The Divisions... [Archive]

Joe Johnson

05-04-2010, 22:06

Let me begin by saying that I love the format of the Championships. I like that they have 4 divisions that come together to play on Einstein (I was one of those who wholeheartedly supported the idea when someone -- Chris Hibner? -- first suggested it on ChiefDelphi.com oh so many years ago).

But... as the years go by, I wonder if there are improvements that could make things even better. One thing that I see as a weakness is that being the "Curie Division" champion, for example, doesn't really have a history associated with it.

Think of the NFL's black and blue division (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFC_North) (Bears, Packers, Lions, Vikings... ...and the Bucs) you know what you're getting when you say you've won the NFC North Division. Basically this is because the teams in that division are of a certain kind with a history and a character that mean something to fans.

Here is my question for the ChiefDelphi.com members.

Would the divisions be better if teams were not pseudo randomly assigned to a division each spring but were place permanently in a division according to some plan? Or if not by assigned by some plan then perhaps the divisions could become home to various teams over time*?

In this way, you could get to know that teams X, Y, & Z were from this or that division. Over time the divisions would take on a character built brick by brick from the characters of the teams that had settled in that division.

There are down sides to such a scheme to be sure. I will leave it for others to share these with us all as well.

Please, share your thoughts. Pros and Cons.

Perhaps we can influence those in a position to decide one way or the other but it is not very likely. Even so, the discussion is worth having because we will have had a passionate discussion about the future of FIRST, a subject which we all care a lot about.

Joe J.

*for example you may be randomly assigned to a division your first year and bounce around divisions until you did something of note in a particular division (say you win an award of this or that status or you won the division or finished second in the division or were the number 1 seed, or perhaps even you just played in a classic match that is one for the ages) at which point are assigned to that division forever -- becoming part of the history and fabric of that division going forward.

Greg Marra

05-04-2010, 22:26

I have wondered what would happen if the divisions were made purely geographic. On one hand, this would eliminate your ability to meet new teams at the Championship; you'd just be playing alongside the same teams you did at your Regionals. On the other hand, you'd be playing to represent your region!

WJF2011

05-04-2010, 22:29

It is a novel and creative idea. I see what you mean and are intending here. However the problem is that one division will always end up being the "hardest" and the others easier. Making it unfair to be in that division.

dodar

05-04-2010, 22:29

WJF2011

05-04-2010, 22:33

The way you're planning right now the international would be too small to compete.

dodar

05-04-2010, 22:34

International = any team not from the US, which is a VERY large amount of teams

gorrilla

05-04-2010, 22:34

I like seperating by region, there could be North, South, East, and West.

But on the other hand I feel that they need to be random to be equal.

CalTran

05-04-2010, 22:38

I like the North/East/Sout/West idea, but that leaves a lot of the mid-united states and international out. Like, I'm from Kansas...

Chris is me

05-04-2010, 22:40

I don't really like the idea. I mean, why even go to the Championship if I'm just going to play the same teams again?

TheFish

05-04-2010, 22:40

I think geography is definitely not the way FIRST should organize divisions; teams too often compete in Regionals close to home and it is much more exciting to be paired up with new teams at the Championships.

I think overall this is a great idea.

One of the biggest things to consider is Division-Pride. Under the current system, teams who don't make the Championships have no interest as to which Division wins Einstein, because they aren't tied to any specific one. If we had a system where each team, over time could get assigned a division then there would develop a much bigger sense of community and pride within that Division.

A big example are conferences within collegiate sports. Even though two schools might be big rivals, they still want their rivals to win so that their conference will get more credibility and they can take pride in something bigger than just their school.

My suggestion: during the first 4 times a team goes to the Championships, FIRST tries as hard as possible to make sure that they are put in all four divisions. After these four times you would be placed in the division where you performed your best (tie breakers being: winner/finals/semis, then to win-loss record, then seed).

Clearly there are risks to a system like this, of having one Division become stronger over time than the others... but as we all know, anything can happen in FIRST and teams get better/worse from year to year, so you never know how things are going to develop.

