On to the next round......boards
 

OK, now that we have made some sort of progress dealing with weight classes and so forth, how about the next issue, boards. What do you feel should be classified as the minimal regulation size for a board? Basically, we have 500's, the Rose Bowl size board, 620's, 2X4's and full scale size. Keep in mind that new guys aren't going to fork over $300 or $400 for a large board. Personally, I feel that the 500's are just way too small to be considered a 'regulation' size. They make perfect arena boards, due to their size and the fact that arena games only use 8 players per side. The Rose Bowl board isn't too bad, but it is a little cramped. The 620 has been around for ages, and many leagues still use it. The 2X4's have become widely popular because they open up the passing game with their increased width and extra length. Full scale boards are in essence, the realistic choice because they are at actual scale to the players, but they are usually too big to move around and too costly for many guys to own.

So, where would you draw the line as to which board would be the smallest that should be used for league or tournament play? I'm thinking the 620's. They are everywhere and easily portable. The Rose Bowl board is borderline to me. It would be a great starter board, but I'm talking about league and tourney play, not what is easiest or cheapest for beginners to get.

Please don't turn this into a piddling contest about how this board is better than that board. I just want some honest feedback about which size is the smallest that you think games would be best played at.

620
 

The Tudor/Miggle 620 is what I would say is the smallest. Miggle Rose Bowl good beginner board but the vintage 620 the minimum for league and tourney play and the Jerry McGhee big board with a scale of 1/2" = 1 yard the maximum.

620

Just let people play, you guys are really aren't doing the hobby any favors.

I really hate the direction we are going in with standards, weight classes, board sizes, etc... I am just one man and my opinion does not mean jack here, but for the first time in the last few years I am on the fence about renewing my dues bases on what I have seen lately.

You guys hash it out.

620 for new comers
 

Al,

I was going to touch on boards next myself. i will post more in detail later.
I think the smallest board should be the 620. Its just enough room for any new comer to spread out a bit and get acustomed to the game again.

Once comfotable and acustomed

1) 308
2)watz boards
3)RD'S 39/24 BOARDS
4)BUZZBALL PD FIELDS

***These fields are relatively the samesize

Specialty scale size fields.

max length, 61" to 67 " in length


My question is, is their a way to measure the current(BUZZ) on each field ?
Like a small meter you can just place on any field and the current is read and recorded. Something like measuring how strong an earthquake was.
This can ensure even distribution of current per game play. Small hand held meters. I sure they are out there.


mantaraydre

What difference does it make???
 

I am a new guy and haven't played much, but guys, I do have some common sense. Do you really think 2 guys are NOT going to play if they don't have an "official" board???? Leagues can spec what is the minimum board if they want to, the tournaments do it already. Surely you guys have something better to do than stir the pot. Why don't you:
A. Build a new team
B. Find a newcomer and invite him over to give him some help
C. Practice your team
D. Call someone up and play a game.
E. Play a solitaire game
F. Write an article for the "Tweak" (which arrived in Dos Palos today, marvelous issue.)

Nah...diffent boards is like different golf courses in golf or different playing surface in tennis, don't take the competition specifications too far. Embrace the uniqueness of type of board. FHaving said that, it might be benefitical to just document the sizes of the various boards used around the hobby, starting with the Tudor and Miggle stuff, then moving on to some of the various board makers out there.

Shabby, here's my spin...I'm curious to your thoughts. All the guys are really trying to do was to help define a few competition classes, really just a snap shot of where we are in the hobby in 2010. For some people that travel to a lot of tournaments, simplification of the classes is really important thing, for others who are happy to play in a local league then it doesn't affect them. All in all, the emphasis should be on just playing -like you said! The hobby is small and every league has their own special home baked rules and we all do our own custom things and that won't change- and nobody's asking it to. In my opinion, the significance of the latest round of questions regarding "weight classes" really centers around what the MFCA tournament/competition weight class will be held at, what other affect could there be? Like I've said before, I have teams for 3.2 and 4.0...but if you're at the MFCA convention and guys have different weighted teams...well lets just say, its a little awkward. Based on this alone I think its a worthy topic to at least discuss openly on this forum. Its a touchy topic and there are always people that rub us the wrong way (especially thru text on the internet), but I don't think its really something to get too upset about because its not that big of a deal. A weighted competition class is a worthy issue for the MFCA to address at a time when we are still many months away from the convention, and many are passionate about it. You just say your peace with the best intentions, don't take things too personally and move on. I don't think anyone's intention is to create division, but if you are planning events for the convention in August you've got to be able to address this and its better to do so openly. So Shabby, I hope you don't take offense to me writing to you thru the chat board but I just thought if you were feeling that way then others probably are too. Have a great night and keep doing what you do. -Joe

Michigan Joe
 

Great response. Thanks.

