|
On March 10 2013 01:44 Noobity wrote:
The elephant situation is less black and white and more shades of grey. You will absolutely not have Kespa players winning every GSL in the coming years. There might be a higher percentage of them winning than ESF players, but there will never be complete and total domination unless Kespa simply recruits more young players.
On the contrary I think you will absolutely have Kespa players winning every GSL in the coming years. 
Joking aside Kespa has enough trainees and B-teamers that some of them will eventually join the A-team (sic!) and keep wreaking havoc in the GSL. As for the new talent it will just get scouted by Kespa - the organisation that actually is an organisation and has the most resources at its disposal. In a few years eSF will just be a distant memory since their model is not sustainable in the long-term.
|
Oh gosh, I just watched the first match, with the eternal broodling battles. I'm so glad I decided to mainly watch IEM instead of this.
It's sad that WoL had to end like this, it had so many entertaining episodes in the meta game 
|
|
|
fuck symbol!
you had one chance!
one chance!!
and you disappoint me
T_T
|
On March 10 2013 02:23 revoN wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2013 01:44 Noobity wrote:
The elephant situation is less black and white and more shades of grey. You will absolutely not have Kespa players winning every GSL in the coming years. There might be a higher percentage of them winning than ESF players, but there will never be complete and total domination unless Kespa simply recruits more young players.
On the contrary I think you will absolutely have Kespa players winning every GSL in the coming years. Joking aside Kespa has enough trainees and B-teamers that some of them will eventually join the A-team (sic!) and keep wreaking havoc in the GSL. As for the new talent it will just get scouted by Kespa - the organisation that actually is an organisation and has the most resources at its disposal. In a few years eSF will just be a distant memory since their model is not sustainable in the long-term.
I am not sure how eSF's model is not sustainable. They are built based on the Kespa model. Kespa is bigger and has more resources because they got the big name Koreans sponsors due to BW. But with sc2 interest in Korea not that high, eSF's relationship with foreign sponsors and tournaments might not be a bad thing.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
kespa teams are corporate teams, they don't live off of individual sponsors (for clothing, accessories etc).
so it's not only that they have bigger name sponsors, but they have a much closer relationship with them. you could say they are owned by those corporations. it is certainly true for big names like T1, KT, storky
|
Vatican City State431 Posts
On March 10 2013 02:30 Emzeeshady wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2013 02:18 p14c wrote:Next final will be Fantasy vs Flash if they dont nerf Terran  You can bet on it. There are many better Terrans that have switched over earlier. I do agree that it will be a TvT final unless someone pulls a Fruitdealer.
No, there are not. Fantasy and Flash have insane shuttle micro and can macro also. Flash already has beaten a lot of good Terran players like Taeja and Ryung. In fact he dominated them quite badly.
|
|
|
Ro fucking rolled, fuck yes! Khan!!!!
|
28100 Posts
Even though this was a zvz, I was quite entertained
|
On March 10 2013 03:01 oneofthem wrote:
kespa teams are corporate teams, they don't live off of individual sponsors (for clothing, accessories etc).
so it's not only that they have bigger name sponsors, but they have a much closer relationship with them. you could say they are owned by those corporations. it is certainly true for big names like T1, KT, storky
And yet, Kespa teams can also lose their sponsors. They are down to 7 teams now.
Of course, their sponsors are still bigger than eSF. But doesn't mean they are not affected by the popularity of SC2 in Korea.
IMO, we might see some sort of merger for the next PL.
|
This sums it up for me!
![[image loading]](http://startheory.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/kirk-khan_.jpg)
|
28100 Posts
|
On March 10 2013 03:32 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2013 03:01 oneofthem wrote:
kespa teams are corporate teams, they don't live off of individual sponsors (for clothing, accessories etc).
so it's not only that they have bigger name sponsors, but they have a much closer relationship with them. you could say they are owned by those corporations. it is certainly true for big names like T1, KT, storky And yet, Kespa teams can also lose their sponsors. They are down to 7 teams now. Of course, their sponsors are still bigger than eSF. But doesn't mean they are not affected by the popularity of SC2 in Korea. IMO, we might see some sort of merger for the next PL.