I'm curious to see what other ideas this thread comes up with.

-TheFish

dodar

05-04-2010, 22:41

the same reasons why you go to your home regional and play the same teams there every year

Joe Johnson

05-04-2010, 22:43

I like seperating by region, there could be North, South, East, and West.

But on the other hand I feel that they need to be random to be equal.

I have never been a big fan of the equality cult but in this case I think we have to try to give some nod to fairness and geography makes fairness difficult.

I also like the mixing bowl effect of teams from different regions of the country/world playing against each other at the Championships.

That is one of the reasons I like idea of "Random until you're a part of history" concept. I envision most teams being random but once you've made history then you stick to that division. This would put only a few teams each season into the frozen forever club. I think you could even have a ceremony at the opening of the games on each field where the newly frozen teams from the prior season's performance are "welcomed into the club" so to speak.

I think this could start to develop into rivalries that help to spread the fame and glory of the divisions. It would also give fans a natural alliance to cheer for on Einstein (at least those in the club but others as well -- there are always going to be division fanboys ;-)

Joe J.

CalTran

05-04-2010, 22:45

Well, another thing to think about is you won't be playing the same teams. Yes, a few of them are going to be the same, but there is no way you went to enough regionals to see every team in your Atlanta division.

WJF2011

05-04-2010, 22:47

I have never been a big fan of the equality cult but in this case I think we have to try to give some nod to fairness and geography makes fairness difficult.

I also like the mixing bowl effect of teams from different regions of the country/world playing against each other at the Championships.

That is one of the reasons I like idea of "Random until you're a part of history" concept. I envision most teams being random but once you've made history then you stick to that division. This would put only a few teams each season into the frozen forever club. I think you could even have a ceremony at the opening of the games on each field where the newly frozen teams from the prior season's performance are "welcomed into the club" so to speak.

I think this could start to develop into rivalries that help to spread the fame and glory of the divisions. It would also give fans a natural alliance to cheer for on Einstein (at least those in the club but others as well -- there are always going to be division fanboys ;-)

Joe J.

Now that makes more sense, perhaps if you win one year the next 3 years you are frozen, and if you dont win in any of those you become unfrozen again? just an idea to keep it slightly fluid.

The Lucas

05-04-2010, 22:55

Andrew Schreiber

05-04-2010, 22:58

Perhaps assign regionals to specific divisions? This could stay static from year to year but would allow teams to choose their divisions.

The downside would be that it would lock teams that had won an event together. Hmm, thinking more about it, this is probably a bad idea. Maybe it will spark some other ideas though...

WJF2011

05-04-2010, 23:03

I like this idea however it seems overly complicated, yet more fair.

bigbeezy

05-04-2010, 23:07

I really like this idea. My first year ('05) we were in Archimedes and I was told this was the "best" or the "hardest" division mainly because of Beast (correct me if i'm wrong they one 3 Championships in and short period of time from Archimedes). However each year we switched divisions. It turned out, until last year, that only Archimedes and Newton (or Galileo i could be wrong) had won on Einstein. The divisions need some sort of consistency so they can build a "history."

sorting by region would not be very fun, you'd just see the same teams again.

My idea on how to qualify to have a permanent division:
Division Champion
Division Finalist Alliance Captain
Chairman's Winner at Championships (chooses their division)
Any team over 5 years old can request a certain division, but not guaranteed with older teams getting priority.

what do you think?

ExTexan

05-04-2010, 23:07

Here's a thought that I haven't completely thought through but it seems to have possibilities.

How about a format where you are randomly assigned a field, you compete for x matches (Thursday) and then separated by ranking and maybe each field is quartered up into different fields....i.e. top quarters from each field go to the same field.

Competition resumes and after x matches (Friday) then the field is re-quartered. Saturday, normal qualifying matches, alliance selections and playoffs to the big show.

