doing the things we do well, better, faster and with even greater precision than in the past. At the same time it isn't all dull drills. Our practices tend to be progressive in that we go from the basic or simple and add degrees of complexity, building on the fundamental(s) we began the day with. By the end of a practice we have (hopefully) worked our fundamentals from drill to scrimmage in ways that reinforce the skill while placing it within the context of the play of the game.

Let me recommend a couple of things to teams large and small. A lot of teams struggle, not because they aren't competent or committed players, but because they don't really know what kind of team they are or want to be. They haven't evaluated their strengths and weaknesses and acted as a unified group. If you are working with a large or multi-team group the first thing that needs to be done is to understand what each team currently is and then make decisions about what sort of team the members want it to be or what sort of team best suits the players' skills & temperament. Everything else will flow from those decisions.
Let me also suggest the large group scenario may decide it's necessary to reduce the total number of practices in order to more effectively focus on the unique needs of the different teams and developmental level of such a large group of players.

Here's a number of different past posts on drills & practice routines. Laning OTB. Laning OTB 2. Gunning & Running. More Gunning & Running. Gunfighting. Not as many as I thought there'd be. Don't know how many I may have missed but there should be a few useful ideas in the batch.
Didn't care for that answer? Did it leave more questions than it responded to? You know where to find me.

Baca's Mailbag

"Dear Baca,
I have been playing paintball for as long as I have known my g/f. She never showed much interest before but lately she's been hinting she might like to play too. What do I do?
signed,
Confused"

Okay, he didn't really sign his question 'confused' but he plainly is and besides, it's kinda a standard advice column gimmick so I'm going with it. Now you might think the answer is obvious--a no-brainer even--but it's not. Everyone says get more people into paintball. It's practically a duty these days and, well--girls are people too. And can paintball really afford to ignore 51% of the population? Ipso facto encourage the girlfriend to play paintball and you will have an activity you can enjoy and share together. But that wasn't the question. So while you lot congratulate each other for being sensitive, enlightened New Age males I'm going to answer "confused's" question. And tell him the truth.

Dear Confused,
There is still hope. The fact that you are uncertain is the proof. A few added details would have been helpful but we'll make do. The practical answer is to give her the Sting Test if she has never been shot before. Everyone who gives paintball a try either passes or fails the Sting Test so that's the place to start. Either the thrill of the game outweighs the occasional pain--or it doesn't. If she fails the Sting Test your worries are over. Here's what I suggest: Explain to her that while almost everyone enjoys playing for some people the pain overrides their pleasure and it's important to discover which type she is as soon as possible. This means you intend to shoot her once. Assure her it will be over quickly. Preferably in the thigh. Do not recommend she wear baggy clothing. Did I mention you want her to fail? Trust me, you're doing her a favor--and yourself one, too.
If she has already passed the Sting Test you are at a crossroads. Before you make a decision it is important you realize that there are a limited number of outcomes and most of them are bad. For you. Are you already on the defensive? Does she already have something of yours--hint: usually comes in a pair--safely tucked away in her purse? If yes this is also an opportunity. The secret to understanding the situation is that she has changed her mind. Nothing unusual in that. But by now you need to understand that means it's test time. For you. Remember, paintball didn't change. You didn't change. She did.
I know what you're thinking. What's the big deal? I hear you, dude. To you and me it isn't a big deal. You go along to get along 'cus most of the time you don't care enough one way or another. Sure, babe, whatever. But that, confused, is the wrong answer. I can't tell you what to say. (Okay, I could but this is something you need to do for yourself.) One last thing: remember, the key isn't trying to figure out what she wants, it's deciding what you want.

(VFTD looks forward to your comments and emails. VFTD cares.)

