|
Bearded Elder29903 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/iffXh3H.jpg)
Aspiring North American Challenger Series team Misfits, who feature veteran players Alex “Alex Ich” Ichetovkin and Alberto “crumbzz” Rengifo, reputedly made an approach to sign Team Liquid top-laner Diego "Quas" Ruiz during the off-season. This move was made without the knowledge of team management, who found out after hearing rumours about the move.
According to Riot’s rule 10.2.12, “No Team Member or Affiliate of a team may solicit, lure, or make an offer of employment to any Team Member who is signed to any LCS team, nor encourage any such Team Member to breach or otherwise terminate a contract with said LCS team.”
After learning of the approach Team Liquid’s co-owner Steve “liquid112” Arhancet has issued a complaint to Riot about the attempted poaching, and Riot is set to begin a full investigation to see if there was any wrongdoing. It’s not clear, however, if Riot will have any jurisdiction in the matter, as Misfits aren’t yet a Challenger team.
Wondering if there will be any consequences to Misfits as they're not Challenger / LCS team yet. Seems like they will dodge the bullet this time or Riot will just punish them in not being able to enter Challenger Qualifiers.
Statement from Liquid112 on the Quas acquisition:
I worked directly with GGLA on the Quas acquisition, this is not even close to the situation presented now. There was a substantial amount of money that was paid for the acquisition of Quas and it was handled professionally. This other organization, allegedly Misfits, directly interfered with contracts I have with my players by luring, soliciting and encouraging them to terminate their contracts. It's unethical behavior, but beyond that - there are legal rules regarding possible tortious interference of contracts - this isn't just about Riot rules.
Source
|
Korea (South)11232 Posts
My suggestion always was that teams are allowed to make offers at any time but they need to make the offer at the same time to the team and the player.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On May 17 2015 04:17 739 wrote:Show nested quote +Aspiring North American Challenger Series team Misfits, who feature veteran players Alex “Alex Ich” Ichetovkin and Alberto “crumbzz” Rengifo, reputedly made an approach to sign Team Liquid top-laner Diego "Quas" Ruiz during the off-season. This move was made without the knowledge of team management, who found out after hearing rumours about the move.
According to Riot’s rule 10.2.12, “No Team Member or Affiliate of a team may solicit, lure, or make an offer of employment to any Team Member who is signed to any LCS team, nor encourage any such Team Member to breach or otherwise terminate a contract with said LCS team.”
After learning of the approach Team Liquid’s co-owner Steve “liquid112” Arhancet has issued a complaint to Riot about the attempted poaching, and Riot is set to begin a full investigation to see if there was any wrongdoing. It’s not clear, however, if Riot will have any jurisdiction in the matter, as Misfits aren’t yet a Challenger team. Wondering if there will be any consequences to Misfits as they're not Challenger / LCS team yet. Seems like they will dodge the bullet this time or Riot will just punish them in not being able to enter Challenger Qualifiers.
There is no way that team is going to be banned from entering CS, even Riot can't be that controversial.
At worst, they're going to be fined, but that's it, especially considering that Curse poached Quas by themselves before.
Plus might be good wake up call for TL to raise salary of your best player, lol.
|
this just makes the poaching rules look really bad for the players
|
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want.
|
Even tho they can't be punished any possible agreement is invalid.
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want.
It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team.
|
On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team.
I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement.
|
in any case it's hard to tell what the Misfits problems are when they are the best in the league they play in, I didn't catch last nights games with Stixxay in, but when they had Intense I had felt it was bottom lane.
|
Stixxay/Alex hard-carried quite often. RF and Crumbz were quite hit and miss though. RF would either get stuck behind and do nothing or... get Irelia. Crumbz had a disaster of an Eve game but some solid tank games. Remilia is very impressive; if Jebus is good/the synergy is good, they'll look solid.
|
On May 17 2015 05:14 Chexx wrote:
My suggestion always was that teams are allowed to make offers at any time but they need to make the offer at the same time to the team and the player.
something like this seems reasonable. No poaching rules always seem weird to me o.o
also shouldn't the post cite a source D:
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
On May 17 2015 06:41 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team. I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement.
All LCS players have their contract end date posted on lolesports so it's impossible for teams not to know them. Obviously a team is going to stonewall them if the player is still contracted...that's kinda the point. If it's pre-season 6 and misfits approached a player then sure that's ok.
|
On May 17 2015 07:04 JBright wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 06:41 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team. I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement. All LCS players have their contract end date posted on lolesports so it's impossible for teams not to know them. Obviously a team is going to stonewall them if the player is still contracted...that's kinda the point. If it's pre-season 6 and misfits approached a player then sure that's ok.
I'm not sure if I'm not getting my point across or you are just ignoring it. I'm saying a team can't possibly know if a player wants to be bought out unless they talk to said player so knowing date of contract end is rather pointless. Talking to a contracted player shouldn't be wrong in the off season. Most big sports have transfer windows where players/teams can shop around if they want even though they are contracted. That is what I'm saying. Being able to completely shut out a player under the whole term of the contract seems really terrible for the players.
Anyway I just think it's highly odd that this period of time adheres to the anti-poaching rules. Actually now that I think about it CLG got in shit for poaching Zion/Scarra in pre-season 5 so it looks like there is no period of time that the anti-poaching isn't active. Means if someone is under contract you can't talk to them?
|
On May 17 2015 05:17 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 04:17 739 wrote:Aspiring North American Challenger Series team Misfits, who feature veteran players Alex “Alex Ich” Ichetovkin and Alberto “crumbzz” Rengifo, reputedly made an approach to sign Team Liquid top-laner Diego "Quas" Ruiz during the off-season. This move was made without the knowledge of team management, who found out after hearing rumours about the move.
