VCT Franchising Contract

#1

Yameroooo

I think its better for VCT to have any franchising team to be contract just 1 year, 2 bottom team relegate to ascension.

Because right now i would say most mid team in franchise doesn't do their best and they just be happy to be here untill contract ends, we can see this in all region, they are recycling washed talent and even not making changes resulting poor performance that is not entertain to watch.

I hope that is direction what vct gonna be toward 2027, what your opinion ?

#2

jawn

11

Frags

+

–

orgs want stability, a 1 year contract is NOT stable

#3

mangotan

5

Frags

+

–

this, idk how people still keep thinking this is viable. franchising exists purely for stability purposes, riot just needs to pick better partners

i wouldn't be surprised if some of these 'bad teams' aren't kicked out either because at the end of the day it's still business decisions (ie: some of them might bring in lots of viewers, they have good financial backing/sponsors, or they're in the interest of riot's expansion plans [which is why they picked TEC and AG instead of like... TES or WBG in china franchising])

#4

Yameroooo

-1

Frags

+

–

for initiating franchise i think its okay, but i dont think its a sustainable system to go with, its not create enough competitiveness

also at this point, i dont think riot need org as much as org need riot since org got paid, i could be wrong here...

#5

mangotan

0

Frags

+

–

partially agree, but riot definitely needs orgs more than orgs need riot - ill try to find the link, but one of Gentle Mates' co-owners mentioned how if they got relegated this year, they'd likely end their investment in valorant

it's just too difficult to sustainably invest in tier 2 atm. ROI is high, sure, but it's also insanely unlikely. re: apeks owners talking about how it was the biggest gamble either.

i reckon if you cut a bunch of orgs after 1 year in Tier-1 and forced them to go back to tier-2, many would leave. and sure, maybe some would stay, but i doubt it'd be good for a sustainable system in the long-term.

#6

foythvlr

0

Frags

+

–

if it was one year then it wouldn't be franchising lol

#9

Yameroooo

0

Frags

+

–

its says 2 bottom team relegate to tier 2, so other team automatically get renew contract for next year, just like in football league

#10

foythvlr

0

Frags

+

–

that is not franchising that is a point-based ranking system. two completely different things

#12

Yameroooo

0

Frags

+

–

you can name whatever you want, but the current system is actually sucks and slowly they gonna kill their the esport scene, or viewership just gonna stuck (already happen at the moment)

#11

Mortadelo

-1

Frags

+

–

Technically speaking it’s already not franchising since orgs don’t actually own the spots, but yeah, it would be less franchising

#7

Ldrago

0

Frags

+

–

franchise itself is shit

#8

serot

1

Frags

+

–

real solution is make tier 2 actually relevant with some sort of open qualifier for every tournament with top challengers teams

#13

fncOPIUM

0

Frags

+

–

agree, the problem is why bother with tier 2 when u can just pick up an unsigned team towards the end of the season? orgs should have incentive to invest in tier 2 year round