Baca's Mailbag

It seems like things are just puttering along and everyone is waiting for the next bit of entertaining or impossible gossip to come along--I mean it's not like anybody plays paintball anymore. And Greg Hastings is about to find out if anybody even plays game console paintball anymore and if our collective ennui has spread to our Playstations and Xboxes what hope remains for the future of paintball? Dressing up and playing soldiers? Oh, wait a sec--this wasn't another depressing rant, this was supposed to be a Baca's Mailbag (and I need questions, dammit!) How 'bout them Cowboys? Is everybody ready to agree that if you don't have a solid offensive line it almost doesn't matter how many high profile "weapons" and impact players you have? [That was a football segue for all the paintball dweebs--and you know who you are.]

The major league season is entering the home stretch with the NPPL, PSP and MS all having one event remaining in the 2010 season. And until the last couple of days everything was quiet, perhaps too quiet. As The Monday Poll hints there's been chatter amongst the pro teams about what happens next year but the state of pro paintball the last two or three years has also frequently meant one last shake-up as the season comes to a close and that time may be upon us. Coming off their best result of the year it appears there's uncertainty in the Aftermath camp as Mouse turns to the dark side and a roster spot with Dynasty. As mentioned yesterday it also appears Entourage will not be playing Vegas and there's whispers on the street they mightn't be the only one. And I, for one, am interested in the new paintball unleashed at Extravaganza. But that's not what the mailbag is about--this time. And in the meantime I'll put Mr. Curious to work and see what he can find out in the dark alleys and abandoned tenements of tourney paintball.

Today's first question is entirely too apropos: With several teams hanging on by a thread this season, what do you see as a sustainable number of Pro teams for next year?

I like the implication of "sustainable" as if pro teams were a green resource that required government to raise our taxes (some more) while strip-mining our rights. (Was that too political?) But in another sense that's really the problem, isn't it? The system was built on a sponsorship model that wasn't sustained. At this stage sustainability needs to reference two things; What's it cost and who can afford that cost? Is, or can, anything be done to reduce the costs involved? Lots of questions and not a lot of answers and instead of a thoughtful, safe answer I'm going to offer a prediction.
The PSP pro division will be 8 teams (tho the league will want to expand it to 10 which could mean some non-competitive filler.) Nonetheless, it will continue to be recognized as the preeminent pro division in competitive paintball. The NPPL will restructure or cease doing bidness. (No insider info, kids, just my best guess.) If it restructures it will be a predominantly west coast league featuring the remains of the NPPL pro division. Crossover between the leagues would amount to 1 or 2 teams at most. How's that for a prediction?

Going back to the [not so] recent Pro Paintball article that declared you as "the best coach in the game"... What exactly does it take to be the best? Also, can you name the more noteworthy other coaches of today and talk more about the role of a professional coach?

Longevity? While it makes for a terrific Facebook endorsement (and I appreciated the kind thoughts) it's even more subjective than trying to name the best player. Before anyone can talk about the best we's gonna need to define just what we mean by "coach." Since coach can be anybody from the Dad who drives everybody to the Saturday 3-man to the friend from another team sideline coaching "coach" covers a lot of territory. I think of coach in the traditional sports sense. More particularly I think of my role equating with that of a basketball coach. Half the job is teaching, making players better while turning them into a team. The other half is to provide the structure they play within and guide the play of the game in competition. In a lot of ways coaching in paintball, in any sense, is a fairly new idea (although there have always been players, owners, captains who have performed some or all of the coach's role) so there are a lot of variations of what coaching is out there.
Being a good coach requires knowledge of the game, an ability to communicate effectively, develop a relationship with your players, evaluate players strengths & weaknesses, instill confidence, prepare your team to compete effectively.
As for noteworthy current names discretion is the better part of valor but Bob Long is a legendary teacher for good reason and Shane Pestana of the Ironmen was an outstanding coach and game day leader.
Regarding the role of the professional competitive paintball coach I think it's still in flux in some respects. It's moving toward a consensus and toward a role as fully complex as established sports coaching but it isn't there yet. In part because the pro teams are struggling for resources, in part because some teams retain players/coaches/captains in the traditional roles and in part because there aren't a lot of people out there with the combination of knowledge, skills and free time to fill the job description.

What makes a tourney series successful nowadays? Is there even such a thing?