Correct me if I am wrong - but don't they use the smaller boards at the Miggle tournament? And from the pics and comments I don't see any complaints. Those tournament wins aren't diminished because of the size of the board - are they???

Yo Shabby............
 

Yeah what Joe A. said.........It's no big deal brother.

In the NEFL we made the switch to 620 being the min. Anything under that is perfect for Arena.

So Shabby it's all good. Where's the wifi!?????? :fghttt: :dohdh: :fghttt:


Nat'l

i think...
 

i think it is not so much board size that needs to be worried about as much as the board SURFACE and MOTORS. If you play on metal with a electro-magnetic (miggle) motor, then switch to a vinyl field with rotary motors, or to fiberboard and those motors, there are going to be gr8 differences in power,speed and smoothness, so size becomes ir-relevent if your team wont run on the surface.

Surfaces
 

I like the various surfaces and sizes. It creates homefield advantage and it makes for unique game conditions similar to lambeau in december:D

[quote=RavennaAl;103593]

So, where would you draw the line as to which board would be the smallest that should be used for league or tournament play?

This should be decided by the league and the tournament host.

I think the question needs more definition.
This was Al's question. "What do you feel should be classified as the minimal regulation size for a board?"

I first need to know, what does regulation mean and who will it apply to? Are we talking in context of the MFCAL, a MFCA Guidebook, our local leagues or the hobby in general?

Before people get the wrong idea on these questions, I think is is important to remind everyone including myself of the purpose and mission of the MFCA.
Our Mission: Assisting the miniature football hobbyist by promoting miniature football, educating the public and providing an association which recognizes and supports the diverse coaches and leagues.

The MFCA is who? It's not the BOD. The BOD is in place to carry out what the membership wants and not the other way around. In order for the BOD to do anything, we need to know what peoples feeling are on certain subjects. At best and especially in the case of board size, the most the MFCA can do is make recommendations in a guidebook as to the preferred size field. Economics, room size, portability, personal preferences regarding surface type and so forth make it impossible for the MFCA to "regulate" anything beyond our own skills competitions.

I don't believe Al's question is going to effect anyones league or what fields they use. I think he is just trying to get an answer to what would be everyones preference for minimum field size for league play? Al, correct me if I am wrong on that assumption.

If that is the question than my answer would be 2x4 (except that I don't own a 2x4 yet). However, I see nothing wrong with anything down to the size of a Miggle Rose Bowl field. 500's are good for practice and arena.

To Wolf's point, I think that the people here have various view points as to what setting specifications are all about. For some odd reason I believe that there are a few who feel like standards are being forced on us. I'm pretty sure that is not the case. My take is we are putting together documentation for new or returning hobbyist WHILE creating standards that these hobbyist can use as a starting point IF they so choose. It appears that we are also creating standards for MFCA sanctioned events (Wolf, correct me if I'm wrong on any of these points).

That being the case we should be clear when we are defining something. For instance, any documentation for new/returning hobbyist should loosely define that boards range from a Tudor 500 sized board to a full scale sized board and the sizes in between. If we are setting standards for MFCA sanctioned events then we could say that the minimum is a Tudor/Miggle 620 (or whatever) board although it may be recommended to use a bigger board for optimal play experience (that's just an example guys...don't get your undies in a bunch).

Your thoughts?

