For years, academies have been the cornerstone of the Counter-Strike scene’s development. It was there that organisations invested in young players. They gave them their first serious matches, a structured environment, facilities and the chance to break into the first team. For many players, this was the only realistic way to make a name for themselves in the semi-professional and professional scene. For a long time, this system operated relatively smoothly. Academies could compete in leagues such as ESEA, gain experience and build their brand, even if their ‘big brother’ was already playing at a higher level. However, everything changed with the new season and the decision to fully link the league to the Valve Regional Standings system.
Changes that were intended to streamline the path to the professional scene have, in practice, struck at one of its most important pillars. Instead of developing and competing, academies have begun to disappear from the scene or be pushed to the margins. So the question is… Has ESEA, by adapting to the requirements of VRS, just begun to destroy the academy system in CS?
Valve Regional Standings and the new era of ESEA
With the new ESEA season, the league has ceased to be ‘merely’ another stage of semi-professional competition. From now on, the competitions have been fully integrated into the VRS system. That is, Valve’s official ranking, which determines which teams receive invitations to the biggest tournaments and what their path to the highest level of competition looks like. In practice, this means that virtually every ESEA division, from Open, through Entry and Intermediate, right up to Main and Advanced, has become a VRS-scoring tournament. Every match, every victory and every promotion now has a real impact on a team’s position within the global Counter-Strike ecosystem.
For many teams, this is a huge opportunity. ESEA has once again become the official “path to the pros”. A direct gateway to the ESL Challenger League, and in the long term even the ESL Pro League and Majors. Results achieved in the league now carry not only prestige but also ranking significance. The problem, however, is that VRS imposes very specific rules that simply did not exist in ESEA before. The Valve ranking is not calculated for the five players themselves, but for the entity representing the organisation. And since we are talking about an official scoring system, there are also restrictions. Among other things, a single organisation can only be represented by one team.
And this is precisely where the conflict between ESEA’s new vision and the reality of academies and multi-team projects begins.
One organisation, one team — a blow to academies and multi-team projects
In practice, the new VRS rules boil down to one simple message… A single organisation may field only one team in ranked competitions. For ESEA, this means ensuring that no two squads under the same brand appear in any VRS-ranked division. Previously, organisations could develop their projects in parallel. The main squad would compete for promotion and prestige, whilst the academy would gain experience in lower divisions, learning how to play in a league and laying the foundations for future transfers. The new system completely dismantles this model.
If an organisation registers its main squad with ESEA, it automatically blocks the academy’s path. It doesn’t matter whether the first team plays in Entry, Intermediate or higher. The academy cannot even compete in Open, as each of these divisions counts towards the VRS. As a result, the junior squad doesn’t lose on the field of play; it loses due to the rules. The same applies to projects with more than one full-fledged team. Organisations that wanted to operate with multiple rosters under a single brand now have to choose. Either one squad in ESEA, or giving up their presence in the VRS system. There is no room for compromise, workarounds or a transition period.
For academies, this is a huge problem. Without ESEA, they lose regular, long-term league competitions, which for years have formed the basis for the development of young players. They also lose visibility, contact with better teams and a realistic path to promotion. Instead of natural progression, stagnation or the complete closure of the project sets in. And that is precisely why more and more organisations are now facing a difficult decision. Should they keep the academy running if there is no place for it in one of the most important league systems in CS?
Our partners speak plainly — VoFoxen and Vandals react to ESEA changes
ESEA’s new rules and the full transition to the VRS system very quickly ceased to be mere theory. For many organisations, they meant having to make real, often difficult decisions regarding the future of their academies. Among them were our partners.
In the case of VoFoxen, the changes proved ruthless, but the organisation’s decision was not based solely on cold calculation. An official statement emphasised that the new ESEA regulations and the inability to field an academy in VRS-scored competitions would significantly hinder the development of young players. Rather than blocking their future path and denying them access to key leagues, VoFoxen decided to bring the VoFoxen Rising project to a definitive close.
Crucially, the decision was made in full consultation with the players, so that each of them could freely continue their journey on the Counter-Strike scene without the regulatory barriers arising from their affiliation with the organisation. In these circumstances, continuing to run the academy without access to ESEA and VRS points no longer made sense, either from a sporting or a developmental perspective.
The Vandals organisation took a different approach to the situation. Their academy, Vandals Protect, is not disappearing from the scene, but must change its place within the competitive ecosystem. In the upcoming ESEA season, we will see only the main Vandals squad. The academy, however, will be moved to other tournaments and leagues that are not subject to VRS rules. This solution allows the project to continue, but at the same time cuts the young squad off from one of the most important developmental leagues in Europe.
Both cases illustrate the same problem from two different perspectives. Regardless of the path taken, academies are paying the highest price for the changes introduced by ESEA and Valve. Some are disappearing entirely, whilst others are being sidelined, outside the main CS league system.
Development of the scene or development of the system?
The new order in Counter-Strike sets clear boundaries… One organisation, one team. For the ranking system, this is a simplification; for the development scene, however, it is a serious problem. Academies, which for years gave young players their first real chance to make a name for themselves, are now falling out of the mainstream of competition. Decisions made by organisations such as VoFoxen or Vandals show that it is not a lack of willingness to invest in young talent, but a lack of space for them within the official ecosystem. Some are winding up their projects, others are seeking alternatives, but the effect remains the same… The path to development is narrowing.
If academies are to disappear in the name of order and transparency, it is worth asking whether the Counter-Strike scene is truly heading towards long-term development, or merely adapting to the rankings. Because a system with no place for young players will sooner or later pay the ultimate price for it.
VoFoxen Esport (x.com — Facebook — team profile — Discord — Instagram — TikTok)
Vandals Clan (Facebook — x.com — team profile)
English 
Polish 