Chris Greeley: "We'd like to expand that in the future" on Tier 2 teams at the Esports World Cup

On the final day of the League of Legends tournament at the Esports World Cup, Chris Greeley, Global Head of LoL Esports, and Fabian Scheuermann, Chief Games Officer at the Esports Foundation, answered questions from the media during a roundtable discussion.

Among the topics discussed were the Esports World Cup, the Esports Nations Cup, and the possibility of bringing Game Changers to those competitions. The two speakers also addressed the future of their partnership, scheduling challenges, and the need to further strengthen ties with the Tier 2 ecosystem.

Chris Greeley: “One of the things we've talked about with adding more competition is finding ways to create more opportunities without just having the same 16 teams play each other.

I think the biggest jump we made with the EWC folks this year was adding qualifiers. The roster here didn't completely mirror MSI, which I think is good. We had two finalists who weren't at MSI and one of our semifinalists, one of the third-place teams, as well.

Obviously, some of the criticism I've seen from fans is that for the teams who went from MSI straight to Paris, a lot of them are out of the competition. There are open questions about how much the travel schedule impacted that.

It's something we're continuing to talk to the EWC folks about. The calendar is jammed, so we're trying to find ways to create space for third-party competition like this without overly shortening regional splits.

It's one of the reasons we didn't allow MSI teams to play in the SOOP LoL Invitational. Part of it was wanting to see different teams compete, but part of it was also making sure teams had the ability to travel, rest, and scrim on their own schedule without feeling pressure to add even more competition.

We're going to continue working through it. We're talking to teams; players are tired, and we're hearing that from owners. No one has directly asked for change, but that doesn't mean we're not looking to make changes.

Fabian Scheuermann: “Ultimately, what we're trying to do is create a better ecosystem and be additive to what we're doing.

I think if we find a way where players are happy with it, both competitions have their own right to exist, create their own storylines, and bring something unique. Only if you really bring something together where one plus one equals three does it make sense. So far, it doesn't, but we'll continue to explore if it makes sense.

If we look at 25 tournaments, 16 of them are co-hosted and official parts of the publisher circuit. But specifically for League of Legends, depending on the formats we use, there are restrictions with MSI that we are not trying to have. We want to be as open as possible, which is why we have Tier 2 teams playing in. That's something you couldn't necessarily do with MSI.

If you bring those two components together, then it makes sense to create a hybrid and discuss it more. But so far, we are additive. They are different storylines, different teams, and different goals. Technically, the high-level goal of creating the ultimate champion is still the same.

Chris Greeley: Yeah, that makes great sense. And just for transparency, we have MSI venues booked for 2027, and we know where we're going in 2028. So, at least in the foreseeable future, we're looking to keep them separate.

I do like having more tournaments rather than fewer tournaments. I think this year was a great proof of concept that MSI and EWC could look different and feel different.

Last year, one of the discussions Fabian and I had was that MSI and EWC looked very similar, except EWC had much tighter constraints because of the number of competition days. So we're trying to find ways to make sure MSI and EWC feel unique and distinct and carry their own storylines.

One of the conversations we started this week, and that will carry into the next couple of months as we plan for the future, is how do we make qualification into League of Legends at EWC feel more open and move beyond just our Tier 1 teams, like we did a little bit this year with Tier 2 teams in some of our regions.

Fabian Scheuermann: One of the things we were looking at coming into this year was how the qualifiers would run. We created this parallel competition during our regional splits, which was something that our global and regional teams all sat down to discuss, using the Champions League as a rough proxy for how we create more parallel competition.

The hope was that it would replace scrim blocks and not player free time. That's the trade-off. To do that, a lot of those competitions probably have to be online, which the EWC qualifiers were. We're still going through our retro process now that qualifiers are done across all regions, sitting down with tournament operators and regional teams to figure out what worked well and what felt good.

I think discoverability was probably an issue for us this year that we want to tackle next year. With more proactive planning, because some of our plans came together a little bit late, we'll be able to get the word out better.

But we feel really good about the outcomes. One of the fears going into a tournament like this was that all the MSI teams would just qualify again. If they're the best teams in the region and qualified for MSI, why wouldn't they win this tournament as well?

We just didn't see that, which is a testament to more parity coming into League of Legends. We hope that's an early, fingers-crossed signal of what we're seeing. But it also came at a different time in the season, the format was a little bit different, and there were opportunities for teams to show up.

Fabian Scheuermann: EWC and ENC are absolutely a top priority because only with sustained investment can we make this growth work.

If we look at it from an esports perspective, the investment there stays the same. I think Paris is a testament to this. We've gone outside of the kingdom, and the investment actually continued, or you could even say grew, and the impact of this is huge.

But I think this is important: we also want to make sure that the sustainability of esports overall grows. Our goal is not to just pour money into esports and hope that somehow it turns into results. We're investing, but we're also hoping for a return for the overall esports ecosystem.