That sounds right on. Thanks.

wolf and d-child
 

Wolf and D-child hit it on he head. The Mfca is not trying to force anything on anyone. I feel all we are doing is setting some guidlines and structure so we look more organized to the outside word. XBOX AND PALYSTATION HAVE THERE GUIDELINES VIA COMPUTER. The mfca is trying to do the same thing,
When i see things like trash this post, this is non sense, why are we talking about this, ICONS BEATING A DEAD HORSE. It leads me to believe there are some who dont want any progress/change. I dont see where any decission will effect your life whatso ever when your going to do what you want in your home/regoin anyway. These decisions are being discussed to give the hobby a more professional outlook. We must keep advancing if we want to keep dancing.

We have come a long way and we are headed towards bigger and better things. I dont understand why when change is discussed, there are some who get crazed because the topic is even being considered. Remember when we talked about paying members and non paying members and there chatboard status. many where up in arms because of this. LOOK NOW, NO ONE EVEN THINKS ABOUT IT ANYMORE !


We are just trying to create some structure. We spent years trying to get to this point. The mfca is in a great place.





MANTARAYDRE

Shabby, don't get mad. At some point, we, as a collective group, need to get these things sorted out. I keep seeing people say that these discussions are dividing the hobby. That's not possible, because the hobby already is divided.

For too many years, we all had been playing miniature football all by ourselves, unaware that others around the country still existed. Sure, there were a few leagues here and there, and the members of that league made their rules and stuck by them. The problem is that each league set up their own way of playing without reguard to any other league, because they didn't know about them. As the years had gone by, we all grew old and steadfast in our ways. It's just the way life is.

Then a wonderful thing happened. Miggle set up a chat site somewhere in '95 or '96. Slowly, we all found the site and realised that there were still others around the country that played the game. And that's when the problems started. Because we were all isolated for so many years, everyone had their own rules and standards for equipment. When guys wanted to play together, they found that they couldn't, because they were so different from each other.

Do we play one stop or multi-stop? Any touch tackle or front of base? Do we use TTQ, sticks or passing dice? Do we play 3.2, 3.4, 3.7, 4.0, 4.2 or unlimited? Do we include fumbles or penalties, and how do we do that? Do we use 500 boards, 620's, 2X4 or full scale? Do we allow boiled bases or not? Should we play by timed quarters or a set number of plays per quarter? Are we only going to allow Tudor/Miggle figures, or do we allow Buzzball, FF.net and customs. Can a person add weight under a base or not? How many coats of paint or clearcoat can a person put on their players? How fast do we have the boards set at? Should the boards be made of metal or fiberboard? What bases do we allow? How about frankenstein bases, in or out? Can a person add a spring to the kicker to make him more reliable? Do we allow the TDQ or TDK?

There are more that I can't recall, but these are all things that we have constantly bickered about it the past, and continue to do so today. Why? Because there are NO STANDARDS. Period! There are no official rules, no weight or figure standards, no board regulations. Nothing. Zip. Nada Zilch.

How do any of us expect to move this hobby forward, when there is so much division in it? How do we expect to get new blood coming into it when we can't agree what weight, boards or rules to introduce them to?

I want each and everyone reading this to ask themselves one question. "Have I really grown so old and steadfast in my ways that I am unwilling or unable to compromise?"

I'm as guilty as the next guy. For too many years, I kept playing the way that I always had. But I realized one day that maybe if I just tried something different, it wouldn't be so bad. I tried actually having kickoffs and running them back instead of just using dice and a chart for both. I tried using the TTQB and passing sticks instead of just using dice. I tried playing on a 2X4 instead of my trusty 620's. I incorporated fumbles and penalties into my game. I used some TTC's instead of always playing with rookie bases. I made some rule changes over the last few years and you know what? I found that I had been missing out on a lot for over 30 years, because I didn't want to change.

My biggest reason for wanting to be in the MFCA wasn't so that I could be some regulatory beast making rules and trying to make everyone play a certain way. My reason was because I want to get this hobby back into the mainstream. I want to get kids and young men interested in playing. I want to someday see this hobby be almost as popular as it was when we were all kids. I want to be able to promote it so that it doesn't die out when we all start dying out.

But we can't promote it unless we are all on the same page. We need some sort of universal rule set and equipment standards so that a new person starting off will be able to compete with anyone else.

