We're in D2 this season and we're finding that D2 isn't very interesting. At the moment, we're 4th and we're going up with the 8th and 9th, who only have 45 points... We don't deserve to go up. Agreements with second-placed teams distort the championship, even if they can't do anything about it.
It would be cool if we only played teams who were fighting for the title and the promotion.

This is also the case in regional national championships (N2, N3, R1, etc.), where reserve teams, even if they win the championship, cannot move up in line with the first team.

I think the way it's done on VF is pretty good.

Yes, I don't see the problem
You're going up, you want adversity
Tkt next season, you're going to be served mdr

Zeus: Oui je vois pas le soucis
Vous aller monter, tu veux de l'adversité
Tkt saison prochaine, tu vas être servis mdr

😁😂🤓🤣

Jalloh: 😁😂🤓🤣

You'll have some good mates in Div with names full of "S" at the end 😅

After that, there's still a bug with the LFP, who don't have the arrow for the climb

Clamsii: Après , il y a encore un bug avec les LFP qui n'ont pas la fleche pour la montée

isn't that a bug? Académie LFP is linked to them, so for me it's their 2?

Terminator: c'est pas un bug ? Académie LFP est relié à eux, pour moi c'est leur 2?

That doesn't stop the LFP in D2 from moving up to D1.
Their 2nd-placed team is in D3.

Alex-AJA: Ca empeche pas la LFP en D2 de monter en D1 du coup.
Leur 2eme est en D3..

Oh yes, I see, you're right ^^

When you propose projects to make a special division for the sister agreements, you have to reply
I had posted the topic a few seasons ago, nobody or few reacted now the topic is dead and I don't feel like looking for it 😁😁😁

kiki-sainté: Quand on propose des projets pour faire une division spéciale pour les ententes soeurs ,il faut répondre
J avais posté le sujet il y a quelques saisons ,personne ou peu à réagit maintenant le topic est mouru et la flemme de le rechercher 😁😁😁

Yes, a championship in which all the sister associations would play!
That would be a great idea!

Zeus: Oui je vois pas le soucis
Vous aller monter, tu veux de l'adversité
Tkt saison prochaine, tu vas être servis mdr

That's precisely the problem he raises: in absolute terms, they don't have the level to go up to D1. So next season they'll be split in two, which is far from motivating.

That's exactly it, bastoun.
And even so, we're fine as fourth-placed teams. It's more for those who finish in the middle of the table with barely 100pts at the end of the season, who will be going up and probably doing the lift without really competing.

After the strong clubs in the Ententes 2, maybe they should go and play in the small Ententes that are moving up to D1 to challenge their mates who play in the dominant Ententes. That would be a great challenge rather than staying in D2 every season... (This is just a comment and in no way a provocation)

It's funny that it's division 4 and 5 that come to send arrows to be polite
It's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game, it's just a game.
I'd remind you that it's only a game, I've got more than enough players to keep me in 2 in D1 as you say
That wasn't the question.

FABIOA: C'est tout a fait ça , bastoun.
Et encore , nous , en tant que quatrième, ça va. C'est plutôt pour ceux qui finissent en milieu de classement avec a peine 100pts en fin de saison qui vont monter et sûrement faire l'ascenseur sans trop pvr rivaliser.

Après les forts clubs des ententes 2, il devrait peut etre aller jouer dans les petites ententes qui montent en D1 pour défier leurs potes qui jouent dans les ententes dominantes. Ça serait de beaux défis plutôt que de rester chaque saison

Houlaaaaaa be careful, thorny subject! Let's pretend you haven't written anything ^^

kiki-sainté: Quand on propose des projets pour faire une division spéciale pour les ententes soeurs ,il faut répondre
J avais posté le sujet il y a quelques saisons ,personne ou peu à réagit maintenant le topic est mouru et la flemme de le rechercher 😁😁😁

It wouldn't change the problem...

If you make a division between sister agreements, those who finish 8-9-10th and go up today will finish 1-2-3, it won't change the story...

Aguado: Ca ne changerait en rien le problème...

Si tu fais une division entre entente soeurs, celles qui finissent 8-9-10e et qui montent aujourd'hui de D2 en D1 finiront 1-2-3, ça ne changera pas l'histoire...

