How i would fix Franchising

Franchising is kinda not the best so here's 5 things I would change (if I were in charge)

1. Survivors/fighting for your spot
   Top 6 WORST performing teams (probably points if they continue that system) fight to stay alive and compete again in tier 1. 2 teams get booted BUT get to fight in ascension (so this would come before ascension) for the chance to get back in.
2. More chances for tier 2
   2 teams get to ascend with the mentioned 2 booted. With the idea of 2 teams being forced to fight for survival in ascension, it also will prove in a way that tier 2 is just as scary as tier 1 and that they deserve to play in VCT. I'm ok with keeping how tier 2 works...but I also think it's stupid how much challengers leagues and stuff teams have to go through, so I think 1st place should auto get put into ascension (maybe) and 2nd auto gets put into playoffs? Or both in play offs. Also let last 2 fight premier winners or something for chance to go to tier2? Idk they really need to implement premier better in my opinion and change how the tier 2 scene works.
3. Point system kinda dumb
   How come winning masters madrid gave 3 points and no points during kickoff to one point for win and 5 points for winning int. MAKE THEM EVEN- i know seeing the growth of teams is cool and all, but if your gonna try to make a fair system, keep it consistent.
4. All games should be in a big arena
   Group stage champs basically being played in a random ahhh building was not very fun, ALL group and Playoff games should be in a big arena. What makes watching VCT enjoyable is THE FANS, ofc the game is why we watch, but cmon riot.
5. Play ins for tier 1 and 2?
   Basically I personally want LCQ back. Single elimination chaos games. The funnest games to watch. Lock in without the problems lol. Of course this would only be for ascension and champs. Since having one for every masters would be impossible.

Instead of top 6 worst teams it should just be top 3 worst teams. Teams placing at 7,8,9 would still be average.
Also an event with single elims would slap fr

Winner of masters gets rolexes and winning champs you get rolls royce

1. valid idea, HOWEVER contradicts with the whole point of franchising (Big american leagues are built in the same way and the worst teams aren't booted)
2. the biggest problem is that the transition from tier 3 to tier 2 and from tier 2 to tier 1 is a cluster fuck
3. just lock the winner of the international event to champs and let them use regional league as practice
4. absolutely fucking NO, that's a way straight to hell with finances, OWL tried them, ask them how it went bud
   5.LCQ for Champs just screams mickey mouse to me
   EDIT. To add to point 4, reason why it's a terrible idea is that this is just not viable. Example Given, IEM Cologne is one of the biggest events in esports and the tickets to it are sold out mere seconds and days into ticket waves yet ESL doesn't find 4 day ticket sale viable, 3 days is the optimum.

Think relegation and format will hopefully be reworked in 2027, but doubt it changes before then. Also points are being changed so it's not as dumb next year.
Disagree that every game should be in the large arena, no other esport does this and is a big waste of money. The point of the biggest stadium is to showcase the most important games, you won't fill a stadium for a first round groups game and it's incredibly hard to lock down that big of a stadium for almost a month.

RhythmD [#5]

Think relegation and format will hopefully be reworked in 2027, but doubt it changes before then. Also points are being changed so it's not as dumb next year.
Disagree that every game should be in the large arena, no other esport does this and is a big waste of money. The point of the biggest stadium is to showcase the most important games, you won't fill a stadium for a first round groups game and it's incredibly hard to lock down that big of a stadium for almost a month.

how would you work in said relegation

RhythmD [#5]

Think relegation and format will hopefully be reworked in 2027, but doubt it changes before then. Also points are being changed so it's not as dumb next year.
Disagree that every game should be in the large arena, no other esport does this and is a big waste of money. The point of the biggest stadium is to showcase the most important games, you won't fill a stadium for a first round groups game and it's incredibly hard to lock down that big of a stadium for almost a month.

how do you want relegation when franchising as a whole prevents relegation? There is expansion in franchising, there is relocation in franchising, but there is no relegation

