Discussing the NACL Changes & the LCSPA Walkout
There's been a lot of NACL news this month. Let's talk about it.
May has been an insane month for LoL esports in North America — honestly, it feels like the most chaotic month in the history of the LCS. As had been rumored for months, LCS orgs have been looking for an opportunity to drop their second string (previously Academy, now NACL) rosters, since most teams were actively ignoring the NA development pipeline anyway. While we’ve had some incredible talents come up through the Academy system (Spica, Blaber, Palafox, to name a few), it always felt like an Academy promotion was the exception, not the rule.
This disheartening but undeniable fact was proved again by Copy’s recent retirement. Objectively, Copy was one of the most talented players in the NACL and Academy systems for the last two years and one of the best native mid laners we’ve ever seen come up through NA’s development pipeline. Despite being unanimously lauded, despite deserving a promotion for well over a year, despite being a consistent MVP frontrunner, he was never even given a shot on the LCS stage.
Teams were contractually required to keep NACL rosters, not to actually promote the talent they developed.
Things were looking up, though. Spring 2023 saw the stunning debuts of players like Busio, Yeon, and Tenacity on the heels of jojopyun and Danny’s incredible journey last year. NA talent no longer felt like an oxymoron. The Academy system rebranded to the NACL, introducing a promotion/relegation system, amateur qualifiers, and more stage games than ever. With the LCS moving to weekdays, the NACL broadcast was bolstered by a viewer-friendly weekend slot and LEC viewer raids.
Despite all of that, the first week of May saw all ten franchised teams petition Riot to make their NACL spots optional, meaning that teams would be able to choose to drop out of the league at will, starting as early as the 2023 Summer split. Despite having every right to deny the teams’ request, and facing widespread community protest, Riot approved their motion.
With only a weekend’s notice, almost 50 people working in the NACL system were jobless.
With seven of ten franchise teams dropping their NACL rosters, the community — players, staff, personalities, and fans — openly criticized the decisions by Riot and the LCS orgs. It felt like a final nail in the coffin of the LCS. It's impossible for fans to feel positive about the LCS when they’re not convinced that the teams they love even care about their league.
That perspective, however, is stagnant. I understand the temptation of despair, but I can’t sit still long enough to wallow in it — this change has caused some major shifts in the NA LoL ecosystem, and it’s vital to discuss them. With Riot trying to staunch the bleeding NACL and the LCSPA threatening a walkout, I can’t resist searching for the silver lining in the eye of this hurricane.
Riot’s Changes to the NACL
In two blog posts, one confirming the changes to franchise requirements in the NACL and the other priming the upcoming NACL Summer Split, Riot outlined its plans for dealing with the fallout of a seven team exodus from the league. Many of these changes are highly impactful — if they’d been implemented earlier, they might have been the breath of sustainability that NACL apparently lacked.
These “financial stability” changes were first on the docket. First, the NACL tournament servers are moving from LA to Chicago, meaning that teams are no longer required to keep an on-site roster in one of the most expensive states in the country (Chicago is central enough for teams to cut costs with fully remote rosters). Academy and NACL were fully remote outside of their finals anyway — I can see how the cost of an in-person squad could start to grate on the bottom line of orgs. This change would’ve hurt last year, but it would’ve been a boon in the long term.
Speaking of the finals, Riot have confirmed that the NACL Summer Finals will be on LAN, as planned at the start of this year. This needs to be a commitment for every NACL final moving forward, especially because of new brands entering the league. The prospect of an IRL activation should be a selling point for the league. If you contextualize viewership, in-person finals, and schedule, the NACL looks better than the top competitive leagues of other, smaller, esports.
The biggest opportunity for fandom, though, was a commitment to international competition for the NA development system that will mirror EMEA Masters (a tournament where EMEA’s regional leagues send each of their representatives). I’m not sure how it’ll be integrated, but it is known that the best NACL teams are capable of beating the best teams from the CBLOL and LLA, which are the two regions mentioned in the post.
If done properly, full integration of the Americas in League could be incredible for all of LoL esports — the formula has already worked in VCT NA and the LEC, and there’s no reason to think it wouldn’t work here.
This is where their second set of major changes comes in — revenue sharing. It’s genuinely baffling that this wasn’t already implemented, but teams in the NACL will finally receive a cut of revenue from the broadcast, from Twitch subscribers and such. Also, teams are now allowed partner broadcast integrations, giving two ways to tangibly take advantage of the growing NACL audience. With the $100,000 prize pool staying intact (though it should realistically be raised), it’s not unreasonable to posit that teams could actually profit off of the NACL, especially considering my personal favorite change.
DSG has joined the NACL. Disguised Toast — one of the biggest streamers in the world, and a member of OfflineTV — made waves with the purchase of a Valorant roster earlier this year, debuting “Disguised” as his new esports organization. In the eyes of believers, this could be a massive viewership boon to the league, with players incentivised to make content, as his Valorant players have, and grow their brands. DSG’s Valorant costreams feature streamers like Tarik and Ludwig, and easily double (or sometimes triple) the primary broadcast’s viewership. The prospect of DSG in the NACL is infectiously exciting.
