Riot's Decision is stupid, and here's why

#1

Nachtel

The main brunt of the issue with Riot's decision to not let a team pick up the Guard can be boiled down to 2 things:

They don't want Orgs to be incentivized to buy the ascension slot in the future.
They don't want Orgs to be incentivized to sell the ascension slot in the future.

The issue here is, there is a perfectly good way to mitigate both of these worries which Riot has completely ignored.

Riot has stated that they were fully prepared to allow players to choose an org to back them if the situation where a F/A team won ascension ever arrived, meaning they have no issue with an org investing purely into the players by signing them at the end of ascension.

In the future, Riot is worried that an org like The Guard could win the spot, pay a sum of money to another organization and refuse to sign their TPA, or sell the roster (for a large premium since those players would now theoretically hold the rights to ascension).

Now, this argument is completely useless regarding the current situation, because all of the Guard players are currently free agents; this means that the Guard would not be able to sell them to any organization and the (now former) Guard Roster would be able to decide as an essentially F/A team.

But that doesn't mean that the precedent can't be stopped at the same time either.

Making an exception now won't ruin the future of challengers because Riot is able to add or remove clauses into the Team Participation Agreement that challengers orgs will be forced to sign next season if they want to compete in the Tier 2 circuit.

Next season, Riot could simply:

Add a clause to the Team Participation Agreement that they have challengers teams sign, which will release all their players' contracts should they not release their signature, and only in the case that they win Ascension. This would make the team essentially be F/A, allowing them to look for an org to pick them up.

With this, teams wouldn't be incentivized to sell their spot because they'd lose ownership over their players if they didn't release their signature, and the F/A team would decide for themselves who picks them up, removing any collusion between two interested parties wanting to buy and sell the roster.

#2

Sk00d

0

Frags

+

–

bump

#3

xSaneZ

0

Frags

+

–

bump

#4

crashhacker1

-17

Frags

+

–

Now, this argument is completely useless

interesting how a point you dont like is useless.

#5

Nachtel

13

Frags

+

–

Did you even bother to read the explanation into why it's useless or are you illiterate

#8

crashhacker1

-8

Frags

+

–

I did, doesnt change much. it basically came down to "i dont like it". which doesnt really work, does it? and good will in esports never works out, watch the cheating scandals in csgo & cod. The legal precedent matters.

#11

Nachtel

6

Frags

+

–

Legal precedent doesn't matter when you're able to make challengers orgs sign a different draft of an agreement every year

This isn't a public policy decision, it's Riot's own internal regulations that they can change every year to prevent any sort of precedent like the one they're worried about

#13

crashhacker1

-1

Frags

+

–

Legal precedent doesn't matter

ibuypower in csgo matchfixing

it does matter, as I said, just because you dont like it doesnt mean its "useless" or "doesnt matter". I still want leo faria to get fired too but lets be realisitc here.

#14

loudsimp

0

Frags

+

–

what are you talking about lil bro?

#16

Nachtel

2

Frags

+

–

How does this compare? Did any party involved here break the law? No.

This means that everything related to this issue purely involves Riot's internal rules and regulations

#18

crashhacker1

-2

Frags

+

–

Did any party involved here break the law?

exactly they didnt when the event happened. But CSGO intervened later & banned them because the team that won against ibuypower went into the next stage of the tournament. There was no precedent BUT it happened because you cant control it. So, your little "goodwill" about "the org I support" wont sell their slot because they're honest bois doesnt actually work and will lead to teams selling their slots later. If riot deny, this is the example they will use to win the case.

#17

loudsimp

1

Frags

+

–

If you were literate you would see that the person who posted the thread designed a way where it is impossible for the orgs to sell the spot without fucking over the players.

#21

marblesoda

2

Frags

+

–

matchfixing is a literal act of fraud, a crime, no shit legal precedent would matter there

#22

crashhacker1

-2

Frags

+

–

how is matchfixing different to selling your slot by throwing the game & making the deal with the team later under the table to get all 5 players?

#25

Nachtel

2

Frags

+

–

because if you read my post you'd know that the org isn't selling the spot, the players themselves are choosing a team to pick them up without their former org having any input

#26

crashhacker1

-3

Frags

+

–

It would still set the precedent if Guard was given the exception. They still need to explain why they or the players didnt sign the contract for 2 months.

#27

Nachtel

1

Frags

+

–

READ MY POST or stop embarassing yourself

I addressed literally all of this

continue thread →

#9

jawn

0

Frags

+

–

ignore the boot lickers, bro is fighting for his life trying to defend a multi billion dollar company being incompetent

#7

loudsimp

0

Frags

+

–

most intelligent "facts dont care about ur feelings" mf

#6

loudsimp

3

Frags

+

–

yes! exactly what I was saying except it would be like if a f/a team won (they would work with riot for 1-2 months to find a new org)

#10

moatz

0

Frags

+

–

Exactly. Liot is just being braindead atm

#12

winae29

0

Frags

+

–

i am pretty sure they only became f/a after the deadline so this makes no sense

#15

Nachtel

8

Frags

+

–

It means Riot still has a window of opportunity to make an exception here because the next challengers and VCT circuits haven't started yet

Regardless of whether they became free agents now or a month from now, Riot is able to make the decision to let an org pick them up so long as they are free agents.

In Leo Faria's tweet, he explained that this is how the process for a F/A agent team would normally go if they won ascension; they'd have an unknown amount of time before the VCT season begins to find an org to pick them up.

The only difference here would be that if they had become free agents later, then they'd have a smaller timeframe to do so.

#19

winae29

0

Frags

+

–

just because riot has control does not mean they should allow themselves to make exceptions every time players get fucked over.

#32

Nachtel

2

Frags

+

–

it's not about whether they should make exceptions, they already do.

They shoehorned China into VCT this year after already establishing a certain number of partnered teams and the requirements to become one of them

If they already have a precedent of making exceptions they should be able to make one here without issue

#20

jawn

0

Frags

+

–

if i had to guess the timeframe for them to get picked-up by another org is already closed, which is dumb

#23

xSaneZ

0

Frags

+

–

Really don't understand why they don't just let G2 pick up the guard here. Riot was already going to franchise them before all the andrew tate stuff but that ceo is gone now, and since it's Riot's choice here it highly minimises the chance that the chosen org payed the guard to do this

#24

randomperson

0

Frags

+

–

leo faria needs to see this

#33

lipton13

0

Frags

+

–

bump

#34

tls127

0

Frags

+

–

Because this isn't a real 'franchise'. It's a partnership meaning the teams in the leagues did not buy the slot so you can't buy or sell slot I think

#35

widepeepofrosty

0

Frags

+

–

Bump!

#37

MerkFreeks

0

Frags

+

–

Bump