According to Riot’s rule 10.2.12, “No Team Member or Affiliate of a team may solicit, lure, or make an offer of employment to any Team Member who is signed to any LCS team, nor encourage any such Team Member to breach or otherwise terminate a contract with said LCS team.”
After learning of the approach Team Liquid’s co-owner Steve “liquid112” Arhancet has issued a complaint to Riot about the attempted poaching, and Riot is set to begin a full investigation to see if there was any wrongdoing. It’s not clear, however, if Riot will have any jurisdiction in the matter, as Misfits aren’t yet a Challenger team. Wondering if there will be any consequences to Misfits as they're not Challenger / LCS team yet. Seems like they will dodge the bullet this time or Riot will just punish them in not being able to enter Challenger Qualifiers. There is no way that team is going to be banned from entering CS, even Riot can't be that controversial. At worst, they're going to be fined, but that's it, especially considering that Curse poached Quas by themselves before. Plus might be good wake up call for TL to raise salary of your best player, lol.
I really don't see how Riot could fine Misfits.
|
On May 17 2015 05:46 Slusher wrote:
this just makes the poaching rules look really bad for the players
Poaching rules are always an advantage for teams that want to keep players and disadvantage for players since it limits their options and leverage. I have always been against them.
|
Apparently Curse poached Quas from a team in the first place...
Seems a bit hypocritical.
|
It was GGLA. They were in the NA CS with Quas/Bischu/Otter and I think a few days into 2013 Winter CS he left GGLA to join Curse. Seems the League started on the 7th of Oct and he left on the 14th of Oct. That effectively killed the teams chances of doing well in the league as he was their main carry and they got Yazuki who hadn't played league in awhile. There has also been that drama with the Aphromoo squad that got announced and dropped. Liquid is just flinging shit like he's a saint when he's not. Sigh I miss the old TL so much. Naz wouldn't say this kind of rubbish.
I hope Regi swoops in, slaps Liquid around with a fat wad of cash and takes Quas while Nick Allen watches. Think this may be the first time I root for TSM to do something lol
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapping_up
It's usual for this to be banned by sports league rules. Just another example of LCS following "proper" sports in their examples.
Given that most contracts in the LCS are quite short, I don't see how it really harms the players. For example, Piglet's contract is only until 7th October 2015, and many other players have contracts just for one full season (until October 2015).
It would be pretty dumb for a player to sign a contract longer than that given the fact that you can be relegated from the LCS. If a team really does want a player before the end of the season, they can communicate that to the contract owner (the team), and not by going directly to the player.
When you consider that Riot have overall control of the LCS, there is an option for players who are having significant issues with their contracts as a form of arbitration, so I don't see how the rules against tapping up particularly harm the players.
|
Regarding communication between teams and players to find out interests, in practice it's supposed to be through backchannels (talking with the player's associates, for example). Or through paper trail-less methods like just so happening to run into each other in real life at some event. It involves not being an idiot leaving behind a record (hint: with online communication, there's always a record).
Poaching/tampering rules tend to be difficult to enforce in traditional sports, as you basically have to be dumb about things to get caught. I'm getting this idea that because the vast majority of the people involved in e-sports grew up immersed in a way of life heavy with computer/internet usage, they are predisposed to behave in ways that give themselves less plausible deniability.
For that matter, how did this even surface in the first place? Someone messed up, either on the side of Misfits or on the side of Quas. It has to be emphasized, if both sides were competent about this, no one will be any the wiser.
|
On May 17 2015 08:10 Saradin wrote:
For that matter, how did this even surface in the first place? Someone messed up, either on the side of Misfits or on the side of Quas. It has to be emphasized, if both sides were competent about this, no one will be any the wiser.
I mean it's possible that Quas wasn't interested and reported it or something right
|
True, that could be the case. Then that's on the Misfits for not using backchannels to gauge interests.
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
On May 17 2015 07:08 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 07:04 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:41 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team. I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement. All LCS players have their contract end date posted on lolesports so it's impossible for teams not to know them. Obviously a team is going to stonewall them if the player is still contracted...that's kinda the point. If it's pre-season 6 and misfits approached a player then sure that's ok. I'm not sure if I'm not getting my point across or you are just ignoring it. I'm saying a team can't possibly know if a player wants to be bought out unless they talk to said player so knowing date of contract end is rather pointless. Talking to a contracted player shouldn't be wrong in the off season. Most big sports have transfer windows where players/teams can shop around if they want even though they are contracted. That is what I'm saying. Being able to completely shut out a player under the whole term of the contract seems really terrible for the players. Anyway I just think it's highly odd that this period of time adheres to the anti-poaching rules. Actually now that I think about it CLG got in shit for poaching Zion/Scarra in pre-season 5 so it looks like there is no period of time that the anti-poaching isn't active. Means if someone is under contract you can't talk to them?
I don't know. If a player really wants off a team, he can bench himself. And if he wants to get on another team, the team's management should get involved. There is no reason to keep them out of the process unless there's something wrong going on. Players aren't the only entities that need to be protected.