Imagine if you will a new person comes into a league where they all play on 500 boards at a 3.2 limit, where none of the guys knew anything about tweaking bases so they are basically all stock, using the TTQB, any touch tackling, not allowed to stack, no fumbles or penalties and only one stop. The guy finds that he does pretty good playing that way, and develops fantastic skills with his TTQB. He can pass from endzone to endzone and hit his guy 99% of the time. Now this guy moves to another state. He finds a league there and tries to play a game. The only problem is that those guys all play on full scale boards with unlimited weight, multiple stops, fully tweaked to the max bases, stacking is allowed , FOB tackling, fumbles and penalties and they only use passing sticks, the TTQB isn't allowed. The guys team is clearly overmatched and his saving grace, his skill with the TTQB is nullified because they don't allow it. The guy is crushed. He says screw this, and never comes back.

Now, the same thing happens, only when he joins the first league, they show him the M-Rules way of playing. It's different from their way of playing, but over a period of time they gradually teach him about the way that their league plays. Now he moves to the other city. He finds that league and tells them that he knows the M-Rules way of playing and his former leagues way of playing. Everyone there knows the M-Rules, so they all play games together. Now, they slowly bring him up to the way that their league plays. It takes him awhile, but he learns. In the meantime, he can enjoy playing with others on a mutual level.

So, when I ask what is the smallest board that you think a league or tourney should be using, I'm just trying to get an idea of where to start a new person at so that they aren't going to be too far off from where others will play. If you say the Rose Bowl board is fine, then that's ok. If you think everyone should be using 2X4's then that's ok as well. These are your opinions, and hopefully, collectively, we can come to a compromise and say "we recommend using a board no smaller than the 'X' board as it is the best compromise between portability and playability as best described by the miniature football community." Or something like that.

Once again I'll say it. We're not trying to force anyone to play a certain way or with any weight limits. We're trying to find a mutual compromise that we can call the 'M-Rules', where new people can play with others on an equal level. Where a person used to playing one style and someone else used to playing a different style can get together and play the 'M-Rules' way. It's a rule set that no matter where you live, if someone comes up to you and says "How do you play?", everyone can say "There are many different rule sets and weight catagories, but we have one called the 'M-Rules' that is generally accepted as being a universal rule set that everyone can play with."
I'm hoping that clears the air.

AL, THE GREATEST.
 

AL,

THIS IS ONE OF THE GREATEST POST IN HISTORY !!!!!!!!!!!

You hit a home run when stating, some are so set in their ways from umpteen years ago. To remotely consider what somelse is doing is unheard of.
Im willing, to try and play everyones style. currently in the

1) MPFL

2)BACK IN THE BAM

3)CBSMF.

I did not make or contribute to any of these rules but im willing to participate.
Life should be, i'll try your league and you try mine. TOGETHER, WE STILL HAVE THE MFCAL LEAGUE. This is why a universal rule set is in the works.
It's like the grandparents refusing to move to a better neighborhood because they are so used to living where they are. It reminds me of a rapper who wanted to move his grandmother to somewhere nicer and she did not want to leave the projects. He is a multi mill !!! HE EVENTUALLY CONVINCED THOUGH !!

Sometimes we must realize that others exist and offer something of value just like you. THIS IS WHERE THE UNIVERSAL PART COMES TO FRUITION !

You may not like sticks or some other form of what another has to offer. But there could be 10 coaches in your league who would love to incorporate what another entity has to offer in terms of rules and equipment. This universalization is affording coaches to explore all playable options. THIS IS WHY WE ARE DOING THIS CONSOLIDATION OF THE EF NATION.

Al, i never saw you this fired up. Glad your on the rules committee.

EFFANATIC, LETS HERE YA !!!


MANTARAYDRE

I'am with you Shabby. Enough already.

Play ball.

We have enough on our hands with the weight issue. One major issue at a time. Lets get back to why we are here, painting, customizing, trading and playing.

competition or just fun
 

If you want a compete in a league or any kind of championship, you need rule. When I play with friends around here, we have our rules and they are not too complicated. That is just fine for us. If I went to a miggle convention, for exemple, I would more than happy to play according to the rules of the miggle convention.

It might be difficult to find a standard set of rules, we all have a tendancy to pull for what we think is right. If people are serious about competition then we need a standard set of rules. If we only want to play a game with friends then we use the rules that we are confortable with.