Well, since it would be a separate division and they can't go up, it wouldn't change their lives either
What's more, the sister agreements were originally formed by members who either formed or didn't want to play ie or new members
Now some agreements have 3 competitive agreements either we let them as before go to div 1 or we put them aside
There aren't 36 solutions but letting them rot in the 2nd division isn't the right solution, that's just my humble opinion

kiki-sainté: Ben si vu que ça serait une division à part vu qu ils ne peuvent pas monter ça leurs changera pas la vie non plus un classement à part
De plus les ententes soeurs à la base s était les membres soient qui former soit qui ne voulait pas jouer les ie soit les nouveaux membres
Maintenant certaines ententes ont 3 ententes compétitif soit on les laisses comme avant aller en div 1 soit on les mets à part
Ils n y a pas 36 solutions mais les laissés pourrir la 2 ème division c est pas la bo

No, here they're talking about the fact that the 8th and 9th are going up because the sister teams are ahead of them. If you remove these sister teams from the rankings, these same 8th and 9th will also move up as they will be 2nd and 3rd...

Having the sister teams doesn't change anything in terms of promotion... In fact, I think it's more likely to help the opposing teams, as there's more adversity...

If you remove the 6-7 sister associations and replace them with D3s, the division will level down and the clubs will face weaker opposition... So it won't be particularly advantageous in terms of the experience you'll need to gain from playing against good D1 clubs.

At the same time div 2 should be lower than div 1 but you are right that it can help improve the level of the agreements, div 3 is starting to be raised too my poor nwo will have trouble finding div 2 😪😪😪

Whether it's LR, LV, RTG, Chope (and others but I'm too lazy to check) none of them are even half full. Why don't these associations get more of the big D2 clubs into their first associations, since the points won in D2 are completely useless anyway?

Why create a second agreement in the first place if the first is never full?
That's a "problem" too.

Alex, for the reasons given above by me small clubs in training

Maybe it's because the big clubs want the d1 title and put their 15-20 best clubs in to win it?
It's a lot of work to have so many top clubs in an agreement like.lv lr cp
Perhaps you should ask yourself the question instead of looking at other agreements, look at your current clubs in your agreement in order to develop them?
You will see with a little help and motivation some will be able to reveal themselves

hazard14: Peut être parce que les grosses ententes veulent le titre d1 et mettent leurs 15 20 meilleurs clubs pour avoir ce titre ?
C'est du boulot d avoir autant de club au top dans une entente comme.lv lr cp
Posez vous Peut être la question que de plutôt regardai les autres entente regardez vos club actuel dans votre entente afin de les faire évoluer?
Vous verrai avec un peu d aide et de motivation certain pourront se révèler

Exactly

Whether it's LR, CP, CERCLE, LV, FYM, etc
What do you think?
We arrived with 2/3 agreements by taking the titles directly?
No, no, just like you, we had to be patient and put together a coherent and united group in order to maintain our position and take things one step at a time.
Any agreement is very complicated the passage from d2 to d1 but that's the charm too ....
The easy way is anything but good

In any case, it doesn't matter that the 5th, 7th and 9th are the 1st, 2nd and 3rd of the pro season (after deducting the second agreements), they will still be yo-yoing between D1 and D2

So frankly, come and rub shoulders with the lr2 teams or any other 2 team and I don't think we'll lose out at all in terms of our level of play (besides the fym, how many entente premières have won D2).
In fact, the level of the Ententes 2 represents a fairly good level for gauging whether we have what it takes to move up to D1.
Par contre c'est assez ridicule qu'une entente qui finit 8eme ou 9eme monte en D1, de mon point de vue si tu ne finis pas au moins dans le top 5 tu ne devrais pas pouvoir monter alors ça limitait les montée certaines saisons mais la D1 c'est le top du top faut le mériter

Alex-AJA: Déjà pourquoi avoir créée une deuxième entente si la première est jamais pleine.
C'est un "problème" ça aussi.

I presume the answer lies in the fact that some are members of the cartel and still want to play IE, but don't have the level of D1.

I think this is the root of the problem, otherwise I don't see why the leading agreements wouldn't be full.

In that case, there are several solutions to the problem (a non-exhaustive list, of course ^^):

• Status quo, with the league as it currently stands levelling out as it is, with the second tier unable to move up to D1 even though they have the ability to do so and are riding high in the division

• Banning the creation of II agreements until the I is complete could be a way of limiting this problem, but it would prevent clubs that are weaker than the behemoths from playing IEs (in my opinion, if you absolutely want to play IEs, then you should just change agreement, the very good players don't play for reserves, they wait their turn to have the level or leave, but I don't think everyone shares this opinion).

