Guard Move to PIFL

The National Indoor Football League (NIFL) forum

Should the Guard make the move next year

Yes
13
50%
No
2
8%
Yes but another league maybe different league
11
42%
 
Total votes: 26

fwp
Site Admin
Posts: 426
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:00 pm
Location: Lincoln, NE

Post by fwp » Sat Jun 10, 2006 11:41 am

http://www.fayettevillenc.com/article?id=235005

The Guard get some great coverage with this article in their hometown paper.

THIS is what's the game is about...........everywhere! Great article!

fwp
Site Admin
Posts: 426
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:00 pm
Location: Lincoln, NE

Post by fwp » Sat Jun 10, 2006 11:42 am

Malepig wrote:
fwp wrote:A year ago I was conversing with the Tri-Cities owner on a regular basis, what you state is totally false, malepig. That would lead me to wonder about most of the stuff you spew.
QUOTE]

I stand 100% behind my statement. What they choose not to tell you is up to them. They may not have told you the truth and that is up to them. But they did try to come to the af2 last year and was told no because the schedule was already done.
I know better, trust me.

fbjunky
Site Admin
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 5:31 pm

Post by fbjunky » Sat Jun 10, 2006 3:28 pm

yellowpages wrote:Sounds like a certain league in the "Midwest" (Not UIF) is hoping the NIFL does win the lawsuit as they believe that all the teams will rush to them for protection. (This "Midwest" league may be exempt from the suit because of the AFL suit a few years back). A pipe dream at best. There are some talks between a couple of leagues but, they do not involve this "Midwest" league.
What are you talking about? And if you have some info, let's hear it. Don't just dangle it out there like you're with the CIA. Share it, or keep your yap shut.

yellowpages
Site Admin
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:17 pm

Post by yellowpages » Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:43 pm

Correct me if I'm wrong but, you were very vague in your statements concerning what leagues where talking to whom about coming together. And I do believe I've struck a nerve with you because you know exactly who I'm talking about.

Clarify your statement as far what teams appear to be coming together due to the lawsuit and who's behind it. I'll do the same. But, I don't believe you want that to become public knowledge.

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

Post by preeths » Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:57 pm

The AFL reached a settlement with the PIFL in 1998. Regardless of what any of today's leagues might think, they are not "covered" by the settlement because of whatever thin ties to the PIFL they may have had. No league owns a magic shield. Instead, the indoor leagues are protected because as long as they aren't using the AFL game system or claiming to play "Arena" football, they aren't doing anything wrong.

fbjunky
Site Admin
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 5:31 pm

Post by fbjunky » Sun Jun 11, 2006 7:45 am

So, I guess I was a bit vague. Although I assumed that everyone knew which parties were suing whom in this case.

The four leagues not named the NIFL are talking about banding together (for more than one reason). There are some common things there. The least of which is that all four were formed out of disdain for Shiver.

yellowpages
Site Admin
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:17 pm

Post by yellowpages » Mon Jun 12, 2006 8:14 pm

I was harsh in my reply and I apologize. I believe that anyone has a right to pursue that which is in the best interest for indoor football. Maybe it's too early but, I am going to be supportive of the PIFL's efforts. Their concept is good and I believe those behind it have the best interests of those involved.

In the grand scheme of things, it would be great if efforts in the indoor game were made by all leagues to bring integrity and character to the operations again. Unfortunately, I believe that there needs to be changes in some leadership in order to obtain that.

yellowpages
Site Admin
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:17 pm

Post by yellowpages » Wed Jun 14, 2006 3:24 am

Here's something I found interesting about the elite af2.

From an article about the new Anchorage franchise:

"Alaska Professional Sports paid the $1 million AF2 requires to start a team, Weatherholt said. He has never managed a pro sports team."

"Alaska Professional Sports will need to pay about $180,000, Weatherholt said, to purchase the removable turf and netting required to play arena football."

"What makes (AF2) work is that it's affordable," he said. "The AF2 treats their customers well."

That's why the AF2 dubs its league as the Nordstrom of football, Weatherholt said."


WOW! I have some ocean front property for sell in Kansas. I think I found an investor. ;)

yellowpages
Site Admin
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:17 pm

Post by yellowpages » Thu Jun 15, 2006 7:09 am

I believe that the PIFL has the team's best interests in mind. Whether they change the landscape of indooor football is yet to be seen. But, at the very least, they have created an alternative. I would love to see the Fayetteville team make that move.

outside source
Site Admin
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 6:17 pm

Post by outside source » Thu Jun 15, 2006 9:47 pm

Seems malepig there is a little disagreement in this did Tri-Cities want to jump and was too late or not. Be open to the fact that you also could be wrong on this.

As a friend to this ownership and don't believe they would lie to me on this or anything else, they did consider the af2 last season, but simply passed, wanting to give the NIFL another chance. If they weren't going to be truthful with me on this, they would simply tell me its none of my business like they have on some other issues.

Post Reply

Return to “NIFL”