Marshals Weigh In!

The National Indoor Football League (NIFL) forum
11HP20
Site Admin
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:56 pm
Location: West By God Virginia

Post by 11HP20 » Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:15 am

I feel you on the whole 'hard to get people to go to games' thing fwp. I've been able to give a total of one ticket voucher away to someone in three years of trying. Every other time I offered people vouchers they said they wouldn't go to the game any way. Not even for free. Everyone I have offered the vouchers to were big football fans.
Life is funny, unless you're too stupid to get the joke.

phydeaux72
Site Admin
Posts: 978
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:56 pm
Location: Odessa, TX

Post by phydeaux72 » Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:11 pm

Being such a big fan of minor league indoor football and hockey, I've found that the ONLY way to get people into the game is by personally taking them there myself. Once you do that, 9 times out of 10, they're hooked and will go on their own after that.

And as far as the comparison between indoor & arena ball, I personally love them both. I love going and seeing the indoor game in person just as much as I do sitting in my living room on Sunday and watching the Dallas Desperados. I think it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. It's all a matter of personal preference. I think as long as the game is exciting then it doesn't matter which version you're watching.

User avatar
preeths
Site Admin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 11:34 pm
Contact:

Post by preeths » Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:11 pm

[quote=""fwp""]There were many people turned off by the arena game here. They didn't consider it real football. Once there was a change to the Capitols and the NIFL, they didn't bother to make the effort to find out if there was a difference, they no longer cared. I know, I ran into that a number of times as I talked some into coming down or coming back.

It was the Capitols job to sell themselves, they didn't.

Different athletes between the leagues is mostly a myth. The biggest difference and cause for some athletes not to cross over has been because of the rules. Each and every league has teams that work sweetheart deals that they work for the players they want.[/quote]

You are certainly entitled to your preference, but saying there is a general preference among fans is a myth unsupported by anything but anecdotal evidence. I know many Arena fans who have anecdotal evidence the other way.

DestroyersFan
Site Admin
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 6:41 pm
Contact:

Post by DestroyersFan » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:18 pm

[quote=""preeths""]You are certainly entitled to your preference, but saying there is a general preference among fans is a myth unsupported by anything but anecdotal evidence. I know many Arena fans who have anecdotal evidence the other way.[/quote]

I completely agree with you that people in general don't prefer one over the other.

But this Cincinnati situation is very intriguing, as U.S. Bank Arena hosted the af2 back in 2003. Rumors are the owner folded the team because they couldn't secure a new lease agreement (although some would say that's not the real truth). U.S. Bank Arena then hosted the NIFL for 2005 and 2006. And although the Marshals were planning (and still are) to play in 2007, U.S. Bank Arena opted to kick the Marshals out and bring the af2 back in. Why? Does the arena management prefer arena over indoor? You'd think they'd have the info they need to make an informed decision given they've hosted both in the last 4 years.

Then I read articles like one recently out of Peoria that says if they do indoor football again, they'd only consider af2.

Basically what I'm asking is among cites that have tried them both, is there a preference within the powers that be (arena management, city officials, etc...)?
www.destroyersfan.com - The #1 Columbus Destroyers Fan Site!

User avatar
preeths
Site Admin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 11:34 pm
Contact:

Post by preeths » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:32 pm

From the people with whom I've spoken, I would bet that Arena, in general, would win that battle hands down. In general, af2 has put together better, more credible front offices than indoor football has. af2 has yet to miss a scheduled game, so I don't believe buildings are out any money with af2. That's not the case for indoor football. Now in specific communities, such as Billings and Casper, indoor football would be the preference as they have had stable organizations that do a good job. But generally af2 has a better rep with the powers that be in most communities.

Dilbert
Site Admin
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 7:23 pm
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

Post by Dilbert » Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:23 pm

[quote=""DestroyersFan""]I completely agree with you that people in general don't prefer one over the other.

But this Cincinnati situation is very intriguing, as U.S. Bank Arena hosted the af2 back in 2003. Rumors are the owner folded the team because they couldn't secure a new lease agreement (although some would say that's not the real truth). U.S. Bank Arena then hosted the NIFL for 2005 and 2006. And although the Marshals were planning (and still are) to play in 2007, U.S. Bank Arena opted to kick the Marshals out and bring the af2 back in. Why? Does the arena management prefer arena over indoor? You'd think they'd have the info they need to make an informed decision given they've hosted both in the last 4 years.

Then I read articles like one recently out of Peoria that says if they do indoor football again, they'd only consider af2.

Basically what I'm asking is among cites that have tried them both, is there a preference within the powers that be (arena management, city officials, etc...)?[/quote]


The previous AF2 team folded because they couldnt secure a lease with USBA and were evicted because they had poor attendence

User avatar
preeths
Site Admin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 11:34 pm
Contact:

Post by preeths » Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:18 pm

Getting back to the Marshals, I have it on very good authority that as of today they do plan on returning, and are currently in negotiations with the city of Mason, a suburb of Cincinnati. They will not play at the Gardens.

DestroyersFan
Site Admin
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 6:41 pm
Contact:

Post by DestroyersFan » Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:37 pm

[quote=""Dilbert""]The previous AF2 team folded because they couldnt secure a lease with USBA and were evicted because they had poor attendence[/quote]

Which begs the question why did USBA boot the NIFL team to bring the af2 back into the arena?
www.destroyersfan.com - The #1 Columbus Destroyers Fan Site!

User avatar
Tatonka
Site Admin
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 5:44 pm
Location: Canton, Ohio

Post by Tatonka » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:21 pm

[quote=""preeths""]Getting back to the Marshals, I have it on very good authority that as of today they do plan on returning, and are currently in negotiations with the city of Mason, a suburb of Cincinnati. They will not play at the Gardens.[/quote]

Nice, work out some sort of King's Island package for the players and you've got yourself the hottest team around. Mason Marshals rolls off the tongue too...

mrinsideto-u
Site Admin
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:26 pm

Marshals

Post by mrinsideto-u » Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:09 am

1, the swarm didnt fold due to no agreement with the arena, owner shut down the team once he got the OK to put the Columbus D in the A1, also his other A2 team, 2, the marshals were kicked out due to lack of money, they could not even put up the money to host their play off game,,,,remember that one? Thats why. Also with the ownership of A2 team you wont have to call Hp or the owner or rip the bank off or others in your front office in order to get the rent. THAT'S WHY. :cool:

Post Reply

Return to “NIFL”