VALORANT Americas Partnership Evaluation *OPINION*

#1

oofington

Keep:
Sentinels - they know how to get hype going for VALORANT and their roster moves are heading in the right direction. Without Sentinels, Americas loses at least 25% viewership.

100 Thieves - similar to SEN, 100 Thieves have the clout needed to stay in Franchising. We also know Nadeshot wants to win, so if they don’t make roster moves this year they will for sure next year (if results are not produced).

Evil Geniuses - reigning world champions. An innovative 10-man roster definitely showed that this team isn’t afraid to spend the cash. Not only that, their clout has gone up tenfold, and with the current personalities on the team, they should have no problem keeping their Partnership slot.

LOUD - iconic world championship org that put Brazil on the map. Their history in VALORANT along with the Brazilian representation makes them a must-keep.

KRÜ Esports - the heart of LATAM, KRÜ has fans from all over the globe. Again, with their history in VALORANT and their popularity, they should be a lock-in for Partnerships.

Can’t Tell Quite Yet/Neutral:
Cloud9 - let’s be real. The budget roster moves this team has made have been questionable. However, Cloud9 is a prestigious org, and hey - they placed very well during the regular season. But yeah, cutting corners on your roster is not a good sign.

NRG Esports - the clout level here is a little bit lacking, and with the biggest personalities probably leaving (FNS, s0m, ardiis) it may make NRG feel stale. They certainly are a stable org, though, and I think they have a strong chance of staying in Partnerships.

FURIA - honestly, this org is the most likely out of the neutral category. Everyone knows about FURIA, and the fact that they’re a prestigious org gives them an edge. They also aren’t afraid of making roster moves, so I think it’s pretty likely they stay. However, I don’t think it’s a done deal like LOUD.

Leviatán - honestly a Walmart KRÜ. I feel as if they do everything KRÜ does but worse apart from their initial roster. They were looking so good, but then went as flat as cardboard. If they continue with their blandness, they might just get the boot. However, there’s no replacement org that’s better than Leviatán at the moment, but we’ll see.

👋:
MIBR - 💀

#2

Linero

4

Frags

+

–

There's 3 years left and people are already guessing who's leaving. 💀

#3

oofington

0

Frags

+

–

fr I wanted a piece of the pie 🥧

#4

B1itz

2

Frags

+

–

Performance-based relegation is such an obnoxiously bad idea. Anyone who even considers it should be banned from ever having opinions about competitive Valorant

#5

oofington

0

Frags

+

–

I mean it’s an idea to consider, as it does incentivize orgs more to actually try with their roster making.

#6

B1itz

0

Frags

+

–

No its fucking not. Its not about how well the org does its about how safe they are financially. That's what's important in eSports rn. With how unstable the sport organizations, especially like the Guard, could collapse at any moment. There are always gonna be bad teams, its impossible for every team to be good. When a team is bad in the NBA no one wants to relegate them and replace them with a minor league team because thats absurd. Leo knows that the Ascension teams can win Champions or something but that doesnt change anything, its not about skill level its about keeping the sport alive for as long as possible. Plus KRU showed why relegation is stupid, teams can have bad seasons then show up and play well anyway the next event. Another massive problem is representation. This is a problem, especially in Pacific where there is only one team representing each minor region. If Team Secret got relegated there would be 0 Phillpines representation which would be bad for the game and for viewership. It would also seriously hurt the scene in the Phillpines

#7

oofington

0

Frags

+

–

No need to be so aggressive. All I said was that it could be considered. That being said, I disagree with your KRÜ point, as relegation would most likely not occur because of one bad seasonal performance. It would probably look like something similar to Challengers. I do wholeheartedly agree with your representation point, however. It makes sense for the health of the esports to have as many diverse orgs as possible. Again, this is all hypothetical.

#8

B1itz

0

Frags

+

–

ok but lets say there are 2 seaons this year. The first one happened the exact same way right so KRU went 0-9. The the 2nd season comes along and NRG has a massive falloff and goes 2-7 and finishes last in Americas(I know that wouldnt have happened but here me out) and KRU has an incredible run and goes 7-2 then bombs out at the tournament the qualifed to. Which team gets relegated? NRG had a good first split and got 4th at Tokyo then fell off in the 2nd season and KRU had a terrible first split then a good 2nd split and a bad performance at the international tournament. Which team gets relegated? KRU would have less points so do they? Despite the fact that they did good in the 2nd half? Or do you relegate a team that finished mid-pack in both seasons?

#10

oofington

0

Frags

+

–

I like the idea of the 2 worst performing teams across both splits playing a Bo5 to see who gets relegated. The teams would acquire circuit points across both splits to determine the two “worst” teams. This format’s definitely got its flaws, though.

#9

Lqwnmower

0

Frags

+

–

He’s a group a player they r room temperature iq