Would this not result in the top Thursday teams from each division sorting out themselves on Friday and being redistributed to each field to result in a somewhat fair cross-section in each field? Perhaps the re-distribution each time should be counting off, 1, 2, 3, 4, in order of ranking to determine which field you move to?

I'm probably way off but it is late, I am tired and I can't quite stumble through it tonight. I will re-look at it in the morning. :confused:

Tom Bottiglieri

05-04-2010, 23:09

I like the idea of a draft. It would be fun to watch some of the experienced mentors (and aspiring students) try to snatch the best up and coming teams.

Joe Ross

05-04-2010, 23:21

I like the idea of a draft. It would be fun to watch some of the experienced mentors (and aspiring students) try to snatch the best up and coming teams.

Kind of like this: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=366349&postcount=8

Tom Line

05-04-2010, 23:27

You could do it by region: Southeast, Southwest, Northwest, Midwest, Northeast, Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, International

Then at Championships each year you randomly assign 2 regions to 1 field and then duke it off and then go to Einstein or whatever the final stage would be called lol

I would absolutely positively hate that system. I can't imagine having to play every year against 27, 33, 45, 51, 67, 68, 70, 71, 111, 469 etc year after year. Point of fact, we already get to see enough of the Michigan Teams! Don't force me to go through them all again in a division at Nationals!

Nawaid Ladak

05-04-2010, 23:31

very VERY good question Joe

In the world cup, we don't remember which team was in which group, but we remember which teams were in the "group of death". I think FIRST sort of has to employ this strategy, Galileo in 2008 and 2009, Curie in 2007, Newton in 2006 Archimedes in 2005 etc. etc. could all qualify as "divisions of death". Those teams faced the toughest challenges in their division that year. and they should be appreciated. it's just the general FIRSTer needs to understand his/her history.

if FIRST was to classify divisions to a particular strategy, I would suggest one of two methods.

Location: have each division represent one segment of the United States, East, South, West and Midwest (Canada = MW, Israel = West). and let the champions duke it out so we can know which region of the country is truly the best.

ie

East 11(NJ), 20(NY), 25(NJ), 40(NH), 41(NJ)
South 16(AR), 79(FL), 86(FL), 108(FL), 116(VA) etc.
West 100(CA), 115(CA), 159(CO), 192(CA), 254(CA) etc.
Midwest 1(MI), 27(MI), 33(MI), 45(IN), 51(MI) etc.

Awards: classify divisions by the four Robot Awards given out at regionals,

Creativity 1153(NH), 1683(GA), 51(GG), 343(FL), 20(WOR) etc.
Engineering Excellence 40(NH), 1466(GA), 1912(LA), 1625(KC), 1538 (SDC) etc.
Industrial Design 78(NH), 25(NJ), 2377(DC), 1379(GA), 1622(SDC) etc.
Quality 1073(NH), 1727(DC), 63(ROC), 1515(OR), 1717(SDC) etc.

make the regional judges classify each team in one of these categories to make this system work.

waialua359

05-04-2010, 23:36

Kind of like this: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=366349&postcount=8

I never saw the original thread back then, but man, that has got to be the best idea I've read all season!
Imagine the hype for championships!!

Brandon Holley

05-04-2010, 23:43

I like the idea of a draft. It would be fun to watch some of the experienced mentors (and aspiring students) try to snatch the best up and coming teams.

I definitely like the idea of a draft.

The popularity of drafts for professional sports has been skyrocketing in the past couple of years. Whether it was randomly assigned (out of a hat) or chosen by "captains" of sorts doesn't really change much. I think the idea of making an event out of the division selections would be very cool to do.

I also really like the idea of winners being frozen into one division. It would be really cool to know that perennial powerhouses need to "defend" their title year to year. There would certainly be some pride knowing your a team who has been locked into a division because of your performance.

-Brando

Chris is me

06-04-2010, 00:43

Don't let teams know whether they were "picked" or randomly placed and I'm all for it.

Cory

06-04-2010, 01:18

I hate the idea of being placed into divisions geographically. I want to play with all the teams we never get to see, not all the teams we ALWAYS see.