And iirc, CLG approached scarra/zion at NA regionals so it wasn't even pre-season 5. The fines and punishment got dished out then because it took some time to investigate.
|
Korea (South)11232 Posts
Liquid112 posted this on Reddit regarding the Quas acquisition
I worked directly with GGLA on the Quas acquisition, this is not even close to the situation presented now. There was a substantial amount of money that was paid for the acquisition of Quas and it was handled professionally. This other organization, allegedly Misfits, directly interfered with contracts I have with my players by luring, soliciting and encouraging them to terminate their contracts. It's unethical behavior, but beyond that - there are legal rules regarding possible tortious interference of contracts - this isn't just about Riot rules.
|
|
|
On May 17 2015 08:24 Saradin wrote:
True, that could be the case. Then that's on the Misfits for not using backchannels to gauge interests.
yeah I realized after posting that you'd still be right since it'd mean that misfits messed up 
|
This seems weird to me. Why would Quas take a chance on a challenger team when they finally got TL working properly and finished the season in 3rd? Am I missing something?
|
On May 17 2015 13:02 Sonnington wrote:
This seems weird to me. Why would Quas take a chance on a challenger team when they finally got TL working properly and finished the season in 3rd? Am I missing something?
Well, he didn't. That's why Quas hasn't moved to Misfits - they just made him the offer. It's a pretty weird offer to make, though.
|
|
|
On May 17 2015 08:25 JBright wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 07:08 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 07:04 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:41 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team. I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement. All LCS players have their contract end date posted on lolesports so it's impossible for teams not to know them. Obviously a team is going to stonewall them if the player is still contracted...that's kinda the point. If it's pre-season 6 and misfits approached a player then sure that's ok. I'm not sure if I'm not getting my point across or you are just ignoring it. I'm saying a team can't possibly know if a player wants to be bought out unless they talk to said player so knowing date of contract end is rather pointless. Talking to a contracted player shouldn't be wrong in the off season. Most big sports have transfer windows where players/teams can shop around if they want even though they are contracted. That is what I'm saying. Being able to completely shut out a player under the whole term of the contract seems really terrible for the players. Anyway I just think it's highly odd that this period of time adheres to the anti-poaching rules. Actually now that I think about it CLG got in shit for poaching Zion/Scarra in pre-season 5 so it looks like there is no period of time that the anti-poaching isn't active. Means if someone is under contract you can't talk to them? I don't know. If a player really wants off a team, he can bench himself. And if he wants to get on another team, the team's management should get involved. There is no reason to keep them out of the process unless there's something wrong going on. Players aren't the only entities that need to be protected. And iirc, CLG approached scarra/zion at NA regionals so it wasn't even pre-season 5. The fines and punishment got dished out then because it took some time to investigate.
I see if it was regionals than ye make sense.
I haven't really talked much about the actual event here mainly just that I didn't get why they couldn't talk. So if I understand right Misfits guys go to Quas and talk to him without talking to Liquid first, Quas either tells Liquid this or he finds out somehow. LIquid then goes to riot and files a complaint about people messing with his contracted players. Up till this point it's completely understandable and justifiable to me. Following that is where it gets a bit murky. Liquid then goes to Richard Lewis and tells him about this while giving him a statement or Lewis gets it leaked somehow and liquid goes to give his side of the story. The latter is a lot more understandable but I question how Lewis would get this info in the first place unless Liquid members leaked it to him. After this news piece goes up Liquid and one of his managers then go to social media and start a slander campaign against the Misfits owner, calling them unprofessional and effectively condemning them as a killer of esports with their behavior. That to me is where everything goes bad. That's not only unprofessional itself but also is completely against what it means to represent Team Liquid. They already went through the proper channels and now just have to wait for Riot to investigate and make a decision. Why are they going to social media while acting that way?
I get that TL doesn't exist as it used to but do they really have to go out their way to completely shit on what TL used to mean? There is no reason for them to go on social media to do. Just wait for Riot ruling then see what to do. They are completely justifiable to go to Riot and file a complaint even though technically Riot doesn't control Misfits yet. What they did after leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It's not something I ever wanted to see from a TL member. I don't even see the benefit of the Curse merger honestly. So we have a LoL team now, what else? Halo and a terrible CSGO team?? Doesn't seem worth it to kill the integrity of the name.
|
On May 17 2015 07:08 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 07:04 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:41 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team. I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement. All LCS players have their contract end date posted on lolesports so it's impossible for teams not to know them. Obviously a team is going to stonewall them if the player is still contracted...that's kinda the point. If it's pre-season 6 and misfits approached a player then sure that's ok. I'm not sure if I'm not getting my point across or you are just ignoring it. I'm saying a team can't possibly know if a player wants to be bought out unless they talk to said player so knowing date of contract end is rather pointless. Talking to a contracted player shouldn't be wrong in the off season. Most big sports have transfer windows where players/teams can shop around if they want even though they are contracted. That is what I'm saying. Being able to completely shut out a player under the whole term of the contract seems really terrible for the players. Anyway I just think it's highly odd that this period of time adheres to the anti-poaching rules. Actually now that I think about it CLG got in shit for poaching Zion/Scarra in pre-season 5 so it looks like there is no period of time that the anti-poaching isn't active. Means if someone is under contract you can't talk to them?
Zion/Scarra was a thing because it started before their contracts were over. It just took a while to investigate things.
