Shifters open their Summer split against MKOI, a team they have a real chance to knock out of playoff contention. After a disappointing Spring and a significant roster overhaul, head coach Yanis "Striker" Kella sat down with RFT.GG for a candid, wide-ranging conversation — on why the changes had to happen, Sheo's return to the org, the surprisingly strong atmosphere behind the scenes, and the fact that every contract at the club runs out this year, his own included.
I'm doing okay. Like you said, it's right before the first BO against MKOI. As always at the start of a split, and even more so when you've made roster changes, there are a lot of unknowns about how things will go on stage. But I'm doing fine.
That's what we want to do. We want to start well ourselves just as much as we want to kill them off.
No, it just adds some stakes. I think they're a good team — you can say what you want, they've had difficult weekends, but I think it's a good team with good players and a good staff. They're in a particular position. They could be a weakened team, or they could be a vengeful team, so we'll see. Either way, we want to be the ones who put them at the bottom, because they started badly in Paris.
Without going into too much detail on the whys and hows, there was an inability for some players to work together. We tried a lot of things as a staff to make it happen, and the players themselves tried a lot of things too.
I don't think anyone was closed to effort, closed to understanding the other's vision. But sometimes it just doesn't work.
When you have ways of seeing the work — or even ways of seeing the game, which is both a game and a job — that are very opposed, it's difficult. So in the end we had to make certain choices, and that's how we arrived at the change we made.
When we recruited Boukada, the goal was to bring two things. The first was stability and predictability in the game. It had already happened in 2025, since he joined us in the Summer. We tried to make his profile work with Nuc so there'd be both aggression and structure. It didn't work that well, even if we had some interesting upsets, notably against G2 at the time. For Boukada, it was that, and also bringing the standard back outside of pure gameplay — the energy to put into scrims, that kind of thing. As a staff we're responsible for that, but it's always easier when there's a player who sets the example among his teammates.
For Trymbi, we wanted a more assertive voice, someone with a more set vision of how things should work in the bot lane. We had Paduck, who's an individual talent but who still needs to develop. So at the start of the year, our vision was to pair him with a veteran support who'd already worked with Koreans, for whom relationships with Koreans had gone well in the past. That whole line of thinking led us to Trymbi.
I don't really want to shoot at people who aren't here anymore. There were a lot of changes we could have made after the results we had, including on the staff side. So changes had to happen, and it wasn't just about who to shoot at — it's also about what opportunities you have elsewhere, and depending on those opportunities, what puzzle you can build, what makes the most sense to rebuild something as early as Summer, against teams that will know each other very well. When you put all that thinking together, you arrive at the conclusion we reached.
What happened is that we had a window of opportunity given the history they had with Heretics. We were opportunistic, as we should be as an organisation, because it was the best window to get them. It also let us integrate them through the previous roster and then understand, with Sheo's arrival, what was still blocking, what was improved, and what adjustments we could make. It avoids making too many changes at once. For preparing Summer, it was a good thing to have him for the EWC as we did. It's Sheo, so he was easy to integrate. We caught up quickly — even when he'd left, we still saw each other from time to time, we talked, he was very connected to Nuc, so he knows the house, he knows everyone here. There wasn't much effort to make on that side.
For Stend it was a bit different — we talked a lot during the off-season, discussed the expectations we had as a staff for his arrival, what kind of player Paduck was, what we expected from his relationship with Paduck, what had worked at Heretics, what had worked less, what was important for him to feel comfortable. The goal was really to understand which player we're integrating and how to put him in the best conditions, because again, it's only Summer split and we don't have time compared to teams who've known each other for a while.
Honestly, no, there was none of that. To be fully transparent, we'd discussed the Summer with the staff before Spring even ended. You always have to anticipate the good and the bad. Sheo was a priority for us, and management also had the desire to bring Sheo back.
When we were due to play in Paris, I told Boukada: I'm not going to bullshit you, if I'd been given until Summer and had to make a decision, Sheo was my number one choice. I wouldn't have made another change before this one.