True, if a corporate sponsor bails out, a team is endangered to disappear. It still doesn't change that KeSPA teams have a closer relationship with their corporate sponsors than eSF teams.
Also, Team 8 is a statement that KeSPA, as an organization, can do something to help during difficult times, instead of being just a name encompassing loosely related teams. Surviving the match-fixing scandal followed by the legal mess courtesy of Blizzard is nothing to scoff at.
|
On March 10 2013 01:44 Noobity wrote:
I hate this elephant argument so much. Looking at champions like Life, Jjakjji, Leenock (his mlg wins were not a fluke) they're all crazy young. Who's to say Life wouldn't have been the next Flash had he not been like 12 or 13 when sc2 came out?
The elephant situation is less black and white and more shades of grey. You will absolutely not have Kespa players winning every GSL in the coming years. There might be a higher percentage of them winning than ESF players, but there will never be complete and total domination unless Kespa simply recruits more young players.
At the time of the article -- and for quite some time after the article -- SC2 was dominated by BW has-beens and BW never-will-be's. The GSL was the minor league, which received disproportionate attention solely because it played a newer game than the players who could hack it in the big leagues. Its competition was a farce.
The elephant observation has nothing to do with new powerhouses like Life, who never quit Broodwar for an easier competitive scene. As you say, we never found out whether they could be Broodwar contenders! But the dominant crowd for a long time was Broodwar wash-outs (or, the best of them, a middle-of-the-road A-teamer). They were not champions -- they were the breakfast of champions.
|
WoW ...
You can measure the success of the last final compared to others when we have only 86 pages of comments xD
|
|
|
On March 10 2013 04:35 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2013 01:44 Noobity wrote:
I hate this elephant argument so much. Looking at champions like Life, Jjakjji, Leenock (his mlg wins were not a fluke) they're all crazy young. Who's to say Life wouldn't have been the next Flash had he not been like 12 or 13 when sc2 came out?
The elephant situation is less black and white and more shades of grey. You will absolutely not have Kespa players winning every GSL in the coming years. There might be a higher percentage of them winning than ESF players, but there will never be complete and total domination unless Kespa simply recruits more young players. At the time of the article -- and for quite some time after the article -- SC2 was dominated by BW has-beens and BW never-will-be's. The GSL was the minor league, which received disproportionate attention solely because it played a newer game than the players who could hack it in the big leagues. Its competition was a farce. The elephant observation has nothing to do with new powerhouses like Life, who never quit Broodwar for an easier competitive scene. As you say, we never found out whether they could be Broodwar contenders! But the dominant crowd for a long time was Broodwar wash-outs (or, the best of them, a middle-of-the-road A-teamer). They were not champions -- they were the breakfast of champions.
The article should never have been made period. All we got out of it is 2 fanbases jumping to each other's throat when possible.
It doesn't matter if it was right at the time, what was the point of posting it at all? It's pretty obvious. Saying sc2 was a joke against BW.
|
IEM it was at the same time and this was a ZvZ.
|
On March 10 2013 04:35 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2013 01:44 Noobity wrote:
I hate this elephant argument so much. Looking at champions like Life, Jjakjji, Leenock (his mlg wins were not a fluke) they're all crazy young. Who's to say Life wouldn't have been the next Flash had he not been like 12 or 13 when sc2 came out?
The elephant situation is less black and white and more shades of grey. You will absolutely not have Kespa players winning every GSL in the coming years. There might be a higher percentage of them winning than ESF players, but there will never be complete and total domination unless Kespa simply recruits more young players. At the time of the article -- and for quite some time after the article -- SC2 was dominated by BW has-beens and BW never-will-be's. The GSL was the minor league, which received disproportionate attention solely because it played a newer game than the players who could hack it in the big leagues. Its competition was a farce. The elephant observation has nothing to do with new powerhouses like Life, who never quit Broodwar for an easier competitive scene. As you say, we never found out whether they could be Broodwar contenders! But the dominant crowd for a long time was Broodwar wash-outs (or, the best of them, a middle-of-the-road A-teamer). They were not champions -- they were the breakfast of champions.
And who just won Code S? Roro was the definition of a middle of the road A teamer. And yet he is a GSL champion eventhough all the S Class players also switched over at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
