Kenu

Sorry about that information missing. The third place (and thus the promotion to ECL Pro) will be decided by a BO7 series between Grenoble BDL Esport (home) and Hotbox (away). The games are scheduled for Sunday (2), Tuesday (2) and Wednesday (3) - but teams are allowed to agree on rescheduling.

Well done ignoring my points and writing in Swedish. 👍🏼 Doesn't mute your points, but doesn't make for much of a conversation. Please write in English or we'll have to remove the messages. Edit: As you continue arguing and provoking in Swedish, I have hidden the messages, as promised. The (first) original message can be read in the quote above. In his response (hidden, due to continuing in Swedish) he claims I'm escaping his questions rather than answering and that I'm being a "big leader who gets things to look good by deleting messages". Additionally, he expects every page to separately say "English only", despite that being our policy for the 5+ years he's been a member. I'm always interested having a proper discussion about these things, evaluate different options and get different views. I have my opinions and I do my best to explain why I see things in a certain way and what the problem areas of another approach might be from my point of view. From my point of view you ignored what I wrote, continue writing in a language that most people here don't understand (I do, but this is a public discussion) and top it off by acting disrespectfully. I think it's ridiculous that you keep brining up a claim that ECL has the same structure as EHL/EC 2010-2015. Yes, ECL runs twice a year and has a hockey-esque regular season + playoffs, but if you don't acknowledge all of the other development that has happened from those days - then I'm afraid we just see things very differently. You say I used "we don't have time" as the argument for not running more ECL's in a year and yet succeeded in "running a Spring League, SCL, Summer Cup and Finnish Championships after the fact". If your view of NHL esports is to play ECL, then ECL, then ECL, then ECL, then ECL and then some more ECL, then yeah, sure - we should probably scrap all of that. From my point of view, the different tournaments and leagues are things that keep it fresh and make winning the "biggies" exciting. I love the ECL. I love the World Championships. I love the Olympics. I love the NHL. Yet I wouldn't want to watch any of these four all year and the competitors wouldn't have time to participate in all of these. That is my main point - keeping it interesting. Making titles mean something. Letting champions celebrate their championships. Am I 100% satisfied with everything we do? Are we making the right call every time? Are we spending every minute efficiently? Of course not. Are we creating something incredibly nice and keep pushing the envelope in NHL esports - I believe so. Constructive feedback will continue to push us to greater things. However you package your feedback, we will receive it and consider it, but it makes no sense for me to take the time and effort to respond if you're just going to ignore my points and continue being offensive.

Big tip of the hat to the entire LA team, but since one was mentioned above, I'll additionally tip my hat to @Franky__2768 who put in a lot of work. 1) I don't think we're going to ban individual players with Elite/Pro history from playing in Neo as a rule, as maybe someone wants to pull a Jagr to continue their career with some friends and that doesn't hurt the integrity of the division. That being said, spontaneously, I think Core would be a better level for this. As for a team with lots of experience playing in Neo - no. That is not the right place for you. 2) Roster rules in the rulebook apply. Feedback on how to potentially improve said rules is always appreciated.

Thanks for the feedback. Definitely understand the criticism. We did say before the start of the season that there would be changes made to the 11->12 structure and it is mentioned in the rulebook - but of course we would have ideally had the exact information out sooner. Previously, teams 13-16 have faced the fear of relegation, so the fear of elimination was always there for those teams. We do agree that the "sudden" immediate relegation for teams in 15th and 16th spot is too harsh at this stage in the season, so we put together a compromise for the transition between ECL 11 and 12 that allows for every team to have a chance to prove their worth. Lite playoff team (4th) Lite playoff team (5th) Lite playoff team (6th) Lite playoff team (7th) Lite playoff team (8th) Lite playoff team (9th) Pro relegation team (12th) Pro relegation team (12th) Pro relegation team (13th) Pro relegation team (13th) Pro relegation team (14th) Pro relegation team (14th) Pro relegation team (15th) Pro relegation team (15th) Pro relegation team (16th) Pro relegation team (16th) Wildcard Wildcard Wildcard Wildcard Seven (7) out of these twenty (20) teams participating in the ECL Pro Qualification tournament will play in ECL Pro 12. I don't personally agree with this, but as always, feel free to convince me otherwise. We made some important structural changes that allows for teams to be "fast-tracked" to higher divisions by giving them opportunities to prove themselves. This should mean that teams find their accurate level of competition as fast, if not faster than before. To me, ECL is a league, not a quick-burst tournament. By shortening the season and cramming in more victors, you're potentially lessening the value of each individual season. Additionally, in the process you're probably preventing teams/players from taking part in other tournaments, because it's always running. That is not to say that a structure like you describe couldn't or won't work. I just don't think it's as simple as it sounds.

Article updated with missing images.