We can criticise the changes we made in 2025 given the results. What's certain is that there was a feeling, on both the players' and the staff's side, after 2024, that we had to do something to move into another dimension, because we still had four out of five players who'd worked together since 2023.
And what I saw when he came back for the EWC was a player who'd changed, a much more mature player, a player who takes a lot more initiative in-game, who can guide his teammates more.
Because you step out of your comfort zone, you're no longer in an org with a lot of French players like it was with us, you're with more rookie profiles at Heretics, so you have to develop as a player. It was striking when he came back and we started scrimming again. I think we got an improved version. He said it himself when we talked — for him, in his development, leaving was a good thing.
On the relational, even cultural side, let's not lie to ourselves, it's simpler — you have three French players with a majority of French coaches. Our staff is basically French and Polish, but we're more French overall. With three French players and then two Koreans, the labels are clear, and it facilitates a lot of things in terms of communication, expectations, understanding. Some people can connect more easily with others, so you have levers — when you have an issue with a player, you can go through two different people. But on the gameplay side, it's not because you have three French players that their brains will automatically connect and there's natural synergy.
We started scrimming with what I think are the worst results we've had at the start of a split, honestly. And in parallel, the best atmosphere I think we've ever had internally — even 2023 doesn't come close.
We've had a lot of very good moments in the office beyond the scrim results. And recently, it's been going pretty well in scrims too, so things have come together for this start of the LEC.
It coincided with several people leaving and several people arriving, so it's hard to say what he brought. Especially since you can bring different things to different groups. What's certain is that Labrov was already a top support when he was with us. It's one of the reasons we were able to have good BOs in 2024 against a G2 team that was already dominant. We had Parus in the academy — Parus was the prospect everyone had their eyes on. There are teams in the LEC doing very well right now who wanted Parus.
The duo worked so well, and I think if they'd joined G2 together, it would also have gone very well. Maybe there'd have been more adaptation time. They had the advantage of knowing each other, which wasn't the case otherwise. It's the only choice on which I can have zero regrets, because when you have a support from your academy who everyone has their eyes on, with very good performances in scrims against top teams — we knew what we were losing when Labrov left.
We were well aware of his value. Concretely, if G2 goes for Parus and we release him because he was under contract with us, we'd certainly have tried to extend Labrov.
Labrov could have either stayed or checked other options. But Parus was safe, first because he was already under contract with us, and second, at the level-safe side, because of the potential.
I think there's something in Labrov's mentality where he doesn't necessarily see himself through the prism of others. He can use others to improve, but he doesn't limit himself to that. When we started in 2023, BDS wasn't a good team — we came out of some pretty horrible BOs. But we developed, and with Labrov it was always easy from a development standpoint, in the sense that you could agree or disagree with certain ideas from his teammates or coaches, but there was always a form of serenity. He was always focused on himself, and through that focus, fairly hermetic to everything external.
When you arrive at G2, that's a pretty precious quality, because you have expectations, pressure, maybe teammates who expect you to replace a Mikyx, so you have to be at a certain level. I think he's very hermetic to that, and I think it helps. On the pressure side, I was convinced there wouldn't be any issues. The question was whether he'd be able to become a better player on the gameplay side — and when you have players with the experience they have, and certainly their staff too, you develop.
I don't think the Heretics jungle-support won them games — that was never my view of their team. I think their strength was a teamfight strength. When they were behind, they came back in a lot of games. They had players who were individually inspired on pre-fight positioning — Stend, for example, often had very good flank positions around the river. The jungle-support worked together in quotes, because they had a certain proximity on the map, but it wasn't very inspired.
When we brought them in, I told management: technically, we don't expect to skip steps just because we're getting a jungle-support who's already played together. We can look at their Heretics games and see together that it's not great.
So we were aware of that. Where we had an advantage is the fact that Sheo had already worked with us, that Nuc can be a relay between the others and maybe a core — it's simpler to make a trio work than a duo. And the fact that we think we can develop Stend at the support position. All that made us think it could still be a good idea.
Yes, we started very, very low in terms of win rate.
The big difference compared to the previous rosters, 2025 included, and it's really striking, is the ability to work together, to build together, to agree faster than usual, to have conclusions and a language.