We're a non-profit organization, which is great, because it means we can invest and don't expect to be a profitable company. But profitable and sustainable are two very different things.

It's similar if you look at other sports organizations, like the Olympics. How they work and operate is also nonprofit, and ultimately that's the goal we want to achieve. We want to create a sport that can carry itself.

I think right now that is not the case for esports. But what we're seeing with our investment is that the overall stability in terms of clubs, players, and the ecosystem is on a positive trend. I think other publishers have said it nicely: esports winter is over, we are in esports spring.

This shows the traction. Let's hope it continues. Our investment is definitely going to continue into EWC, and otherwise we would have never created ENC.

If the investment was failing and we weren't reaching our targets, ENC would never have been created. But the fact is that we're creating a second ecosystem that is nation-based and very strong.

Chris Greeley: Fandom really is born in regional leagues, and being able to give teams in those leagues an opportunity to gel, come together, and build a fan base.

So if you're running really short splits, I think you're taking the bottom four or five teams and essentially just relegating them for fans in a way where they never get to see those pros, and those pros never get the ability to grow and shine.

We want to find a balance. We love international events. First Stand this year, we spent a lot of time taking feedback to try to make it feel better. Most of the negative feedback we got was, "I wish it had been in a bigger venue," which is great feedback to get. More people want to come and see the thing that's happening.

Competitively, it felt better for fans. I think knocking out two Korean teams really helped change the perception that it was just a foregone conclusion. We want to find more opportunities for international competition, and not just international competition for the top two teams in every league. We're looking to continue iterating and doubling down on that. Finding ways to make competitions like that really interesting for fans.

It's partly about how you create more international competition, but also how you do it in a way that doesn't crush the calendar and burn pros out.

I think one of the things we want to eliminate is those deep periods of two or three weeks where nothing is happening and you're just waiting for the next big event. There are a lot of pros who, during those two or three weeks, are just sitting around, also like fans waiting to watch the next thing.

If they haven't qualified for it and we can keep them playing, it's good for their teams and partners, but it's also good for those pros.

Chris Greeley: The first year League of Legends was involved in EWC, it was a one-year license, and I think both sides were testing the waters. Could EWC present League of Legends to fans in a way that was good for them? And from our side, were we the right property? Would our fans show up? Would our teams and players give it their all?

After that first year, we felt really good about what we saw. We talked to every team that attended to get their feedback—the good and the bad—both to help EWC improve as a tournament organizer and to understand if this partnership made sense long term.

Every team came back with a positive experience. They praised the way teams were treated on-site, the practice facilities, player areas, activities, and even the schedule. We had a lot of conversations afterward about how we could improve pro player hospitality at our own events.

The other big piece was viewership. That's the best measure of whether fans want something.

Reddit and other global social media tend to bring out a vocal minority. So you hear all the bad things, and it feels like that's the only sentiment that exists in the world. But then you have a million people, plus China’s viewership, watching the event. A million people didn't show up to hate-watch—they showed up because they wanted to see these teams and the competition.

The last piece was EWC's willingness to experiment with qualifiers and formats. They were willing to test things like Fearless Draft and be a testing ground for us. This year, they're running dual streams, which we're interested in because it creates more international competition while keeping things condensed.

If you can take twice as many pro teams, put them in the same space, and broadcast more games through multiple streams, it creates a lot of opportunities. We'll take the data and learnings from that to see what could work in future formats.

Having a partner willing to take risks and try new things with us is a big part of what makes this exciting. I know if we came to them with something unusual, they would at least consider testing it and taking on the fan reaction.

Fabian Scheuermann: For EWC, we built partnerships with all the biggest global publishers. For more than a decade, everyone in esports has wanted national competitions.

I think this is a great opportunity to bring esports closer to the mainstream. It's easier for people to connect with France, for example, than with specific clubs that may only appeal to a smaller fan base. We see that in every other sport.

The challenge is that you have to build completely new rosters and enter untested territory. That's not just for League of Legends — every game's roster is new.

We knew this was a huge task, so we could only make it work if all publishers were involved. The publisher is essentially the federation for each game: they know the right roster, who is eligible, and what the community will support. We know fans want it, publishers are behind it, and we've started something exciting.

But it's still untested ground. The first ENC will be great, but we'll learn a lot from it. It's going to be a journey. We already announced another ENC in 2028, and I think this is the start of something great for esports overall, including League of Legends.

Chris Greeley: This is one of those areas where I'm happy to admit I was wrong. We spent a lot of time discussing nation-based competition.

The concern was that building national teams requires a lot of work. Every country has different structures, different organizations, and different rules around representation.

We asked ourselves, after all that effort, what are fans actually getting? Are they just watching Korea versus China, something we already see at events like the Asian Games? Then I went to the LEC Finals in the south of France.