• Sending the Ententes II to even lower divisions or creating a separate division altogether, which would allow the clubs in these agreements to take part in matches that would still be interesting from a level point of view, although limited in number in principle. Not a fan of this option, but hey.

Whatever the case, we mustn't take any credit away from these agreements, that's not the aim of this topic (I think), we all agree that none of them have stolen their statutes, and we're aware of the time it takes.

The idea is first and foremost to make it as interesting as possible for "average" associations to follow their rankings and their progress, and it's clear that moving up from div.2 by finishing 8th or 9th wouldn't appeal to me personally...

Si seul être dans le top 5 montent du coup il faut viré les ententes soeurs de la d2 car plus aucune chance de montée
Arrêtons un peu l'abus il y a 6 ententes soeurs en d2 imaginons sur 10 saisons ces ententes font 7 fois le top 6 il y aurait que 3 montées en d1 et la d1 serait pénard sans pression de descente
Frankly sorry zejl but the 3 ascents descents must be preserved
Mina you say that the big agreements are not made in one season but at the time there was no classification with 15 or 16 clubs it was a classification directly with all the agreements
We just need to find a happy medium that satisfies everyone, at the time of the descent of the sister teams into D2 I warned that it would create a lot of problems and now we're right in the middle of it
The Ententes Soeurs want to be well ranked but can't go up - that's where the mistake lies, it's not having left things as they were at the time
You can turn the problem every which way, the best solution was 20 clubs, at least no excuses if you're in the top 3, you go up, you're not there, you stay, full stop

I'm dreaming of agreements without a second agreement, with no more than 30 members. It would be much more open and would stimulate competition...

kiki-sainté: Si seul être dans le top 5 montent du coup il faut viré les ententes soeurs de la d2 car plus aucune chance de montée
Arrêtons un peu l abus il y a 6 ententes soeurs en d2 imaginons sur 10 saisons ces ententes font 7 fois le top 6 il y aurait que 3 montées en d1 et la d1 serait pénard sans pression de descente
Franchement désolé zejl mais les 3 montées descentes il faut les préserver
Mina tu dis que les grosses ententes ne se font pas en une saison mais à l époque il n y avait pas

After that, it's all a question of point of view but I completely agree with the current system, 16 clubs in D1 is enough, yes, some Ententes 2 would have the level to go into 1 but that poses too many problems and it allows the Ententes claiming to go into D1 to have high-level opposition before going into D1. What's the point of going up to D1 and rubbing shoulders with the very big teams if you can't even beat the 2 teams? You have to see it as an advantage to gain experience and get a taste of the top level (there are often big clubs who come to take a break from the entente 2s for a few seasons) so that you only go up when you're ready, because what's the point of going up only to come down again straight away, it's more disgusting than anything else.
In short, I maintain that you shouldn't go up if you're not in the top 5 or 6 in D2. If there are 3 clubs, well done, then they've got the level and if there aren't any, too bad.

At worst, we'll have a d1 LR CP LV FYM RTG and 2 3 others
And a D1 for the rest of the agreements?
That way you'll be happy to stay at your level and avoid thinking internally about how to improve
2 vf would be great

hazard14: Au pire on se fait un d1 LR CP LV FYM RTG et 2 3 autre
Et on fait une D1 pour le reste des ententes ?
Comme sa vous serez content de pouvoir reste à votre niveau et d éviter de réfléchir en interne à comment s améliorer
2 vf ça serai super

I never asked to kick your agreements of the d1 it is necessary to stop you feeling targeted, I only said that it was necessary to leave as before the 2 could be in d1 the that distorts all to go up the 8 ele 9th that does not make any rhyme to anything

kiki-sainté: J ai jamais demandé de virer vos ententes de la d1 il faut arrêter de vous sentir visé, j ai juste dit qu il fallait laisser comme avant les 2 pouvait être en d1 la ça fausse tout faire monté le 8 ele 9 ème ça ne rime à rien

The problem is that we've come to this point precisely because it's annoying that the sister agreements are in D1...
You need to know what you want too 🤭😅😂😘

Drezzo35: Le Pb c'est qu'on en est arrivé justement là parce que ça gené que les ententes soeurs soient en D1...
Faudrait savoir ce que vous voulez aussi 🤭😅😂😘

If you go back in time, I was at rtg2 and I was against this reform

That's why I said you and not you 😉

There's a lot here that I disagree with.
But there is one good idea cited by one person.