I'm not talking about French, I'm talking about the in-game language — that's more universal across the group, staff and players. We started low, but from the beginning, when we put things in place in terms of objectives — you're the player, you need to focus on this, these are the team's win conditions, here's how you fit in, this player has this weakness, you have this strength, so in-game we want you to bring that at this moment — it's much easier than with the previous roster, and that's what we're trying to capitalise on.
Yeah, it's nothing alike. It doesn't mean anything — maybe we'll have a horrible split, maybe we'll get on stage and forget everything. But I have reminiscences of how we could function in 2024, in terms of the staff's input, the integration of these in-game concepts by the players, the players' knowledge being pooled between them. Finding the same in-game calls together very quickly — even recently, it wasn't the case at the start because it wasn't our main axis of progression, but we've started working on teamfights recently and I already see a difference, which was our strength back in the day. So there's a real difference, and I don't think I'm being nostalgic or putting on blinders.
In my opinion, we were very much on band-aids — we had to be on band-aids between December and this Summer split, because of what we discussed earlier about visions and relationships. It was hard to align people.
You almost had to make sure they didn't impact each other negatively, rather than positively. That's complicated. But now the understanding is there at the base, and you can build on that understanding. So it's much simpler.
As a coach, those are two different questions. The organisation's request is to return to playoffs, because we missed that milestone several times. With a reformed roster, and a split that's supposed to be the most competitive — but we'll see over the year — it's to go for playoffs.
People know me, I'll never be satisfied or congratulate myself if we qualify for playoffs. That's just not why we do this job, we aim much higher, but step by step.
Regrets, no. No regrets, because everything I did, everything I put in place, was to help the club. Sometimes you can be wrong, and some choices can be very costly. In terms of roster building, we sometimes made bad choices. And once it's done, it's very difficult, even with all the goodwill in the world from both staff and players, to come to something viable. But again, it was done with the intention of helping the club and performing at our best. There are other teams in the league that I think are in the situation we were in after 2024, between this Spring and Summer — with ceilings that haven't been broken in a long time, deciding to make changes. I think it's the case for one or two teams in the league, and I feel they were in the same mindset as us, so I understand the thinking — and I feel maybe it won't necessarily be the results they hoped for.
I don't know.
I have that feeling every split, and I'm okay with that.
When you look at it, we've put players on the other bench and continued to pay them — we're capable of that kind of change. I'm not the one who pays them, the money doesn't come from me, so we can do exactly the same on the staff side. From that point of view, this split isn't different from any other. But from a group standpoint, the reality you described is present, because these are contracts that end in November, and I think that alignment on the dates is a good thing. We talked about it openly at the start of the split — we did a bootcamp in Geneva, in the new Shifters facility.
We discussed it and said, this is good, we're in a good situation. Either we crush it together and make a comeback, or it's a fresh start — new players will come and take our place. That's it.
Yes, but it's good pressure, because we want to do something good together. We're in similar situations. I find it almost more exciting than being a team that's mid-table or top-table but can't break the glass ceiling. It's more stimulating — you're playing for something, for the players too. Honestly, I could continue or stop tomorrow, both would suit me. I've had discussions on the subject recently, with people close to me and with my agent. I'm open to a lot of things.
I don't necessarily want to continue for the sake of continuing.
I want to continue in projects I like. That was already my thinking after Spring split. I want to be able to contribute, I want the group to evolve. You spend so much time together that beyond it going well on stage, you want to see progression, to build something. With this group, so far that's the case. We'll see how the officials go. We're not putting too much pressure on ourselves — the players know their contract situation, and I know mine too.
Either we're good, or we're out, and that's okay.
Yes, absolutely. We're very grateful — thank you so much, guys. We know the results weren't up to your expectations in Spring. I don't want to promise anything, because I know it's even harder if those promises aren't kept. But for many reasons, we want to do things well this Summer split. Like I said, we didn't start with the best results, but we probably started with the best attitude on a lot of individual aspects. We'll do our best, and we'll see you at the opening match against MKOI to kick off the Summer split. I hope it goes well — thank you again for your support.