The Friday night was an EMEA Masters match between Spain and France, and the building was shaking in a way you don't always see at regional finals. The team told me, "You have to come. It will change your perspective." And it did. We realized it's not just about the destination; it's about the journey.

For fans in France and Spain, watching their national teams compete against each other is special. It's similar to the World Cup. Even if your team isn't expected to win, following the journey and the rivalries is what makes it exciting. That's what we see with ENC.

Will China and Korea potentially reach the final? Maybe. But we've seen more parity this year, so maybe not. The regional rivalries are what will carry ENC and make the entire tournament worth watching, not just the final.

Fabian Scheuermann: We hear this feedback, and it's not League of Legends specific—we hear it across many tournaments. One of the key variables we look at is audaciousness. There's only one chance to win, and if you're out, you're out.

Sometimes fans don't like that, and I understand. But with the limited time we have, we also want teams to have that one opportunity to prove they are truly the best. There's no RNG. You have to perform every time, and if you don't, you're out.

That's a very unique format. It may not always be liked by fans of individual teams, but overall, people enjoy the excitement that comes from it.

It's also complementary to the League of Legends ecosystem. In regional leagues, you can follow teams consistently, but here we create new storylines and high-pressure moments.

So it's a decision that is rather on the meta layer across all of EWC and something we are fighting for and something we don't want to change.

Chris Greeley: From a scheduling perspective, when you have five days but want to include as many teams as possible, you really only have three options: shorten the format, burn out teams with extremely long days, or multi-stream.

I think EWC made the two right choices. They shortened the format and introduced multi-streaming, which reduces pressure on players. Best-of-ones create variance, and variance is interesting.

That's why we use it in the Swiss Stage at Worlds. We used groups for a long time, but Swiss is best-of-one until you reach elimination or qualification matches, where it shifts to best-of-threes. It creates more opportunities for storylines, upsets, and the moments fans look for in tournaments.

I know some people ask why we don't have double elimination in the Worlds bracket stage, but part of the reason is that you can't always have a safety net. At Worlds, you can't have a bad day. You just have to take it.

Fabian Scheuermann: Yes, we're very happy with this.

Especially in Europe, we've seen some amazing turnaround games, and we feel this new format we created together is something we want to build on. We'll see how it looks next year, but we want to expand on it.

That also connects to the second question. EWC is not here to create a year-round calendar and add even more games to an already packed schedule.

It's about finding the right balance between creating something new, making sure the burden on players isn't too high, and ensuring it remains complementary to what publishers are already doing.

So yes, we love new storylines and openness, but we need to balance that with the calendar.

This will continue to evolve. Even if in 2027 or 2028 we look back and say, "This was too much, let's go back," that's completely fine. Ecosystems move and grow, and we can try new things, see what works, and adjust.

Chris Greeley: I think it's a great opportunity to create more opportunities in Tier 2. For a long time, depending on the league, it was either promotion/relegation or simply talent development.

Promotion/relegation used to have value because teams could develop and sell their spots for significant amounts of money. We moved away from that because we didn't think it was the healthiest model for the ecosystem, and we wanted Tier 2 to focus on developing talent.

But talent development alone is difficult to sustain. There's not a lot of money in it unless teams can sell players or contracts, and the market wasn't compensating Tier 2 organizations for the investment they were making.

Fully subsidizing leagues also isn't sustainable long term. It's difficult to attract sponsors to Tier 2 when they can invest in Tier 1 and reach more people.

So we're trying to find ways where an organization can look at Tier 2 and say: "We're developing talent, which is good for the ecosystem, but this also makes financial sense for our team."

I think EWC is a great opportunity for that. Our test this year, with Tier 2 teams having a path into the ecosystem and potentially reaching EWC, was great. We'd like to expand that in the future and bring more regions into it.

Winning an EMEA Masters is already a huge accomplishment and creates a lot of fandom. The LEC has done a great job using ERLs as a talent pipeline, and many players on stage today came through that system. But that alone can't sustain Tier 2. The LEC only has 10 teams and doesn't have enough turnover to support the entire ecosystem.

Fabian Scheuermann: We only have Mobile Legends: Bang Bang right now, the women's competition, because there's a truly rigid ecosystem. And for VALORANT, we've always been exploring it with a Game Changers ecosystem, but it also needs to fit the schedule. It's on the table, but we need to make sure that there's a rigid ecosystem. So right now, it would only be VALORANT that we would truly consider including. We don't want to build something where then suddenly players have nothing to do for the rest of the year.”

Chris Greeley: It's an ecosystem we've looked at. We've tried; there have sort of been various starts at it. We had something in Europe; we had a program in NA. It was public, and then it was stealth, where we were doing things but not... publicizing them, and then it was public again, and we ran into a bunch of issues running it overall in terms of just having interested participants. It’s something where it's like, sort of always on the board as something we're looking at, but we don't have any sort of hard and fast plans to develop any process.”