The second question first: Absolutely there is such a thing. I think the Vicious Series and WCPPL and others have proven to be successful this year and they've done it in different ways to some extent--which brings us to your first question. The baseline of success is that a series draws enough interest and participation to make it worthwhile to continue doing the series for everyone from the promoters to the players and sponsors. At the same time a local field operator may simply love tourney ball and may consider his efforts a success as long as he's proud of the product he provides and doesn't lose money doing it. If you're thinking a tourney series must show growth year to year or event to event that's plainly unrealistic in the current environment, particularly at the national level.

The universal why. You know -- life, the universe and everything. Just -- WHY?

Not about paintball of course but since it's an easy question -- why not? The universal answer is 42. (I thought everybody knew that. What do they teach in school these days?) The tricky part of this equation is knowing the question, which nobody knows. (It is not what is six times seven.) And the last time anyone made the effort to find out it didn't turn out all that well.

SnapShooting is one of the key skills for a player. But if you ask ten (pro or not) players to explain it, you will have ten versions of snapshooting. There is for sure only one good way to shapshot!!!
Who got the good one, and when the whole world of paintball will learn and train this basic skill the same way?

This is an interesting question on a couple of grounds. First, is there in fact one way that is demonstrably superior to all other options? I'm not convinced. I will grant that there are core fundamental techniques involved that if followed will offer the most consistent results for the most players--but does that mean I'm going to insist all my players do it my way? If they are 10 years old then yes, they do it my way because that becomes the foundation of their skill--not the end of it. If they're 18 or 20 odds are I will try to fine tune their technique instead. Second, you're going to have a hard time convincing one group or the other that they need to change what they're doing. If one technique proves to be universally superior everyone (mostly) will eventually adopt it.
But let's break it down a little further. What's the snap-shooting priority list? Presenting the least profile possible? Making an accurate shot? Taking the shot in the least amount of time? Replicating the technique in the widest variety of positions possible? And we haven't even considered the practical complexity of the bio-mechanical problems of real human bodies with the differing dimensions of gun set-ups and those effects on snap-shooting technique. Is there one technique that encompasses all those elements better than any other?
I tend to treat the issue like a swing coach in golf. If everyone could swing a club like Tiger Woods that's what I'd teach. Since they can't I focus on making them the best they can be.

Baca's Mailbag, part 1

This just in: NFL contemplating putting microchips in footballs. To be used to confirm with GPS precision whether the forward spot of the ball really crossed the goal line or was a first down. Where officials sometime fail let technology take over. And wouldn't you just know it, I have a Paintball parallel. Imagine a reusable projectile with built in sensors that correspond to similar sensors embedded on the players gear and equipment. When a projectile makes contact such that sensors in the projectile and the gear both signal contact the player is eliminated. The projectiles can be used over and over, say good-bye to paint cost. No broken paint at all. Which kinda sounds like Airsoft or laser tag. Okay, obviously the concept needs some work. Probably a lot of work. Moving on ...

One thing Paintball doesn't need is a rookie salary cap. But it could use some more rookies.

Don asks, "How many times can Johnny Perchak retire before we start making Brett Favre comparisons?"

Looks to me like you answered your own question, Don. Let the comparisons begin. Unfortunately for Johnny they begin ... and end with the fact both have done it more than once. Although you could say at least Johnny didn't go play for his former arch-rivals ... um, nope, scratch that too. At least Johnny didn't go to the Hall of Fame and ask for his donation back. Of course that would require a couple of highly unlikely scenarios; Johnny being as attached to his slider shorts as Brett is to his thigh pads and paintball would need a Hall of Fame. Oh. Here we go again.

Since Don started with the football comparisons I think we need to see how far we can go with that. Who is the LT (former MVP maybe on the downside of his career) of paintball or the Ochocinco? Is there an America's team; the team everybody either loves or hates? Let's hear what you got.

Papa Chad asks, "Do you feel we have hit the competitive skill ceiling?" and followed it up with, "If we have, do you think the skill ceiling should be higher?"