|
On May 17 2015 19:29 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 08:25 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 07:08 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 07:04 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:41 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team. I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement. All LCS players have their contract end date posted on lolesports so it's impossible for teams not to know them. Obviously a team is going to stonewall them if the player is still contracted...that's kinda the point. If it's pre-season 6 and misfits approached a player then sure that's ok. I'm not sure if I'm not getting my point across or you are just ignoring it. I'm saying a team can't possibly know if a player wants to be bought out unless they talk to said player so knowing date of contract end is rather pointless. Talking to a contracted player shouldn't be wrong in the off season. Most big sports have transfer windows where players/teams can shop around if they want even though they are contracted. That is what I'm saying. Being able to completely shut out a player under the whole term of the contract seems really terrible for the players. Anyway I just think it's highly odd that this period of time adheres to the anti-poaching rules. Actually now that I think about it CLG got in shit for poaching Zion/Scarra in pre-season 5 so it looks like there is no period of time that the anti-poaching isn't active. Means if someone is under contract you can't talk to them? I don't know. If a player really wants off a team, he can bench himself. And if he wants to get on another team, the team's management should get involved. There is no reason to keep them out of the process unless there's something wrong going on. Players aren't the only entities that need to be protected. And iirc, CLG approached scarra/zion at NA regionals so it wasn't even pre-season 5. The fines and punishment got dished out then because it took some time to investigate. I see if it was regionals than ye make sense. I haven't really talked much about the actual event here mainly just that I didn't get why they couldn't talk. So if I understand right Misfits guys go to Quas and talk to him without talking to Liquid first, Quas either tells Liquid this or he finds out somehow. LIquid then goes to riot and files a complaint about people messing with his contracted players. Up till this point it's completely understandable and justifiable to me. Following that is where it gets a bit murky. Liquid then goes to Richard Lewis and tells him about this while giving him a statement or Lewis gets it leaked somehow and liquid goes to give his side of the story. The latter is a lot more understandable but I question how Lewis would get this info in the first place unless Liquid members leaked it to him. After this news piece goes up Liquid and one of his managers then go to social media and start a slander campaign against the Misfits owner, calling them unprofessional and effectively condemning them as a killer of esports with their behavior. That to me is where everything goes bad. That's not only unprofessional itself but also is completely against what it means to represent Team Liquid. They already went through the proper channels and now just have to wait for Riot to investigate and make a decision. Why are they going to social media while acting that way? I get that TL doesn't exist as it used to but do they really have to go out their way to completely shit on what TL used to mean? There is no reason for them to go on social media to do. Just wait for Riot ruling then see what to do. They are completely justifiable to go to Riot and file a complaint even though technically Riot doesn't control Misfits yet. What they did after leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It's not something I ever wanted to see from a TL member. I don't even see the benefit of the Curse merger honestly. So we have a LoL team now, what else? Halo and a terrible CSGO team?? Doesn't seem worth it to kill the integrity of the name.
He is also seems to takes this really personal judging from his tweets . hes says misfits owner of trying to poach Quas is "not business, its personal." its seems like he felt backstabbed by misfits owner . Were they friends or something?
|
On May 17 2015 10:05 Chexx wrote:Liquid112 posted this on Reddit regarding the Quas acquisition Show nested quote +
I worked directly with GGLA on the Quas acquisition, this is not even close to the situation presented now. There was a substantial amount of money that was paid for the acquisition of Quas and it was handled professionally. This other organization, allegedly Misfits, directly interfered with contracts I have with my players by luring, soliciting and encouraging them to terminate their contracts. It's unethical behavior, but beyond that - there are legal rules regarding possible tortious interference of contracts - this isn't just about Riot rules.
Some former ggLA players are disagree, so I'm not sure how accurate Steve's comment is.
|
On May 17 2015 22:03 reddishcarp048 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 19:29 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 08:25 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 07:08 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 07:04 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:41 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team. I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement. All LCS players have their contract end date posted on lolesports so it's impossible for teams not to know them. Obviously a team is going to stonewall them if the player is still contracted...that's kinda the point. If it's pre-season 6 and misfits approached a player then sure that's ok. I'm not sure if I'm not getting my point across or you are just ignoring it. I'm saying a team can't possibly know if a player wants to be bought out unless they talk to said player so knowing date of contract end is rather pointless. Talking to a contracted player shouldn't be wrong in the off season. Most big sports have transfer windows where players/teams can shop around if they want even though they are contracted. That is what I'm saying. Being able to completely shut out a player under the whole term of the contract seems really terrible for the players. Anyway I just think it's highly odd that this period of time adheres to the anti-poaching rules. Actually now that I think about it CLG got in shit for poaching Zion/Scarra in pre-season 5 so it looks like there is no period of time that the anti-poaching isn't active. Means if someone is under contract you can't talk to them? I don't know. If a player really wants off a team, he can bench himself. And if he wants to get on another team, the team's management should get involved. There is no reason to keep them out of the process unless there's something wrong going on. Players aren't the only entities that need to be protected. And iirc, CLG approached scarra/zion at NA regionals so it wasn't even pre-season 5. The fines and punishment got dished out then because it took some time to investigate. I see if it was regionals than ye make sense. I haven't really talked much about the actual event here mainly just that I didn't get why they couldn't talk. So if I understand right Misfits guys go to Quas and talk to him without talking to Liquid first, Quas either tells Liquid this or he finds out somehow. LIquid then goes to riot and files a complaint about people messing with his contracted players. Up till this point it's completely understandable and justifiable to me. Following that is where it gets a bit murky. Liquid then goes to Richard Lewis and tells him about this while giving him a statement or Lewis gets it leaked somehow and liquid goes to give his side of the story. The latter is a lot more understandable but I question how Lewis would get this info in the first place unless Liquid members leaked it to him. After this news piece goes up Liquid and one of his managers then go to social media and start a slander campaign against the Misfits owner, calling them unprofessional and effectively condemning them as a killer of esports with their behavior. That to me is where everything goes bad. That's not only unprofessional itself but also is completely against what it means to represent Team Liquid. They already went through the proper channels and now just have to wait for Riot to investigate and make a decision. Why are they going to social media while acting that way? I get that TL doesn't exist as it used to but do they really have to go out their way to completely shit on what TL used to mean? There is no reason for them to go on social media to do. Just wait for Riot ruling then see what to do. They are completely justifiable to go to Riot and file a complaint even though technically Riot doesn't control Misfits yet. What they did after leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It's not something I ever wanted to see from a TL member. I don't even see the benefit of the Curse merger honestly. So we have a LoL team now, what else? Halo and a terrible CSGO team?? Doesn't seem worth it to kill the integrity of the name. He is also seems to takes this really personal judging from his tweets . hes says misfits owner of trying to poach Quas is "not business, its personal." its seems like he felt backstabbed by misfits owner . Were they friends or something?