The previous problem with sister agreements in D1 has been resolved.

As far as I'm concerned, sister agreements don't spoil D2.
But there's a problem in D2, that's for sure.

A few seasons ago I spent a season in D2 with the LFL, and when I look back at that season when I've just moved up to D3, I find that the level in D2 is totally similar to that in D3 if you don't include the sister agreements.

Hearing people say that dv3 is much weaker than D2 and that if we move the top 6-7 from dv3 up to D2, these people are welcome in my agreement to do IE in D3. On the other hand, D4 is much weaker than D3.

As far as I'm concerned, if non-sister agreements that are 8th-9th in D2 move up to D1, I'm not surprised if they go down the following season.

In my opinion, the idea of creating a division with only sister associations would be a good one and would add a lot of pep and challenge to the associations below. In addition there will be more IE between them and we will see the members of the cp and the other agreements which play the title in D1 and D2 to continue their championship between them.
On the one hand, there will be a number of teams promoted from D3 to D2, which will make the level of D2 more homogenous and will make those who are between 8th and 16th place in D2 shake more.

After that, if it could make some members who are in agreements 2&3 want to join other agreements 1 that are struggling to survive that are in D1 and + that would be cool.
Because I remember that in D1 many members leave and prefer to play in sister agreements and top of the table in D2 than to play the maintenance in D1 in particular.

But as I keep saying, there's a gap in level between D1 and D2, and if the top 3 in D2 are three sister associations, it's because these three associations are much more capable of being in D1 and competing with the other associations in D1. And this avoids the 8th to yo-yo in D1/2/1/2/1/2 ...

So very complex.

Sister agreements in d3, or in a special championship.

Removal of sister agreements

leakcim58: Les ententes sœurs en d3, ou dans un championnat spécial.

En d4 autrement la nwo n'a plus d'espoir la ptdr

Unagi: Suppression des ententes sœurs

It's not a good solution, you're going to have to delete sister agreements and therefore leave members out in the cold, not cool ( note that the nwo is recruiting 😁😁😁🫣🫣🫣)

kiki-sainté: Ce n est pas une bonne solution ,tu vas devoir supprimé des ententes soeurs donc laissé des membres sur le carreau pas cool ça ( en remarque la nwo recrute 😁😁😁🫣🫣🫣)

That's the whole point :)

The only use of sister companies is to be able to recruit at will and to think that out of the ten or so managers recruited there will be a top profile.

Adrimax: La seule utilité des ententes soeurs c'est de pouvoir recruter à tout va et de se dire que sur la dizaine de managers recrutés il y aura un top profil.

Please don't generalise about your opinions

Alexandre67310: Merci de ne pas faire de vos avis une généralité

I speak for myself :)

Adrimax: Je parle en mon nom :)

No, you're talking about sister agreements in general, that their only use is to stack up members, but you're talking without having. You're making a generality out of your own biased opinion.

Alexandre67310: Non tu parles des ententes sœurs en général, que leur seule utilité c’est d’empiler les membres, mais tu parles sans savoir. Tu fais de ton avis, biaisé, une généralité.

Yes, I think that for the majority of agreements it's just a matter of stacking the deck. Just look at the latest arrivals in these agreements. After that, it's much less the case with you.

My god what you shouldn't read ... 😅🤭😁

Déjà au lieu de se plaindre , commencez par faire un effort de votre côté, j'attends par là de la communication, un discord ou forum pour votre entente juste pour commencer m.
It's easy to criticise and complain, but I don't see any effort or desire to do better!
It's easier to hit the big guys 🤭
On the other hand, don't think that by disbanding our sister agreements you're going to get the members back, we're giving ourselves the means 😉

Concerning D2, how many of these agreements have an active discord where they talk about the IE of the agreement of how to do better to go for D1?
Je pense que c'est plus sûr ça qu'il faudrait creuser , parce que croyez le ou non , nos ententes soeurs hormis se donner a fond lors des IE ils font rien de magique ou d'impossible et la preuve en est on a bien vu des ententes comme les AFU ou la sweet en émergé et être bien en place en D1 mtn