Pierre

Also, baseball has no regulation for the distance the the power allies, down the lines, and to straight center. The polo grounds center field was i think 487 ft. or something around there, but down the lines it ranged from 250-270 ft. I like the tennis relation by Joe, grass, clay, concrete, just like fiber board, expanded pvc, sheet metal, plexi, ect.

There is a point to draw a line on size though, probably at the rose bowl size.

Taylor

I kind of agree with Shabby. Seems like we are treading over well worn ground here. You play with the rules in place at the venue. I know that in Dallas, it will be their version of the shootout rules. Similar scene in Canton. I know that out here in L.A., we allow lots of equipment that other leagues don't....but I haven't seen any road warriors having any troubles with our rules.

The Miggle tourney has standards as well....but ain't it the granddaddy of all the events anyway? It makes sense that Miggle's rules will remain unchanged.

When in Rome....do as the Romans do!ltsplbll

The Rules Committee
 

The Rules Committee is working on two things right now. A "For Advanced Play" guide book, encyclopedia, or whatever you want to call it.

This is the Purpose and Mission of that project.

Purpose: To create an “Encyclopedia” of rules and terms used by current and past league and tournament organizers to play the game of “Miniature Football”

Mission: By examining and evaluating the various rules that are currently being used and have been used in the past by league and tournament organizers, we are attempting to compile an “encyclopedia” of terms, rules and game play formats, to give the serious coach of miniature football a guide to use in choosing a league or tournament format to challenge and further develop his skills and coaching abilities. This will also serve as a guide to coaches who wish to organize their own local or regional league or tournament for the purpose of attracting other coaches who may wish to play the game of miniature football in a more competitive environment.

This guide will also attempt to serve as a history of leagues and tournaments and as a historical account of the development of rules and equipment (game boards, figures, bases and other innovative developments) used by league and tournaments to play the game of miniature football.

We are also working on a set of "official" rules for MFCA sanctioned league and tournament play. Every league or tournament has to have rules. Any one who has ever worked on league or tournament rules knows what a difficult task this.

We are not trying to force standards on any one.

This series of discussions (and there will be more) is purely to find out what the majority of the MFCA membership wants so that we can create a set of rules that will govern the game play of MFCA league and tournament competetion that hopefully enough people will be satisfied with to want to participate in.

For those of you who think that this is trash and a waste of time. I humbly respect your opinion and you have a right to express that opinion. But you also have to repect the opinion and the right of those to express their opinion who do think that it is worth their time and effort.

Respectfully,
Chris LeMay
Chairman, MFCA Rules Committee.

The MFCA is not a league nor should it be. It is an organization that brings coaches together to embrace and unify people in all styles of play.

Is the MFCA on TV, is the MFCA on local radio, is the MFCA in major sporting publications, is the MFCA ever going to hit 300 members, is the MFCA going to retain current members, is the MFCA offering DVDs, etc...

This is where I think the focus should be, not on weights and field standards that already exist.

Just my opinion Mr. Chairman and there will be more.

Standards already exist??
 

Shabby,

So if standards already exist, what are they and are they clearly defined?

You are right about this and I quess we have to decide whether or not the MFCA as an organization should be trying to sanction or sponsor league and tournament competetions of their own.

One thing that confirmed players have to realize : for a "real" beginner (people who never played electric football ), the MF world is dark and foggy :D


I explain : When I found the first information about MF on internet, my first thought was "it's original and unusual, how do we play that thing ? ". Then, I readed, and readed again, anything I found on the subject. And I didn't understand anything, until I found youtube videos.

Once I understood how the system was working, I suscribed on MFCA forum. ANd again, I was completly lost : what figs, what bases, differences between that brand and that brand, what board should I use, what ruleset, sticks, ttqb, tdq, etc...But I was motivated. When I've got something in mind, I dig, and dig again until I 'll understand everything, and in the better case, I 'll master it.

But I'm pretty sure a lot of guys will surrender facing all the difficulties, the dozens of ruleset, the tons of diferent equipements available.


If you want to bring new MF players, especially the youngest (who never played the game) or foreigners (as I said before, a lot of foreign countries already know football : canada, germany, italy, france, japan, holland, etc...), you'll have to make guides, standard or whatever you can call it.