IIRC, Chris Badawi (Misfits owner) was one of the bidders for Gravity, thus establishing a relationship with Steve. Then later Steve helped him out with advice leading up to the creation of Misfits. So kind of a mentor/friend relationship in that regard.
|
On May 18 2015 01:27 Saradin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 22:03 reddishcarp048 wrote:On May 17 2015 19:29 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 08:25 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 07:08 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 07:04 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:41 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team. I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement. All LCS players have their contract end date posted on lolesports so it's impossible for teams not to know them. Obviously a team is going to stonewall them if the player is still contracted...that's kinda the point. If it's pre-season 6 and misfits approached a player then sure that's ok. I'm not sure if I'm not getting my point across or you are just ignoring it. I'm saying a team can't possibly know if a player wants to be bought out unless they talk to said player so knowing date of contract end is rather pointless. Talking to a contracted player shouldn't be wrong in the off season. Most big sports have transfer windows where players/teams can shop around if they want even though they are contracted. That is what I'm saying. Being able to completely shut out a player under the whole term of the contract seems really terrible for the players. Anyway I just think it's highly odd that this period of time adheres to the anti-poaching rules. Actually now that I think about it CLG got in shit for poaching Zion/Scarra in pre-season 5 so it looks like there is no period of time that the anti-poaching isn't active. Means if someone is under contract you can't talk to them? I don't know. If a player really wants off a team, he can bench himself. And if he wants to get on another team, the team's management should get involved. There is no reason to keep them out of the process unless there's something wrong going on. Players aren't the only entities that need to be protected. And iirc, CLG approached scarra/zion at NA regionals so it wasn't even pre-season 5. The fines and punishment got dished out then because it took some time to investigate. I see if it was regionals than ye make sense. I haven't really talked much about the actual event here mainly just that I didn't get why they couldn't talk. So if I understand right Misfits guys go to Quas and talk to him without talking to Liquid first, Quas either tells Liquid this or he finds out somehow. LIquid then goes to riot and files a complaint about people messing with his contracted players. Up till this point it's completely understandable and justifiable to me. Following that is where it gets a bit murky. Liquid then goes to Richard Lewis and tells him about this while giving him a statement or Lewis gets it leaked somehow and liquid goes to give his side of the story. The latter is a lot more understandable but I question how Lewis would get this info in the first place unless Liquid members leaked it to him. After this news piece goes up Liquid and one of his managers then go to social media and start a slander campaign against the Misfits owner, calling them unprofessional and effectively condemning them as a killer of esports with their behavior. That to me is where everything goes bad. That's not only unprofessional itself but also is completely against what it means to represent Team Liquid. They already went through the proper channels and now just have to wait for Riot to investigate and make a decision. Why are they going to social media while acting that way? I get that TL doesn't exist as it used to but do they really have to go out their way to completely shit on what TL used to mean? There is no reason for them to go on social media to do. Just wait for Riot ruling then see what to do. They are completely justifiable to go to Riot and file a complaint even though technically Riot doesn't control Misfits yet. What they did after leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It's not something I ever wanted to see from a TL member. I don't even see the benefit of the Curse merger honestly. So we have a LoL team now, what else? Halo and a terrible CSGO team?? Doesn't seem worth it to kill the integrity of the name. He is also seems to takes this really personal judging from his tweets . hes says misfits owner of trying to poach Quas is "not business, its personal." its seems like he felt backstabbed by misfits owner . Were they friends or something? IIRC, Chris Badawi (Misfits owner) was one of the bidders for Gravity, thus establishing a relationship with Steve. Then later Steve helped him out with advice leading up to the creation of Misfits. So kind of a mentor/friend relationship in that regard.
This whole thing has seemed a bit awkward. I guess this is why Steve is so emotional over it considering they arent event a challenger team yet. If Misfits were a CS or LCS team I could understand Riot taking any sort of position, but at this point it seems seems like Steve is just seeking revenge and drama. And yeah, Quas would do wonders for TSM. I really hope Regi considers making an offer given how MSI went. LOL
|
Can someone explain the actual fact pattern here? What actually was the sequence of events?
|
Unfortunately there aren't any facts yet. We just have Liquid management on social media saying Misfits manager went behind their backs to encourage their player(s) to terminate contract and go to Misfits. That and an article by DailyDot saying liquid has filed a complaint to Riot but that looks like it came from Liquid as well.
If you want general facts around the situation then I guess there are those. Misfits is an amateur team not yet in the CS so do not fall under Riot's rules yet. Riot has rules saying teams in LCS can't talk to players directly without going through the teams. It also looks like the tampering/poaching rule only applies to LCS teams and nothing is mentioned in CS ruling about poaching/tampering. That's pretty much it. There are a bunch of aggressive tweets on Liquids side about the situation and bischu in regards to Quas leaving GGLA right at the start of CS but those are hardly facts.
|
That is what I thought. How ridiculous.
|
this is not newsworthy and if you think otherwise please stick to proper professionalism and cover all angles (assuming Misfits and Riot take a stance)
|
On May 18 2015 04:31 Naphal wrote:
this is not newsworthy and if you think otherwise please stick to proper professionalism and cover all angles (assuming Misfits and Riot take a stance)
what?
|
Bischu salty cause he couldn't get carried into LCS
|
i think TL is gonna have a really good split if Quas was even thinking of moving to Misfits then he is going to regret it later when they get relegated.
|
|
|
United Kingdom50293 Posts
So kez backs his boy, I wonder if otter or nydushermain will chime in now.
|
Haha GGLA guys still mad about that.