The short answer is no. If pro paintball had the resources of other real pro sports I think you'd be surprised by the result. How many baseball fans can tell the difference between the top two AA power hitters when team scouts already know one of them can't hit a major league quality curve ball? Or a better analogy would be the speed of the game difference between college football and the NFL. Plenty of great college players, signed for lots of money, can't make the transition. They work hard, have real skills but don't quite have it, for whatever reason. Sam is true of pro paintball.

Mike wants to know, "What have teams done differently this year to help them rise to the top? (ie Damage, Impact, Infamous). I want your opinion, not the vanilla answer of player pickups or whatever."

I was initially going to go with whatever but you took the smartass answer off the table. I can't speak to the Impact or Infamous situation--well, I could and I can but you're not going to like those answers. Damage opted to go with Santeria. You know, the whole Serpent & the Rainbow thing. We couldn't quite manage robots but figured zombies was a close second. And the only real downside to the Santeria rituals is the blood and chicken feathers. Otherwise I think the results speak for themselves.
Now for the "vanilla" answer. We've been working on this with the majority of our players for awhile now. This is our third year pro and we began with a plan. Each year we set goals and we work within the confines of the real world limitations we have to deal with. We are in the neighborhood of where we intended to be and we still have lots of room for improvement. In the case of both Impact and Infamous what you're seeing is a solid core supplemented by the "right" players. Both teams are among the league leaders in resources, organization, experience and excellent team chemistry. They made good decisions that have led to positive results. There are no guarantees but it's working out. Of course the league(s) are different too. With no Philly those players have upgraded a number of teams while leaving a Philly-sized opportunity. And top to bottom the PSP probably isn't as deep as it has been in the past at times.

In a similar vein Be Smart asks, "Recently we have seen several Pro teams make adjustments to their rosters (Ironmen adding SK to coach, Dynasty adding 2 players). . would you care to comment on how roster changes can affects a team's dynamic in mid-season?"

In a game like paintball it's a crapshoot. If things aren't working the way you wanted them to anyway a change is unlikely to make matters worse and sometimes it's the only option for making them better. In the Ironmen's case bringing in SK is a change in the working relationship of coach and players while maintaining the team's organizational structure. Change can often be good, shake things up a bit. On the flipside if things are good why take the chance? In Dynasty's situation they've taken on seasoned players who have defined roles who, on the whole, ought to be easier to integrate into the team. Even so, again there's no guarantee as we've slipped into the chemistry zone. You see it all the time in every sport. The big name all-star type teams frequently don't pan out and it's not because the players can't play. It's because, somehow, they are missing the intangible that makes them a team.

Be Smart continues, "Could you walk us thru the decision making process for picking up a player to play Pro ball? How much value does 'chemistry' factor in as opposed to skill?"

In our case we were short a roster spot. There was no pressure to fill it but it was open. In the background I knew the role I was looking to fill. As it turned out a young guy who fit the bill also fit with the team. We didn't go looking. In fact we held off making the permanent move until I was convinced he had what it took because he was so young.
In the off season the team was contacted by a lot of current and former pro players looking for an opportunity. We turned most of them down, spent some time talking with a couple of players where the timing just wasn't right and by the time pre-season practice began we had nine players we were very happy with and started to get ready for 2010. Don't get me wrong, we didn't turn players down because we thought they weren't capable--mostly because we believe more in team than we do in talent. We're a Florida team so our guys are Florida guys. (Yeah, I know J-Rab plays 7-man with us and isn't from Florida. For 7-man it's okay 'cus he's a seamless fit with the other players and we don't practice 7-man unless we can do it at the event venue.) Along the way Jason brought his little brother to drills practices. The team liked him. He fit. The chemistry was good. Instead of having one older brother to give him crap he's got 8. And that's important. But it's also important that Jacob had solid technical skills and that he has a great attitude and work ethic.
I guess the answer to chemistry versus skill is they are at least equal though if pressed I'd give the nod to chemistry. We can teach the right kind of player what they need to learn.