When I was thinking about my first board, people had PM me infos about miggle boards, tudor boards, or even on how to create my own custom board. All that, via PM or on threads hided (I mean, not directly visible for the newcomer) on the forum. So that information and opinions, basically already exists. If anything more visible and clear existed , it would be easier.


If there is only ONE reason to make that type of guides or discuss, here it is : making the beginners a easier way to join us. It will not change veterans league or their hobby vision, it will just make the hobby more "readable" for non specialists. thmbsp$

there it is!
 

Dimitri,

this is What I have been saying for years, but one thing you must understand, many guys in the hobby don't really care about supporting newbies. We have come a long way, many guys have since stepped up to the plate, and the tide has turned but we still have a long way to go.

You described what I have classified as "Paralysis by analysis" the newbies get sooooo bogged down with the "so many ways/things" many walk away before they even get started.

Hello Chris,

I believe that if everyone knew about the guide/rules being created for the MFCA, which is why Al was posting these questions about standards and boards, there wouldn't have been so many pros and con responses. There was no mention of this in any of the original posts. There would've been suggestions made for it, and the responses wouldn't be going the way they are. It's all in the wording of the questions. I wouldn't have known why these questions were being asked either, until I called Wolf about it.

Mike

"Paralysis by analysis"
 

To the original question:

I would say 620...

And to Coach RIP,[ "Paralysis by analysis" the newbies get sooooo bogged down with the "so many ways/things" many walk away before they even get started.]

You hit the nail on the head...That is unfortunately, ME, just my nature, in everything I do, no one to blame but myself, haven't walked away yet, however, this morning I am seriously considering it, once again, NO ONE's fault, just my "nature" which may not be conducive to this hobby. It may just not be for me. It will be a tough decision as I enjoy it so much, however, on the other side of the coin, it can be over whelming, while trying to work, take care of Family needs, etc, etc, if one let's it get to that point and I let it...

My apologies for going off subject, however, RIP's "Paralysis by analysis" kinda just hit home...and to re-iterate, it's my current work environment (24x7) and MY personality that is the prob...like my wife has been saying for 31 years,must "suc" to be you.

THE MFCA IS GREAT AND SHOULD CONTINUE ON IT'S PATH, ONLY GOOD COMES OUT EVERYTHING THESE GUYS DO...and Oh yea, 620, minimal board size:)

We already play at 3.2/3.3 or 4.0 and a few play unlimited, for the most part that covers 99% of the games played and the leagues active, why do we need to re-invent the wheel here.

The boards in use are primarily 620 or larger, with a lot of guys going custom, why re-invent the wheel here.

Figures are for the most part within the same scale/size already, why
re-invent the wheel here.

We already have the basics in place, what are you establishing?

Bottom line is, this hobby is covered within these three groups, move on.

confused???
 

Didnt Tudor Games WAAAAAAAAAYYYYY back before any of you even thought about playing this game establish a constant that still exsists today?
you have the fab 5 and stock bases that weight in at 3.2/3.3 right out of the box !!!

so your talking apples and oranges here... if it were not for the heavyweight figures being used IN TODAYS GAME, this would not be an issue.

you can still go to MIGGLE TOYS and buy those very same figures and bases and play a good ol game of ef.... where is the hang up for a new guys....

JUST PLAY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The MFCA has 3 parts to its mission.
Educate, Support, Promote

Can we all agree that the hobby would benefit from a definitive guidebook for the new coach? Any body think a guidebook is a bad idea?
This would not only educate the new coach, but be a nice promotional piece as well. It would help support leagues that are looking for new members because they could hand them an easy to understand FAQ. The book can be written by 2 or 3 of us or we can all have a hand in it. The solution is very easy. If you can't stand reading these questions, stop reading them! This is a "forum"! Forums exist to discuss things just like this. Otherwise, there is not point to having a forum.