Harapan845 [#6]

how would you work in said relegation

Either a system where Riot evaluates teams more often like 2 years to get rid of teams that aren't trying to make a competitive roster or put the resources into the system like others or a straight up relegation where the bottom 1 to 2 teams are sent to ascension to come back up. I do see the benefits of franchising because it allows teams to take a risk, but hopefully Riot finds some ways to make the bottom teams more competitive and not straight bottom feeders. I get there has to be a worst team, but MIBR putting val money into csgo kinda shows their intentions
Not really sure of an exact way but hopefully a better system than allowing promoted teams one year in a league where they have almost no chance of doing good since every other team has security and infrastructure around them

i don't have literally any knowledge on how the tpa works or any of the legality of it but wouldn't they be able to rework the tpa into including relegation? especially since they aren't looking to increase the number of teams per region, i feel like relegation would give teams incentive to field more competitive rosters. so yea i think it's cool. 2 teams at a time? i don't know about that. i also think the points system wasn't very good this year but it is only the first year so there is a lot more time to improve it, especially for 2nd place tournament winners (as successful as TH was they got highkey robbed). i think making it only about the fans or only about the players schedule-wise is a huge mistake. doing it so that there are breaks while maintaining a suitable amount of "minimum matches" is probably the best way to do it. i personally think that the minimum number of matches this year was fine. whether players felt that way or felt burnt out regarding the state of the schedule is unbeknownst to me (i am curious though). i will say the situation with tier 2 that is happening is kind of sad yknow. i think the thing we can all agree on is that the format is definitely far from perfect lol

as for the whole arena matches thing i agree with @Nef0r0.

number1_cned_hater [#3]

Winner of masters gets rolexes and winning champs you get rolls royce

winning two international events grants you knighthood

1/ This isn't fixing, this is destroying it
2/ Go to 14/16 team and have 2 ascended more team
3/ Maybe
4/ Maybe
5/ I agree

Anguibok [#11]

1/ This isn't fixing, this is destroying it
2/ Go to 14/16 team and have 2 ascended more team
3/ Maybe
4/ Maybe
5/ I agree

how do you even think of number 4 being realistically possible?

RhythmD [#8]

Either a system where Riot evaluates teams more often like 2 years to get rid of teams that aren't trying to make a competitive roster or put the resources into the system like others or a straight up relegation where the bottom 1 to 2 teams are sent to ascension to come back up. I do see the benefits of franchising because it allows teams to take a risk, but hopefully Riot finds some ways to make the bottom teams more competitive and not straight bottom feeders. I get there has to be a worst team, but MIBR putting val money into csgo kinda shows their intentions
Not really sure of an exact way but hopefully a better system than allowing promoted teams one year in a league where they have almost no chance of doing good since every other team has security and infrastructure around them

but that's just rito's fault in getting such candidates in, and I doubt there are a lot of orgs who could possibly go instead of mibr

Nef0r0 [#12]

how do you even think of number 4 being realistically possible?

To play in bigger arena ? Not fully sure, it depend of a lot of factors, thats why I'm in the "maybe" but i'm listening to what you could give as an argument

Anguibok [#14]

To play in bigger arena ? Not fully sure, it depend of a lot of factors, thats why I'm in the "maybe" but i'm listening to what you could give as an argument

shit is just unsustainable, 2-3 day short term loan of a stadium is the most profitable system, otherwise you would need for Riot to rent out the arena for 5 weeks (average length of stages last year) in cities like LA or Berlin it's just impossible

1. But what if 100T/Sen somehow mess up their season and get relegated? Will Riot let that slide? They have one of the biggest fanbases, bringing in constant revenue (both financially for the organization and through viewership). Instead of just forcing the worst 6 for them to compete, Riot could evaluate all partnered teams based on their performance over 2 seasons. The 3 least satisfying teams (each leagues) that don’t meet the standards (performance and/or fanbase growth) would have to fight in a relegation match. The loser gets kicked out of the league, and a new partnered team replaces them.
2. Cap the teams at 14 or 16, with 2 more partnered teams invited and 2 promoted from ascension. It would probably mess with the schedule, and I haven’t even mentioned the logistics (money).
3. Maybe make it 5 points.
4. Budget issues.
5. Maybe.