With the topic of esports you have this pattern of speaking in general overtures without understanding their status. I politely tried to explain to you their context. You seem to have a presence in multiple areas where your knowledge on those matters is impressive. This is one area though that youre misunderstanding the information. Crash course of source material used for reference is misguided on their true stature.
When we talk about the success of football or baseball we refer to viewership numbers, salaries and ad revenue at the top tier of professional play. Whats unseen and is the main factor driving to its continued success are the third party support systems feeding into the top tier of play. These begin at the public/private school programs and youth programs. If these unseen support systems ceased to exist tomorrow the top tier in the years to come would fade away into obscurity.
Overwatch esport doesnt have this support structure. Nor does the top tier play have the information to prove its success for the data is limited to celebrity show matches at Blizzcon. Daybreak used the same metrics with its success on Twitch with their show matches at Twitchcon to secure broadcasting rights on CW for professional play, it bombed.
Find and read the document Blizzard put forth to venture capitalists for the Overwatch League. Guidelines to warrant its projected earnings was solely based on the current success/structure of LoL, Dota2, CSGO and of all things WWE.
These are areas youre refusing to grasp solely because you dislike the messenger.
So because Valve isn't running it...it isn't an eSport.
*Sigh*
We'll couch that in a spurious "support structure" argument, which is entirely irrelevant to whether or not a sport is a sport. Perhaps more saliently, it's just another bad argument. For instance, it ignores that the golden age of boxing in this country in the 20th century, when it was at its most popular, never had a deeply developed AAU program, nor sophisticated and widespread farming programs at a youth level like Pop Warner & Little League, nor was it even a secondary school club victim of the rise of litigation (similar to Pole Vaulting, Hammer, Javelin, Diving-- the most dangerous sports and apparatuses that ultimately succumbed to unsustainable insurance fees and legal payouts).
All of this despite the fact that four different professional organizations existed, and all still true today. No, the heart and soul of boxing always has been independent beat up gyms that-- like Frankie in
Million Dollar Baby pointed out-- tend to struggle. Bodies like USA Boxing did little more than organize amateur competition.
This is the clearly the essence of your argument (now). You aren't
organized enough to be considered a
real eSport, PinocchiOverwatch. This despite that it is organized enough to deliver $56m in payouts, and that's exactly what makes a professional sport....
professional. Previously you repeatedly emphasized this distinction between "casual" and "competitive" play, such as in eSport viewership share hours on Twitch, but now you're trying to emphasize the casual dimension again that feeds the professional.
There was a time when Skateboarding was just in backyard pools. Now we have the X-Games. I wonder at what point Skateboarding grew into a real boy. To where does one trace the origin of the Cooperstown myth?
Indeed, here, yet again, you have formed a faulty premise. Not every sport is successful in the same way, and nobody cares about "support structures" who isn't an active participant. After all, the entire
point of
professional sports is spectacle, not how that spectacle came to be. Athletes care about cash prizes. They care about the glory of filled arenas. Fans care about The Show. They care about that celebrity Blizzcon event you're disparaging. They don't care about minivans or cap sheets for venture capitalists. They don't care about untelevised qualifiers.
I have shot down faulty premise after faulty premise, again and again, until this is what you're left. When one argument fails, you try another, even contradictory ones, and yet you perceive me as the one having a confirmation bias. The difference between you and me regarding this topic is that I'm not bending over backwards to not see what is so obvious-- what is plain as day. I don't dislike you, Kane. On the contrary, we have a great deal in common, I sense beyond what I already know. More than anything I'm indifferent. My issue is with your ridiculous shilling and fanboyism on the matter of everything
CS:GO.
Blizzard doesn't have to do things the way that Valve believes is the
correct way to do things in order for them to qualify. Valve doesn't issue certifications for this. They don't have that authority.