Reminder: the results have been posted here:
#forum?topic=167259

Hello ,
Thank you and happy new year

I'd just like to relaunch the idea of voting, whether it's the presidents of the nominees' associations (to avoid little jokes 😉🤭 or cronyism)
Those without agreements are of course free to vote individually

Then, for the votes to elect the winners, the voting should be open to all

There will always be cronyism, it's not linked to this event. It's in people's nature.
In any case, you've done a great job magik! It's rare to find guys who propose things for the commu, and with so much investment - hats off to you!

Drezzo35: Hello ,
Déjà merci a toi et bonne année

Moi je voudrais juste relancer l'idée pour les votes , que ce soit les présidents d'ententes pour les nominés (pour éviter les petites boutades 😉🤭 ou le copinage)
Les sans ententes sont eux bien entendu libre de voté individuellement

Ensuite pour les votes permettant d élir les vainqueurs là il faudrait laisser le vote ouvert a tous

I think we should leave the voting/nominating system as it is. It's not bad, everyone is free to choose their nominees and then the jury (which should be varied, not two managers with the same agreement, ideally one manager with no agreement) chooses the final nominees from the list. Personally, I've almost always opted for those who have been nominated the most, to follow the lead of the VF managers. It's afterwards that the negotiations take place. And there, you can't close the votes either. All we can do now is hope that people vote objectively, but that...
Overall, in this latest edition, I think most of the choices seem logical in the eyes of the majority. So it's not all bad.

Regarding the original message in the topic:

"More explanation on some categories, including the disappointment one."
So, yes and no, it won't stop people from voting stupidly. It goes without saying that this category should be understood as the manager who had very few results in 2024 in relation to his squad and experience. Unfortunately, we won't be able to counter the fact that many people will have voted for Mina just because they don't like him in this edition, without even really understanding the principle behind the category.

the "Entente révélation" (and therefore the "équipe révélation"), the fact that CP (who was the most cited by the public for the first names), for example, was also in the best agreement, wasn't great. Hence the idea of changing to L'Espoir for example."
That's what I also said during my rather short stint on the vocal. L'entente espoir seems more appropriate, even if the original title seemed pretty clear to me. That's why I put CP at the top of the list for the best agreement and at the bottom for the revelation category.

Good idea for the best manager without agreement as well as the manager of the year.

Thanks to Titi for trusting me with the jury and to Magic for organising the event because, even if there are always grumpy people who complain about a category or a nominee, it's a bit of a change for this kind of event and it's good to see more initiatives like this. Thanks also to Colo for the voice. I love you, Colo, even if you're an OL fan <3

That's good, my rating is still intact despite my lack of inactivity 😀
Whether it's here on vf or elsewhere the votes will always be debated .the action remains honourable.
Congratulations magik for your investment in any case, whether it's here or in the championship you always stay invested

Yes, it's fun in principle (and it's a change from the 'classic' VF competitions) and it creates a lively atmosphere, even if every time there's something innovative there are always grumpy people.

However, a word of advice to our GO (kind organiser) when I read his prospects for future developments: be careful not to multiply your Oscars ad infinitum because (in my opinion) : Too many Oscars kills the Oscar!

myforsans: Oui c'est amusant comme principe (et ça change des compétitions "classiques" de VF) et ça crée de l'animation même si chaque fois qu'il y a quelque chose d'innovant il y a toujours des grincheux.

Un petit conseil quand même à notre GO (gentil organisateur) quand je lis ses perspectives d'évolutions futures, attention à ne pas démultiplier à l'infini tes oscars car (selon moi) : Trop d'Oscars tue l'Oscar !

it depends on whether Mava or Hazard wins one, otherwise it's not normal, you have to redo it!

Like Myforsans, I don't think it's a good idea to go down the employee of the month route.
It will bore the commu and you at the same time... It has to be once a year to keep it interesting.

Lebaygue: Du même avis que Myforsans,je ne pense pas que se lancer dans l aventure de l employé du mois soit très judicieux.
Ca va lasser la commu et toi par la même occasion...Il faut que ça reste une fois l an pour que cela reste intéréssant.

once every 6 months in real life, I think, would be a good average.

Lebaygue: Du même avis que Myforsans,je ne pense pas que se lancer dans l aventure de l employé du mois soit très judicieux.
Ca va lasser la commu et toi par la même occasion...Il faut que ça reste une fois l an pour que cela reste intéréssant.