At this point NA LoL teams are basically pathological liars. I don't get why anyone still takes what owners/managers/players say at face value when time and time again they been burnt. Bjergsen is totally not going to TSM guys, better attack the journalist that said that! In this case even if everything Liquid says Misfits did is true they still full of shit lol.
|
On May 18 2015 22:27 Fusilero wrote:
So kez backs his boy, I wonder if otter or nydushermain will chime in now.
Otter seemed to think it was funny when I tweeted about it
|
Poland3748 Posts
By surprise and poaching are different situations. You can approach organization properly and offer unbeatable proposition which will take organization by surprise but wouldn't be poaching.
|
|
|
I don't understand the poaching rule. If a team wants a player and the player is happy with his current team he won't leave. if the offer he gets is better and he may think about leaing he will contact his current team on his own and they can decide to make a better offer on their own. the only problem I can see for the current team is if he gets a better offer and the current team doesn't want to give him a better offer. This way he will leave as soon as the contracts end or if he gets bought out of his current contract. Still they don't lose anything cause he will either stay until the contracts end or they will get a compensation.
Can someone explain me now the problem?
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On May 19 2015 07:50 AmstAff wrote:
I don't understand the poaching rule. If a team wants a player and the player is happy with his current team he won't leave. if the offer he gets is better and he may think about leaing he will contact his current team on his own and they can decide to make a better offer on their own. the only problem I can see for the current team is if he gets a better offer and the current team doesn't want to give him a better offer. This way he will leave as soon as the contracts end or if he gets bought out of his current contract. Still they don't lose anything cause he will either stay until the contracts end or they will get a compensation.
Can someone explain me now the problem?
Riot contracts are pretty much set up in way that you can't talk with any player under contract before window in the end of year, unless team agrees on it, because only GM can make trades. Every contract is season-long, from ~January to November.
|
On May 19 2015 08:14 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2015 07:50 AmstAff wrote:
I don't understand the poaching rule. If a team wants a player and the player is happy with his current team he won't leave. if the offer he gets is better and he may think about leaing he will contact his current team on his own and they can decide to make a better offer on their own. the only problem I can see for the current team is if he gets a better offer and the current team doesn't want to give him a better offer. This way he will leave as soon as the contracts end or if he gets bought out of his current contract. Still they don't lose anything cause he will either stay until the contracts end or they will get a compensation.
Can someone explain me now the problem? Riot contracts are pretty much set up in way that you can't talk with any player under contract before window in the end of year, unless team agrees on it, because only GM can make trades. Every contract is season-long, from ~January to November.
Yeah but afaik this only applies to LCS-Teams (if I understood it right by the reddit thread) and still I don't get why it is handled that way. It doesn't make sense for me =(
|
So anti-tampering/poaching rules in competition are, ostensibly, for two reasons.
Primarily, to not give a team an edge ahead of others when the player hits free agency. The idea of free agency typically presumes that every suitor starts off evenly.
Secondarily, there is the suspicion that a player performs at...less than his best for the team he's currently contracted to if he already has one foot out of the door, so to speak. (NBA example: Cavaliers' 2009-2010 playoff collapse right before LeBron James' departure to the Heat in free agency, which in itself is strongly suspected to have been orchestrated)
|
But noone is going to wait until they can start talking to the player, every team will contact the player without letting it go public anyway. It's the same in the stock market, everyone wants information first and act first. In my opinion you can't regulate the player market like this, the best way would be to make all information public. So everyone knows how much he gets paid, contract lenght, sell out clause etc. This way the player will exactly know what the market is willing to pay him, the actual team has the chance to hold him until contracts end, sell him for the highest amount possible or renew the contract. Seriously a player isn't dumb, he also kinda knows his market value and if he thinks he is underpayed he is going to perform bad anyway, try to get out of his current contract or contact other teams on his own.
It's a rule you will never be able to establish 100% and the losers are the fair teams.
|
That's the difference between principle and practical.
Such rules exist as a matter of principle; that in an ideal competitive environment, so and so shouldn't happen.
In practice, yea, tampering goes on and only the idiots get caught. (yes, Georgey boy over at CLG qualifies as an idiot when it comes to getting caught on poaching twice last year)
Alternative interpretation is that it's one of those 'don't be egregious about it' rules. You know, where everybody implicitly acknowledges that this happens, but agree to avoid being too blatant about it for appearance sake. Basically don't be a fool about it.
Players typically don't underperform if they think that they're underpaid heading into free agency (assuming they don't already have something prearranged). It's usually the opposite (the so-called contract year phenomenon). They usually try as hard as possible to get the biggest contract they can get in free agency. After getting the big contract is when you run the risk of lesser performance due to the absence of external motivation.
Although now that you mention it, the fact that salaries aren't publicly disclosed is an interesting development of this industry. After all, we're used to the years and money aspects of contracts being announced in traditional sports. I always figured that e-sports not having luxury tax or a salary cap to worry about played into it, but that might not necessarily be the cause.
|
It's pretty sad really reading most of the comments here. As a female, I find it absurd that "men" who want eSports to be considered a true "sport" don't understand the fundamentals of the "business" side of sports in general. The comments posted here, in majority, are why, to me, it seems it'll be a long time coming, within the USA, for that to even happen.