I won’t lie — I was praying for this to happen as soon as I saw the news come out initially. In fact, I even drafted an article about how good DSG could be for the NACL, based on their presence in the NA VCL (Valorant’s Tier 2 scene). However, I ended up speaking to Toast about potentially joining the league long before his interest in the NACL was public, so I had to stay quiet about the potential move. I was going to include that piece within this, but I’ve just got too much to talk about here.
The story of DSG entering the NACL will be its own piece, coming out soon.
The LCSPA’s Response & Potential Walkout
I’m positive about Riot’s changes in a vacuum, but the LCSPA’s recent statements illustrate exactly why these changes still aren’t sufficient to help people affected by the gutted NACL. After Riot announced the changes, in a post entitled “Our commitment to the NACL,” the Player’s Association responded, almost immediately, with an open letter entitled “Riot’s lack of commitment to the NACL.” They weren’t pulling their punches.
The letter, signed by the association’s advisors as well as top LCS players, doesn’t just lambast Riot for giving up on a development pipeline that’s had proven value for the LCS — it calls out specific alternatives that were ignored throughout the decision making process. Months ago, they allegedly proposed ways to ease the transition, suggesting that Riot allow teams to pay players based on wage laws where they live (for remote teams, this could seriously cut costs), and that LCS teams be allowed to partner with affiliate organizations to operate their NACL teams.
The plan they presented also matches their demands ahead of a potential walkout vote, which would go through if a majority of LCS players vote in favor of it on Sunday.
As they outlined in their statement, the coordinated dissolution of 7 teams without warning is unacceptable — it’s not fair to the players, staff, or fans to see half of the NACL be axed midway through the year. It makes sense, then, for the players to seek a walkout, since they have a vested interest in the future viability of their league, and many of them watched their friends get fired without consideration or support.
The LCS product is nothing without the players, and the players are irreplaceable. If even half of the players walk out, there’s no way to run the broadcast — and every day without a functioning broadcast loses Riot even more money. The players have a legally protected right to strike, and all of the advantage is in their hands. If Riot tries to get around their highly public protest, players can easily mobilize fan support in a way that orgs, and Riot, cannot.
With that being said, these demands look a little unrealistic to me.
The walkout demands feature an interesting proposition for helping displaced players: a 3/5’s roster continuity rule which would let released NACL players continue to compete. Despite losing their organizations, these players would be able to play out their year in the league they deserve to play in. It’d be a small step, but it would help limit long-term damage to the ecosystem, since many former NACL players are considering quitting esports. We could easily be losing the next big LCS talent unless Riot works to retain them.
As helpful as this would be, Riot has already started preparing for a ten team league in the Summer, and it’s also become clear that unaffiliated organizations aren’t realistic for the NACL. Team Tony Top qualified for the NACL from the amateur qualifiers alongside Supernova and Maryville University, but gave up their spot to Team Fish Taco (another amateur squad) when it became clear that they wouldn’t have a sponsor for their team. The only way to hold unaffiliated teams in the league would be to fulfill another one of the LCSPA’s demands — a 300k yearly stipend for player salaries in the NACL, which I don’t see happening.
Simply put, I don’t see Riot forking out that money for NACL player salaries — it probably isn’t worth the cost. That’s also why they likely won’t guarantee contracts for Summer LCS champions, which was another one of the LCSPA’s demands.
The only way I could see the LCSPA securing this funding is if Riot agrees to cut the revenue share of organizations which don’t have an NACL roster, since it was an original stipulation of the franchising agreement. Sourcing $300k per NACL team this way would be nearly impossible, but it would be an extra source of funds, and I could see it as a compromise if the walkout exerts enough pressure.
That just leaves one: the addition of “Valorant-style” promotion and relegation between the LCS and NACL. This was a point brought up in the open letter, it’s first on the list of walkout demands, and it’s received the most attention from the community by far.
The other demands would require Riot to commit to high, long-term spending without a proven payoff — I already covered the positive changes coming soon, and they definitely make it possible for the NACL to survive 2023. Valorant’s promotion-relegation system still has partnered teams (without the buy-in), it just promotes and relegates a set of non-partnered teams which qualify by winning the VCL, VCT’s tier 2 league. Importantly, it’s a newer system than the LCS franchise model, and was implemented around the world for Valorant.
There are many criticisms of LoL franchising, but the relevant one here is that there isn’t an incentive to play in the NACL like there is in the VCL — you can’t join the LCS no matter how hard you dominate in the NACL. The steep buy-in makes brands hesitant to invest in the league, and stagnates competition within the scene. While it wouldn’t be perfect, an amendment to the franchising system is likely a step in the right direction.
The LCSPA’s strategy banks on a simple fact: the players have a lot of power with a walkout. Riot has to be receptive to negotiations no matter the demands, and we’ll likely see some serious changes across the board if the walkout happens. There’s no point predicting what those changes will be, but long term viability is in everyone’s best interest — hopefully, that means a quick resolution.
Of course, that’s all speculation. Perhaps Riot will actually see value in directly paying NACL teams, or be forced to buckle regardless under the financial pressure of an LCS walkout. Or, the walkout won’t happen at all and we’ll leave all of this behind us. Either way, I’m certain that both sides are desperately searching for a way to resolve the dispute, because it won’t be good for anyone if LCS Opening Day is delayed by a walkout.