Or per season?
like best manager per season?

Well, the best guy of the season, 2 times out of 3, will be the one who wins the Champions League.
And it has to remain an event, you'll start the thing, there'll be 50 participants, after 10 seasons, you'll only have 20 and it won't look like anything.
The Oscars once a year, that's fine... I'd concentrate on that, if I were you, with, for example, a YouTube video to announce the results that Aymeric will share on his networks for sure... so that it's a bit more pizzazz than a written announcement or via a discord that doesn't interest many people in the end.
Finally, improve what you're already doing rather than trying to create something at all costs....c is my point of view 😉

Lebaygue: Ben le meilleur gus de la saison,2 fois sur 3,ce sera celui qu aura remporté la Champions League.
Et puis faut que ça reste événementiel,tu commenceras le truc,y aura 50 participants,au bout de 10 saisons,t en auras plus que 20 et ça ressemblera plus à rien.
Les Oscars une fois par an,c'est nickel...j me concentrerais que la dessus,si j'étais toi avec par exemple,une vidéo YouTube pour annoncer les résultats qu Aymeric partagera sur ses réseaux a coup sur... que ce soit un peu plus pep

I totally agree with you

Make a jury of 10 managers from 10 different companies to select the Oscars, because unfortunately there's too much cronyism, but that doesn't take anything away from your hard work
Or else you canvass the presidents by division
That could allow the presidents to take the opinion of these members
It's not very easy to organise an event like this to elect the agreement for your division

Lebaygue: Ben le meilleur gus de la saison,2 fois sur 3,ce sera celui qu aura remporté la Champions League.
Et puis faut que ça reste événementiel,tu commenceras le truc,y aura 50 participants,au bout de 10 saisons,t en auras plus que 20 et ça ressemblera plus à rien.
Les Oscars une fois par an,c'est nickel...j me concentrerais que la dessus,si j'étais toi avec par exemple,une vidéo YouTube pour annoncer les résultats qu Aymeric partagera sur ses réseaux a coup sur... que ce soit un peu plus pep

Yes, it's true on the one hand that it can be tiring.

kiki-sainté: Faire un jury de 10 managers de 10 ententes différentes, pour désigner les oscars car la trop de copinage malheureusement mais ça n enleve rien à ton gros travail
Ou autrement tu sondes les présidents par division
Ça peux permettre aux présidents de prendre l avis de ces membres
Pour élire l entente de sa division ,c est pas très simple en tout cas d organisé cet événement

One of the jurors had no agreement throughout the whole period between the nominations and the Oscars.
And the others all had different agreements.
I think that the basis is already there.

Now there's one thing I can do, it's more about the "pre-nomination" ideas where I can't do it in public.
The public wanted it, but on the pre-nominations how can I put it ... There have been a lot of sloppy choices ... And often the criticisms that I've had about such and such in relation to the nominees, well, it was the public's first choice...

For example, in the CP revelation agreement, it was the public's first choice for the nominees. Personally, I'd rather see a TGV with 3 Montées in a row, including two firsts, than an agreement that you know 90% of the time will win the Oscar for best agreement.

After the crony votes once again, several managers wanted the Oscars to be 100% public votes, but when you have 50 jury members and 50 members of the public, it avoids a lot of people not voting seriously.
Then to say it I deleted the votes of a person who was serious about nothing at all.

Personally, it's impossible to please everyone. By creating this topic, I'm following up on the progress that's been made vocally to see the opinions and ideas of the managers who will be able to help me do even better and that out of the final 100 voters (I've deleted several) we'll have 150 or 200.
And I know that some of the big agreements in question voted very little. But I've seen the opposite in others.

I'll have to see, and then I've got 9 or 10 months before I do the 2025 ones. I've got time.

Magikcats: Parmi les jurés il y avait un qui était sans entente tout au long entre les nominations et les Oscars.
Et les autres étaient dans des ententes tous différentes.
Ça je pense que la base est déjà là.

Maintenant il y a un truc que je peux faire , c'est plutôt concernant les idées "pré nomination " où je peux ne pas faire en public.
Le public voulait , mais sur les pré nomination comment dire ... Ya eu beaucoup de choix pas sérieux ... Et souvent les critiques que j'ai eu sur tel o

I know it's a pain to organise, but well done for your work

kiki-sainté: Après je sais que c est chiant à organisé encire bravo pour ton travail

thanks :)