Do you even know NCAA rules for off-season? Those players are not even allowed a salary and "poaching" will pretty much wreck a college students career. When you start off by saying he's the team's #1 player, whether it's a true statement or not, then what you're suggesting, in sports parlance, is the same as if the Warriors or Bucks contact Kobe directly thinking they don't have to talk to the Lakers about his contract, IN THE OFF-SEASON. The whole idea of it is absurb. But past that, the amount of time it takes, epecially in the NA LCS setting where, at best, you get a round-robin best of 1 game series to develop your talent and team synergy, the idea that it's easy to simply replace any talent, as talentless as NA Solo Q is and the fact that Team Liquid would HAVE to get an NA player due to the 3/2 rules and Quas being a "grandfathered" player is ridiculous.
Whether you like it or not [http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/07/ncaa_transfer_rule_college_coaches_can_block_their_former_players_from_getting.html]
these are standard practices in sports of every genre, and I'd like to compare Challenger teams to NCAA teams becasue that's the "normal" pro-sports farming system, and think the same rules should apply in eSports: "NCAA coaches have the power to block an athlete from getting a scholarship at an entirely different university... Coaches can block a player’s “permission to contact” for a number of dumb reasons—to prevent a former assistant coach from “poaching” talent, for one—or for no discernible reason at all.. Basketball and football coaches might not want to admit it, but college athletes have to pay a penalty for switching schools. Under most circumstances, Division I transfers in football, baseball, men’s ice hockey, and men’s and women’s basketball must sit out a year before they can play again. The NCAA claims this year-off requirement is a result of those sports being “historically academically underperforming.” In practice, that restriction helps suppress player movement in the highest-revenue sports, creating a more consistent, fan-friendly product and giving coaches a greater ability to control the inflow and outflow of talent..."
In NCAA, the PLAYER cannot even PLAY for a year after transferring!! And considering a season split as if it's end of a year is like saying a player who practices year round but only actually competes in one seaon should be allowed to move teams between semesters and the team that originally spent the time & money teaching them in "practice" shouldn't get the "benefit" of it between "SEMESTERS". Sorry, whether you agree with it or not, sports is a business and the businessman, that includes colleges and PRO team owners will do what they can to "PROTECT" their investment. It's been this way for years. But if eSports fans cannot understand these concepts in sports, how on earth do you think anyone will EVER take eSports seriously as a SPORT?
|
I'm not really sure how your gender factors into this discussion. Seems like a meaningless piece of information. Secondly I don't know why you are talking about NCAA, they are pretty much one of the only organizations that can stand toe to toe with Fifa when it comes to being despicable human beings.
Anyway generally how it works in Football(One of your "REAL SPORTS" lol) is that a player tells his Agent that they may want to look around for new clubs to play for. Through back channels and unions the Agent either sets up "meets" or spreads the word about this player. The agent will then set up meetings between the current club and the interested party. Technically this is all illegal but is either hushed up or overlooked for the most part unless people are making a stink about it. It's beneficial to the clubs to let this happen as they themselves use this method to obtain players. Ideally the rules should be changed to protect clubs and still help players but well Fifa took how long before they started trying out goal line technology?
You really shouldn't come in here shouting around and insulting people just because you don't agree with them.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On May 22 2015 20:54 Numy wrote:
I'm not really sure how your gender factors into this discussion. Seems like a meaningless piece of information. Secondly I don't know why you are talking about NCAA, they are pretty much one of the only organizations that can stand toe to toe with Fifa when it comes to being despicable human beings.
Anyway generally how it works in Football(One of your "REAL SPORTS" lol) is that a player tells his Agent that they may want to look around for new clubs to play for. Through back channels and unions the Agent either sets up "meets" or spreads the word about this player. The agent will then set up meetings between the current club and the interested party. Technically this is all illegal but is either hushed up or overlooked for the most part unless people are making a stink about it. It's beneficial to the clubs to let this happen as they themselves use this method to obtain players. Ideally the rules should be changed to protect clubs and still help players but well Fifa took how long before they started trying out goal line technology?
You really shouldn't come in here shouting around and insulting people just because you don't agree with them.
Only females can understand that NCAA is sick good org and only thing being attention worthy, so because we can't find out why, clearly, we're not into business.
That's why she went with Ryze pic, she's going to outstall us in that discussion.
|
I don't even know what an NCAA is.
|
On May 22 2015 21:34 Ansibled wrote:
I don't even know what an NCAA is.
American athletic organization known for basketball.
|
The NCAA is a corrupt cartel . I dont know why anyone would want to say its some sort of beacon of light, or fair comparison.
|
Poland3748 Posts
On May 22 2015 21:34 Ansibled wrote:
I don't even know what an NCAA is.
enjoy: + Show Spoiler +
|
I also don't think anyone using 'female' is actually a girl, so basically that's a bunch of bullshit.
|
On May 22 2015 20:37 Dratwka wrote:
It's pretty sad really reading most of the comments here. As a female, I find it absurd that "men" who want eSports to be considered a true "sport" don't understand the fundamentals of the "business" side of sports in general. The comments posted here, in majority, are why, to me, it seems it'll be a long time coming, within the USA, for that to even happen.
Do you even know NCAA rules for off-season? Those players are not even allowed a salary and "poaching" will pretty much wreck a college students career. When you start off by saying he's the team's #1 player, whether it's a true statement or not, then what you're suggesting, in sports parlance, is the same as if the Warriors or Bucks contact Kobe directly thinking they don't have to talk to the Lakers about his contract, IN THE OFF-SEASON. The whole idea of it is absurb. But past that, the amount of time it takes, epecially in the NA LCS setting where, at best, you get a round-robin best of 1 game series to develop your talent and team synergy, the idea that it's easy to simply replace any talent, as talentless as NA Solo Q is and the fact that Team Liquid would HAVE to get an NA player due to the 3/2 rules and Quas being a "grandfathered" player is ridiculous.
