Talk Fantasy Football

Good luck to both!

My thoughts on the NAF Presidency in general, and the candidates: http://www.sann0638.co.uk/the-naf-presidency/

One more day before the voting begins. Check the Q&A threads of the candidates. There were quite a few questions asked already, but I'm sure both candidates are more than happy to answer even more questions.

Voting has started - I was vote #7, hope there will be more to come!

Voted, both seem like good, solid choices though so we’ll be well catered for either way I’m sure.

fromherashes wrote:Voted, both seem like good, solid choices though so we’ll be well catered for either way I’m sure.

Agreed, tough choice!

Are the Q&A not available for non-paid up members to see? I recall (possibly incorrectly) that I have been able to see such things in the past.

You need to log in to see that part of the forum, so yes, you need to be a member.

I'm glad to see you can vote blank.
Hope next election someone not pro-gw presents as a candidate.

viyullas wrote:I'm glad to see you can vote blank.
Hope next election someone not pro-gw presents as a candidate.

If you have ideas why didnt you stand?

That would certainly have been interesting.

Someone who's anti-GW, you mean? I think it's fair to say that I was second only to Manuel in terms of misgivings about their return to the game. (To be fair, that distinction might be too relative to mean anything.) Similarly, I'm pretty ambivalent about BB2016.

viyullas wrote:I'm glad to see you can vote blank.
Hope next election someone not pro-gw presents as a candidate.

I know how this is going to look, but I promise it's a genuine question. viyullas (or Nate, or anyone else), what exactly is the anti-GW position these days?

I used to understand it, if not agree with it. Deciding to not support Blood Bowl for some years did not endear them to a number of the older players. Certainly since I started playing in earnest, I think not supporting BB until recently actually made a lot of business sense (I won't bore on about why, but GW not supporting non-core brands in tough financial times chimes with what was going on around me in the world of work at the time), but I understand if it wasn't popular.

But they are now back supporting BB, putting out lots of new content and new bits. There was no vast rules rewrite (which according to a recent AMA was on the table). I'm sure you don't begrudge them making money from their game or, indeed, doing whatever they want with it? The NAF is an international association of players dedicated to Blood Bowl - Games Workshop's game of fantasy football. If the argument is 'CRP was perfect, forget whatever now comes', that's difficult for our organisation on a number of levels. Firstly, I remember heaps of salt around some of the less popular facets of CRP, 'CRP is perfect' is not a universal view. Secondly, if the NAF decided to cut ties and ignore GW now, why now? Why not pre-LRB4? Why do you get to decide that, what if the membership want to get back on the train in two years when we have a new president, doesn't it all get rather messy?

I can't quite put my finger on the thread, but was it not made public recently we number 3-3.5 k active members? I don't know how many BB2016 boxes GW have recently sold, but I suspect it's many, many times that number. I remember when FUMBBL moved from LRB4 to CRP, there was a very vocal minority that shouted and screamed until an LRB4 division remained open. This CRP garbage was not for us, forget change, sod progress, meddling idiots do not know as well as we do, we're the experts, having played 2 million games. I think it lasted about 6 weeks. The overwhelming majority wanted to play up to date, current Blood Bowl. The screamers had each other to scream at, and no Blood Bowl to play. If / when the NAF cuts ties and does it's own thing, how long do we 3-3.5 k last without new blood from new sales?

So, a lot of text, I guess little understanding. Am I warm anywhere? When I read anti-GW sentiment around the place, it appears to rarely come with a persuasive argument. Genuinely interested, not trolling. I admit, I am not a GW nerd, I play none of their other games. If this is a 'do you not remember what they did to the Warhammer guys back in '07?!' thing, sorry, I don't.

Purplegoo wrote:

viyullas wrote:I'm glad to see you can vote blank.
Hope next election someone not pro-gw presents as a candidate.

I know how this is going to look, but I promise it's a genuine question. viyullas (or Nate, or anyone else), what exactly is the anti-GW position these days?

I used to understand it, if not agree with it. Deciding to not support Blood Bowl for some years did not endear them to a number of the older players. Certainly since I started playing in earnest, I think not supporting BB until recently actually made a lot of business sense (I won't bore on about why, but GW not supporting non-core brands in tough financial times chimes with what was going on around me in the world of work at the time), but I understand if it wasn't popular.

But they are now back supporting BB, putting out lots of new content and new bits. There was no vast rules rewrite (which according to a recent AMA was on the table). I'm sure you don't begrudge them making money from their game or, indeed, doing whatever they want with it? The NAF is an international association of players dedicated to Blood Bowl - Games Workshop's game of fantasy football. If the argument is 'CRP was perfect, forget whatever now comes', that's difficult for our organisation on a number of levels. Firstly, I remember heaps of salt around some of the less popular facets of CRP, 'CRP is perfect' is not a universal view. Secondly, if the NAF decided to cut ties and ignore GW now, why now? Why not pre-LRB4? Why do you get to decide that, what if the membership want to get back on the train in two years when we have a new president, doesn't it all get rather messy?

I can't quite put my finger on the thread, but was it not made public recently we number 3-3.5 k active members? I don't know how many BB2016 boxes GW have recently sold, but I suspect it's many, many times that number. I remember when FUMBBL moved from LRB4 to CRP, there was a very vocal minority that shouted and screamed until an LRB4 division remained open. This CRP garbage was not for us, forget change, sod progress, meddling idiots do not know as well as we do, we're the experts, having played 2 million games. I think it lasted about 6 weeks. The overwhelming majority wanted to play up to date, current Blood Bowl. The screamers had each other to scream at, and no Blood Bowl to play. If / when the NAF cuts ties and does it's own thing, how long do we 3-3.5 k last without new blood from new sales?

So, a lot of text, I guess little understanding. Am I warm anywhere? When I read anti-GW sentiment around the place, it appears to rarely come with a persuasive argument. Genuinely interested, not trolling. I admit, I am not a GW nerd, I play none of their other games. If this is a 'do you not remember what they did to the Warhammer guys back in '07?!' thing, sorry, I don't.

Right on the money for me.

Guess that sums it up for a lor of people!