- 12/06/2011, 08:01PM ET
CuntryBlumpkin said 12/06, 08:01 PM
In another TD, it was determined that a Jousting League could work in the US with the proper exposure and marketing, but to appeal to the people in today's United States, a simple one on one joust would not draw that much attention.
The premise of the joust in my format will remain the same, you get knocked off your horse by another competitor, you lose, but instead of the one on one tournaments, I say that the league should format it's jousts in a demolition derby type format.
The field would be limited to 12 jousters that will be determined by a qualifying round of one on one jousts.
The jousters will start on the edge of a circular arena, each evenly spread out on the edges of the circle.
When the starting bell sounds, the jousters all charge to the middle of the circle, and like the demolition derby where the last car running wins, the last jouster still on his horse wins.
Obviously, there will be some safety concerns, but keep in mind that the jousters are wearing full metal suits, which would protect a stomp from a horse. Rodeo clowns will be used to corral all unmanned horses.
Good luck Grue
Grue said 12/07, 09:50 AM
Thanks for the TD, UH.
When we last TD'd, your house was under siege from the killer tornadoes in the south. So a heartfelt "Good luck" to you, too.
Your Jousting League is brilliant. But the format needs work for mass appeal.
First, it must be team-based. No one wants to watch individual competitors in a big circle running into each other. They'll all just end up running around in circles for 4 hours. Yawn.
We're Americans. Most of us. So we need a ball. But I'm upping the stakes and making 3 balls. Three balls are better than one. Welded steel rods in rings to allow lances or hands to carry or horses to kick and roll.
Remember dodgeball as a kid? When the starting bell sounds, 11 jousters on each side start by racing full speed towards three balls spaced on a center line.
You have to carry the ball to the opposite end to score points. Maybe toss it through a hoop for extra points, Basketball/Quiddich style. Americans need points in sports.
Obviously there are safety concerns. But if people get injured, you can simply move the starting line up 5 yards and it solves everything.
CuntryBlumpkin said 12/07, 05:31 PM
There are certain sports that would never work as teams sports, and jousting is one of them. I consider jousting to be a combat sport, and unless you're wrestling in high school or college, combat sports are for the most part, and should remain individual sports.
Your format, while, I admit, it is fun, just makes things too complicated. A professional jousting league is going to appeal to fans of sports like MMA. Your format is essentially turning jousting into a slightly more violent game of polo. We're not trying to make a sport that only appeals to the high class here.
Your format totally removes the main goal of jousting, which is knocking somebody off a horse. Like it or not, a good portion of the population likes violence.
I like my idea a lot better. It would be more exciting, and it wouldn't resemble the national sport of Afghanistan.
My format would ensure a chaotic free for all, it's you against the other 11 competitors, last jouster remaining on his horse is the winner.
Grue said 12/07, 05:58 PM
A few fundamental issues with your argument.
- Jousting is a combat sport. It has the origins in combat. Mounted cavalry lancers would descend on the enemy IN A LINE. It is designed for head-on collisions. People definitely get knocked off. That's how you move the ball.
12 combatants in a ring colliding in the center creates really weird angles for a lance. You cannot swing it to the side effectively. Everyone is pointing the wrong direction. Proper lancing technique requires room to pass on the side. The horses aren't stupid enough to run into the center. Chaos.
- Second, my sport is complicated. You know why? Because were American AND we're MEN. Men like complicated sports so that we can feel superior explaining the particular nuances to our women. Simple sports are tennis, ice skating, and Iron Chef. There is nothing to explain!
Wife/GF: "What are they doing?"
Guy: "Knocking each other off the horses."
Wife/GF: "That's barbaric. Let's watch Iron Chef."
Guy: "Playing Grueball."
Wife/GF: "How do they play?"
Guy: Long explanation of intricacies of scoring/strategy.
Wife/GF adopts your team OR leaves you to watch with your beer.
CuntryBlumpkin said 12/08, 11:20 AM
Just because jousting has always been done in a line doesn't mean it's the best way to do it. Personally, I think it would be cool to see a lance knock a guy off his horse from the side, or even the back if he's very skilled.
My idea takes jousting to a whole new level, new skills would be needed, and you would need to train your horse extremely well.
You say horses aren't that stupid, but you overrate them. I used to ride horses a lot, and they will do pretty much whatever you lead them to do. They're not stubborn like mules.
Using a ball in a joust is akin to using a hockey puck in baseball. It just doesn't work.
With my format, there is a better chance of achieving long term financial stability, as an all out joust would appeal to fans of rodeos, and a possible merger with PBR could be in place.
I want a sport where women can understand the game. We're trying to appeal to all demographics. The simpler the sport, the better.
Your idea would just be a fad, flash in the pan, be popular for a few years until everyone realizes it's just a gimmick. With mine, there is a good possibilty of long term success.
Grue said 12/08, 12:00 PM
You may take jousting to a whole new level but "What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?"
Put it up to eleven. On each side. With more balls than most guys.
Why is this more successful than your format? Teams.
Teams are tied to cities. Fans identify with their city more than a horse owner. Riders may change but the city rarely moves (tho the team might).
Team games allow for bursts of action interrupted by commercial breaks. Balls go out of bounds. Points are scored. Substitutions happen. Fans take a leak. And corporate sponsors flock to TV networks. TV revenue leads to long-term success.
The four, and now five with Grueball, major sports are team sports. Individual sports are the side shows on crappy time slots.
Yes, NASCAR sells ad space on the product. But, do we really want to see this?
The other advantage to teams is merchandising. 11 players gives you a better chance of having superstars and franchise players. You can sell more jerseys.
You have any idea how much money replica player armor generates?
Great TD, UH.
- Awful Announcing
- Free Darko
- Pro Football Talk
- The Big Lead
- Joe Posnanski
- The Sporting Blog
- Big League Stew
- Bugs and Cranks
- Every day Should Be Saturday
- Mr. Irrelevant
- With Leather
- The Sports Hernia