Millennium rosterlock.

[Bngi]

Something yesterday made me realise and question, why in the world is the roosterlock in CPL, 15 players, and inte SPL, 12 players?

Ive tried to apply all kinds of logic to this, without any luck. The only reasonable situation to me would be to have them switched or atleast at the same number of players.


If anyone out there has more info then me, i would love for you to enlighten me.

Thanks


Edit: Sorry, guess i should have posted it in the union forum.

 

[Mikey D]

The same reason the SPL is 10 minutes of game time whereas the CPL is 15 minutes....

oh....err

sorry, who know's the answer to both!

 

[ThreeD]

10 mins/4 points because of 32 teams=timing. but the 12 player roster lock?

i have no idea...

 

[Chicago]

It reduces the ability of teams to buy an advantage (whether real or perceived) by paying for more players to come to the events.

Since NOBODY can have more than 12 players, then SPL teams don't have to pay to fly around 3 more people to feel like they're competitive with team who would have 15 players.

And yes, that means it's assumed CPL teams are willing/capable of devoting more money than SPL teams.

 

[Bngi]

thank you for your input chicago.

Simply put, you think Mill wants the CPL teams to pay for outside pros(americans) but not the SPL teams?

I guess that could be a logical explenation, however my opinion is that it hardly justifies the decision.

Ill have to think about that one for a while though.

cheers

 

[Chicago]

No.

Roster limits don't have anything to do with your ability to buy US pros - if you can buy a pro with 15 people on your roster, you can buy a pro with 12 people on your roster.

The roster limit simply means that SPL teams don't have to spend as much total money on airfares, hotels, cars, etc as CPL teams may be inclined to do.

 

[velocity]

I do not agree on this.

The Tournament roster would still be 9 players as it is today.
The Season roster could be 15 and it would not impact the cost pr. tournament as you dont have more than 9 players with you pr. tournament.

The reason for this is that some SPL teams than can spread the cost out on more players to reduce the financial strain on each player.

Ingvar Orten
Oslo Envy

 

[Bunkerkidz]

Yeah I agree, I think it would make much more sense to actually allow SPL teams to have more spots on the roster if anything.

Since we're going on the logic that CPL teams have better financial conditions, they would be able to afford travel expenses more than the SPL teams, which would be able to have more players on the roster that could travel throughout the season, in order to help lower the costs.

It really doesn't make much sense...

 

[Thuor]

it make a lot of sense to me and I totally agree that 15 would be better.

 

[Chicago]

I apparently misunderstood the way this rule works. I agree, it doesn't make any sense. If anything, the CPL limit should be LOWER than the SPL limit. (More financial resources to ensure stability)