Whether you like it or not [http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/07/ncaa_transfer_rule_college_coaches_can_block_their_former_players_from_getting.html]
these are standard practices in sports of every genre, and I'd like to compare Challenger teams to NCAA teams becasue that's the "normal" pro-sports farming system, and think the same rules should apply in eSports: "NCAA coaches have the power to block an athlete from getting a scholarship at an entirely different university... Coaches can block a player’s “permission to contact” for a number of dumb reasons—to prevent a former assistant coach from “poaching” talent, for one—or for no discernible reason at all.. Basketball and football coaches might not want to admit it, but college athletes have to pay a penalty for switching schools. Under most circumstances, Division I transfers in football, baseball, men’s ice hockey, and men’s and women’s basketball must sit out a year before they can play again. The NCAA claims this year-off requirement is a result of those sports being “historically academically underperforming.” In practice, that restriction helps suppress player movement in the highest-revenue sports, creating a more consistent, fan-friendly product and giving coaches a greater ability to control the inflow and outflow of talent..."
In NCAA, the PLAYER cannot even PLAY for a year after transferring!! And considering a season split as if it's end of a year is like saying a player who practices year round but only actually competes in one seaon should be allowed to move teams between semesters and the team that originally spent the time & money teaching them in "practice" shouldn't get the "benefit" of it between "SEMESTERS". Sorry, whether you agree with it or not, sports is a business and the businessman, that includes colleges and PRO team owners will do what they can to "PROTECT" their investment. It's been this way for years. But if eSports fans cannot understand these concepts in sports, how on earth do you think anyone will EVER take eSports seriously as a SPORT?
I mean, there is factually correct information here, but it's so devoid of context relevant to this discussion that it's actually comical.
Also I'm not sure where you're getting it from this thread that people think teams holding contracts should have absolutely no rights with regards to keeping their players, it's just being argued that the players should have some as well(which is something that comes under fire in every CBA in every sport that has a player union every time it comes time to renegotiate, probably priority #2 right below % of revenue players earn as a collective party).
|
On May 23 2015 00:23 Caiada wrote:
I also don't think anyone using 'female' is actually a girl, so basically that's a bunch of bullshit.
Maybe I'm dumb, but I didn't really see how gender was even relevant to that 
|
On May 23 2015 04:18 God Killer v2 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2015 00:23 Caiada wrote:
I also don't think anyone using 'female' is actually a girl, so basically that's a bunch of bullshit. Maybe I'm dumb, but I didn't really see how gender was even relevant to that
Just a way to get people angry. 99% sure it's bad troll.
|
For TL Fantasy Cancer, you guys be okay with Sunday 9PM PST? If not, Monday 9PM PST?
|
On May 22 2015 20:37 Dratwka wrote:
It's pretty sad really reading most of the comments here. As a female, I find it absurd that "men" who want eSports to be considered a true "sport" don't understand the fundamentals of the "business" side of sports in general. The comments posted here, in majority, are why, to me, it seems it'll be a long time coming, within the USA, for that to even happen.
Do you even know NCAA rules for off-season? Those players are not even allowed a salary and "poaching" will pretty much wreck a college students career. When you start off by saying he's the team's #1 player, whether it's a true statement or not, then what you're suggesting, in sports parlance, is the same as if the Warriors or Bucks contact Kobe directly thinking they don't have to talk to the Lakers about his contract, IN THE OFF-SEASON. The whole idea of it is absurb. But past that, the amount of time it takes, epecially in the NA LCS setting where, at best, you get a round-robin best of 1 game series to develop your talent and team synergy, the idea that it's easy to simply replace any talent, as talentless as NA Solo Q is and the fact that Team Liquid would HAVE to get an NA player due to the 3/2 rules and Quas being a "grandfathered" player is ridiculous.
Whether you like it or not [http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/07/ncaa_transfer_rule_college_coaches_can_block_their_former_players_from_getting.html]
these are standard practices in sports of every genre, and I'd like to compare Challenger teams to NCAA teams becasue that's the "normal" pro-sports farming system, and think the same rules should apply in eSports: "NCAA coaches have the power to block an athlete from getting a scholarship at an entirely different university... Coaches can block a player’s “permission to contact” for a number of dumb reasons—to prevent a former assistant coach from “poaching” talent, for one—or for no discernible reason at all.. Basketball and football coaches might not want to admit it, but college athletes have to pay a penalty for switching schools. Under most circumstances, Division I transfers in football, baseball, men’s ice hockey, and men’s and women’s basketball must sit out a year before they can play again. The NCAA claims this year-off requirement is a result of those sports being “historically academically underperforming.” In practice, that restriction helps suppress player movement in the highest-revenue sports, creating a more consistent, fan-friendly product and giving coaches a greater ability to control the inflow and outflow of talent..."
In NCAA, the PLAYER cannot even PLAY for a year after transferring!! And considering a season split as if it's end of a year is like saying a player who practices year round but only actually competes in one seaon should be allowed to move teams between semesters and the team that originally spent the time & money teaching them in "practice" shouldn't get the "benefit" of it between "SEMESTERS". Sorry, whether you agree with it or not, sports is a business and the businessman, that includes colleges and PRO team owners will do what they can to "PROTECT" their investment. It's been this way for years. But if eSports fans cannot understand these concepts in sports, how on earth do you think anyone will EVER take eSports seriously as a SPORT?
What a ridiculous post. :D
I as a "man" (lol) dont have the slightest interest in esports being like true "sports". I dont give a flying fuck about NCAA and I dont see a single reason why we would want esports to emulate them.
Really get out of your bubble, most people think the direction American pro sports has taken is terrible. And it is not the only model that exists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
