Literally not my argument at all? He didn't do bad this map so I'm saying that it's not the best time to be hating

He did his job that map, much better times you could be criticizing besides now lmao

Kingg is so good he's there twice

He wasn't winning last year in T1, not saying Zeek is bad or anything, but it's really hard to compare between tiers

I don't think comparing the performance of someone playing in T2 vs T1 is really fair

https://x.com/brfootball/status/1807110158826533267

No way you're using my comment to peddle this narrative. Fnatic was the only good team in EMEA last year, at least we had 2
Also Giants was EMEA 4 at champs, Navi was 5. It doesn't matter if you think Navi was better, that's how they were classified. And if Navi was better, maybe they shouldn't have lost to Koi and then Giants.

I don't think you know how statistics work

What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

Best NA team beat PRX in the grand finals of champs. Clown on this guy, for sure, but you're just wrong here

G2 won their game against a team that went 5-1 last split and they fell off apparently 💀 💀 💀

Classic d0rt

You got it in the next one :)

I love unintentionally spreading misinformation

I've heard it's Net but I have no evidence to back up this claim

:3

So wrong...

I know why, you just come across like trembo every time you post this shit

STATS:

Get new material, this shit is boring

I don't get how us not considering Americas before it happened matters at all. We're just talking how leagues were distributed prefranchising, region unity before the regions as they are today were established doesn't mean anything

Your evidence, is to have me go look and try to find your evidence, which is incredibly flawed because of how algorithms work. Also holy fuck, I said there's no evidence for my hypotheticals, just like there is no evidence for your hypothetical. "Both of these options have as much actual evidence as you have offered up", you haven't shown any actual evidence, so that's what this means. The point is, we don't know why they're doing this, we can't know, so why are you pretending like you do, and that it's this one thing you clearly don't like
The Overwatch example was to show a game that cracks on toxicity without a lot of edaters, it has fucking NOTHING to do with whether or not it's a popular decision.
Still missing ANY hard evidence for ANY of your claims. You just love to throw numbers around without any evidence, you have a poll for that 60/40 is that just what you think it is? Which just seems to be a lot of your argument

I apologize for the delayed response, I went to sleep
All of your evidence is literally just more correlation = causation. There's no way it's "mostly edaters", I'd love your statistics that say otherwise. I'll concede that it probably has more edaters than most games even though you offered up no evidence. Riot is allowed to have just changed their mind and start cracking down on toxicity since it could have just gotten worse to a point where they felt like they needed to, or maybe their shareholders wanted them to because it doesn't look good for a game to be known as toxic. Both of these options have as much actual evidence as you have offered up. There's also games that do have a "no toxic" policy that do not have as much edaters, Overwatch just got into hot waters because one of their moderators started banning people for just cursing, but I'm not hearing about their edating problem.
I also apologize if I'm coming off as "aggressive", I'm just annoyed so it's probably coming out that way.

The first part is sarcasm because correlation doesn't necessarily mean anything unlike what you're implying, I can't believe I have to spell it out to you. Unless you have actual evidence for this claim instead of wild speculating, I don't know how you expect me to take you seriously

Not your worst work honestly, I personally don't have faith in FUT or LEV but otherwise I would generally agree.
Wonderful work not baiting sentinelmain377

They can beat both of them, EDG should be easy for them but DRG could go either way depending on how DRG plays

Oh correlation = causation, how could I have been mistaken. I don't think I have to explain why there's a few problems with your logic

Ketchup because I like it the most :3

I'm a hater but not even I expected this, it's crazy how bad it's gotten for them o7

Talking about players, not teams

I'm getting the feeling you might be stupid

I don't think edating has anything to do with them clamping down on toxicity. A game that is toxic is more likely to dissuade most people than one that is not, that's just simple logic and marketing. I'm sure people that edate would also fall under this category because most people would fall under this category

Do you play soccer?
It makes sense when you play it since it's always changing with where the ball, if it was just a line that would actually be awful

Anyone who thought TL would beat BBL has not been watching EMEA

Don't HAVE to, not can't. You need to sign for VCT, you don't need to for GC just like you don't need to but can for Challengers

People do that? Damn they must be miserable lmao
I wish you the best of luck

Holy fuck calm your hate boner for NRG down for one second

Sentinelmain has already been on that

Professional bullshit spewer

Goodbye!

Your flair lost to GiantX 💀 💀 💀

#GXWIN

Because they're a dumbass wannabe alpha

The save for every EMEA team

#DRGWIN

In their defense the silly little dragons are the goats

100t isn't that bad honestly, they really only have nutoriouspro who's annoying

You can glaze Rb as much as you want, but don't talk shit about my dragons.

The Luke question is actually so real

He's raving about how smart he is

Feel like you're downplaying Kick's bad side, but yeah they both suck