Yes they have all been discussed and cussed a hundred times before, but we have close to a hundred people on here who probably have never seen these discussions and honestly could learn something or benefit from them. At the very least, we are trying to get constructive input that will help us to create the promotional materials that we are supposed to be creating. Now unless you trust Ravenna Al, Chris and I to be the all knowing experts of miniature electric football, quit your whining, add some input valuable to a guidebook or stop reading these threads. I'm sure if the 3 of us came out with a guidebook, 99 guys would jump in and say, "who made you guys the experts." "Why wasn't I asked for my opinion?" "You left out this or that". We are trying to build something, but you guys can't get past the fact that you think we are trying to take something from you. We are not. Everybody can do what they want in their own area and league. NOTHING the MFCA does will effect it in any way. We can't regulate those who don't want to be regulated, BUT I have had at least 40 people ask why we don't have a MFCA League and why we don't have a set of basic rules. Some people want this! Allow those that do, to work on this. Those of you that don't want it, are not and will not be affected by it.

In regards to a MFCA League. We have one already that promotes play by any ruleset and in your own area and leagues. It is a very fair system that takes nothing away from anyone. Like it or not, having a ruleset that all MFCA members can understand and play by, that is universal to the MFCA DOES help promote the hobby and gives us validity for the outside individual looking in. It has to happen. These things need to be put in front of not only the oldsters in the hobby, but the up and comers. Right now the only people that will play by a MFCA Rule set or the ones in the championship game at the convention, but even they have the option of playing by rules that they are familiar with if both coaches agree. If they don't, then the MFCA has to have an option and the coaches need to know that option in time enough to prepare.

If you can't get on board with this idea then just leave it alone. If you feel that a brochure or a DVD is of more importance than get off your bum :D and start working on it...you are a MFCA Member! You signed on to be part of the mission. Don't wait on us who are wasting our time with these questions to get started. We have 200 members...it shouldn't be that hard to get a guidebook together, but it is!

I think the world of EVERYONE who is a member, but if you want something to happen then you have to be the spark that ignites it.

By the way a DVD IS in the works....the first part is finished and I have seen it. It should be out in the near future.

Everybody on here has a right to express there opinion and I read each of them over and over. Simply put, if you can't put in positive input to the discussion then move on to another post. Change the channel! I can understand disagreeing with the point made in a discussion but disagreeing that there should even be a discussion make NO sense to me.

I am sorry, but I can't help but thinking a group's ideas on standards leads more to exclusion than inclusion.

I know from experience on this and other forums and in playing the game that we have had folks arguing to keep innovations out of this hobby. Some don't like the custom figures and more weight....some don't like boat bases.....some don't want boiled bases....some want offense in dark and defense in white and others want entire squads in both colors.....some don't like Geno's QB and see it as a crutch.....and it goes on and on and on.

We already have standards. They might be local...but that is just the nature of the beast and easier to manage.

I think it would be great to put out a guide teaching newbies how to tweak, how to obtain bases and figures, advantages/disadvantages for each piece of equipment....etc. Make it easier for the newbie to get into the game at a high level as quickly as possible. Give them links to existing rule sets....they are all over the Internet. Trying to create a standardized set of rules and impose them on the hobby as a whole just doesn't sound that great to me.

I also don't think that telling people who can't get on board with one viewpoint to "leave it alone" is not very friendly and does little to further the cause. If an idea is good, then it will stand up under fire. Stifling dissent is not a good way to convince anyone that you value their opinions.

You missed the entire point of my post! Please reread it.

Hey we are going to play the way we like
 

here in Philly, but if this organized format would help a newbie.....I'm all for it.

And ultimately that's what it is all about. I work with a lot of guys from Ireland, some don't know football too much, and know even less about this game. So if I could give them a standards pamphlet for them to look over... that's great.
Everything the MFCA has touched so far has been golden, so I have no reason to doubt that this is going in the right direction and the intensions are good!!!

The Standards Program (TSP) gets the NATIONAL seal of approval from the

F . O . T . H .
ppls$ ppls$ ppls$ thmbsp$ thmbsp$ thmbsp$

In other words, if we don't agree with what is being discussed then we should shut up, because our opinions don't mean jack, not sure that's how discussion threads on a forum were meant to work, but oh well.

Should we all just sit back and let three guys take us where ever THEY want or can we be part of the discussion regarding what may happen to our future, as we are part of this as well?

Knock yourselves out, I'll just stay busy doing my part for the MFCA by being a Pacific West Region Rep and moderating the chat board.

I'll put the rest of my comments in a pm