VCT's 32-Team Future: Is Riot's Contraction Starting a New War for Talent?

Even after LOUD's name echoed across the Shanghai stage, one number kept circling in my head—40 to 32. For the first time in the history of the Valorant Champions Tour, the number of partner teams is shrinking. Last year, 40 teams shared roughly $86 million. Now that number drops to 32. The question is simple—what happens to the remaining eight? And is this contraction merely a financial reshuffle, or a major intervention in competitive balance? According to Riot Games' announcement, the VCT structure will undergo significant changes starting from the 2027 season. 'Stage' tournaments will be replaced by 'Cup' tournaments. Kickoff will feature 8 partner teams and 4 open-qualifier teams. Partner teams will get direct entry into the main Cup events, while open-ecosystem teams will have to navigate more rounds. This advantage isn't just nominal—it creates a massive difference in preparation, rest, and tactical planning. I remember working as a junior host at the League of Legends World Championship semifinal in Shanghai in 2026. In the SKT T1 versus Royal Never Give Up series, Faker's Galio absorbed five bans. That series taught me that every arena begins as a whisper. Today, this VCT restructuring is a similar whisper—one that will gradually create large waves in the talent acquisition market. Another major advantage for partner teams is that each team can design its own capsule. Starting next season, teams will create their own item bundles, with the 'Ghost' as the weapon (instead of the Classic). This is a purely commercial decision, but its direct impact will be on team revenue. The bigger the fanbase, the more capsules sold. As a result, revenue disparity among partner teams could widen. But the real question is—how was this list of 32 teams created? According to a leak from Sheep Esports, parts of the list surfaced on October 19, after which some teams confirmed their partnership themselves. Riot's official announcement is still pending. This leak-first, announce-later rollout raises a governance transparency question. If the selection criteria aren't clear to the eight teams being dropped, resentment is natural. For the open ecosystem, Riot has maintained a limited but meaningful support structure. Qualifying for Kickoff or a Cup through open qualifiers earns $100K, reaching Masters earns $200K, and reaching Champions earns up to $400K—a maximum ceiling of $1.1M. Securing a spot in the Game Changers Championship earns $100K. The total season prize pool remains above $6 million. Looking at these numbers, it seems Riot wants to keep the open pathway alive to preserve competitive fairness. But comparing it with partner team revenue makes the gap clear. In 2026, 40 teams shared $86 million, averaging about $2.15 million per team. How much will be allocated for 32 teams in 2027 is still unannounced. If the total budget remains the same, per-team revenue could rise (averaging around $2.7 million). But if Riot reduces total spending, the situation could reverse. This is where my biggest doubt lies. Partner teams receive guaranteed revenue—through capsule sales and direct Riot support—two channels. Open teams' revenue is entirely results-dependent. As a result, the revenue gap between partner and non-partner teams will be much larger than the $1.1 million figure. The open pathway is a survival mechanism, not an equality mechanism. The situation is even tougher for the eight dropped teams. They are moving from guaranteed revenue to a results-dependent pathway with a maximum ceiling of $1.1 million. This revenue drop could push them toward selling rosters or dissolving. I think the fans of these eight teams will be the most vocal, and Riot will need to send a clear message on regional representation. Another observation of mine—partner teams' guaranteed revenue will allow them to plan multi-year rosters, while open teams will face qualification pressure every season. This structural advantage will gradually widen the talent gap. Partner teams can pay higher salaries and offer longer contracts—so young talents will gravitate toward partners. However, there's a counter-thought here. If this contraction proves profitable for Riot, other publishers may follow the same model—contraction and deeper integration—in their esports circuits. That means fewer teams, but deeper commercial relationships with each team. My biggest objection is the opacity of partner selection. On what criteria were the 32 teams chosen—viewership, regional balance, financial health, or historical performance? If these criteria aren't disclosed, the dropped teams will see it as arbitrary. Riot should publish transparent criteria at the time of announcement to avoid legitimacy questions. I hosted the LCK Spring Finals from Sylhet in 2026, when stadiums around the world were empty. That experience taught me that empty stadiums don't mean empty stories—they mean stories that echo louder. This VCT contraction is a similar story—one that hasn't been fully told yet. Ultimately, the success of this restructuring depends on a single unknown number—how much each partner team will receive in 2027. If it's less than the 2026 average of $2.15 million, the 'sustainable contraction' narrative will collapse. And if it's more, Riot will have proven that fewer teams with deeper relationships is the future model. The talent war will truly begin only after that number is revealed.