TKM.368

06-04-2010, 02:13

For any given year, let the previous four Championship Chairman's Award Winning teams serve as Division Captains for a draft. It's an added bonus for the CA winners and there would be rotation through the years as to who is Division Captain...

Cartwright

06-04-2010, 02:42

This may seem odd...

But, what if division were by major sponsor type. Like what if there was aerospace, automotive, military, construction, uncategorized, etc. It could get interesting; plus, it might be a way to get sponsors more involved...just a little competition perhaps? I think it would definitely give some sentimentality to the divisions. Think of all the hype. You might get completely GM alliances. Or perhaps the Big Three might join up. I think that would make the Championship very exciting.

There would have to be a process for teams with more than one type. Some sort of lead sponsor status or something. Also, some teams might go into an uncategorized category if they have lots of small sponsors.

just a concept.

- Jamie

dtengineering

06-04-2010, 02:50

To be fair, I've been to Atlanta once... so I'm probably not as fired up about this as those for whom it is an annual spring ritual.

However when I went, I had no problem knowing who I wanted to cheer for on Einstein. It had nothing to do with their division, and everything to do with the team and their machine. So, based on my one experience there, it seems to be that there are lots of great solutions here... but I just don't seem to see that there is a problem.

FIRST tried a few years back to play around with the match scheduling algorithm for regionals, reducing the randomness by pre selecting qualifying alliances based on team number.

I think we all agreed after that, that randomness was a good thing. So I'd be very careful about reducing randomness in Atlanta.... even a little bit.

Jason

TKM.368

06-04-2010, 02:57

... serve as Division Captains for a draft.

After a little thought, I'm going to contradict myself here. A draft will involve great teams being picked first, but what about for those teams picked at the end? That'd be a pretty disheartening way to start off a Championship. I have a feeling a lot of kids on a lot of teams know what being picked last is like.

waialua359

06-04-2010, 03:37

FIRST tried a few years back to play around with the match scheduling algorithm for regionals, reducing the randomness by pre selecting qualifying alliances based on team number.

I think we all agreed after that, that randomness was a good thing. So I'd be very careful about reducing randomness in Atlanta.... even a little bit.

Jason

Jason,
I'm with you on this on. The only problem is that the divisions now weren't really random also.
I always joke with Mark from 358 that we never get a chance to be in the same division because of our no. and its not random.
Its also hard for us to be in the same division as 368 when the only consistent team between us attending is MOE.

Jared Russell

06-04-2010, 07:29

Let each team "bid" on which division it wants to be a part of.

Then, assign teams based on their choices in a random order (which, assuming a roughly equal distribution of division selections, should result in most teams getting their wish). Alternatively, use some other metric for ordering the teams - a FiM-like points system, Regional Winners first, etc.

Why I like this system:
-Teams can talk amongst themselves (and on Chief Delphi) about their choices if they choose, so you will have a little bit of insight into who is going where ahead of time - much like when teams are picking what regionals to attend.

-There is still plenty of opportunity to play against teams from distant parts of the country/world.

-Over time, teams would come to associate with a particular division and a sense of history would develop naturally.

-A rough balance would naturally develop, as strong teams will maybe want to pursue other divisions if one starts to get "stacked" year after year.

-Teams can try and get a banner from each division (and I think that if you get one of each, your team should go into the Hall of Fame)

-Mentors/sponsors that support multiple teams could try and get them put with each other.

Possible downsides:
-It would require slightly more effort on FIRST's part to orchestrate this system.

-Powerhouse teams could coordinate bids to come up with "uber" alliances (though they then risk having to seed first/high enough to avoid playing against each other!)

The Lucas

06-04-2010, 08:10

Jason,
I'm with you on this on. The only problem is that the divisions now weren't really random also.
I always joke with Mark from 358 that we never get a chance to be in the same division because of our no. and its not random.
Its also hard for us to be in the same division as 368 when the only consistent team between us attending is MOE.

Divisions were most likely random last year (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=850684&postcount=29). That's probably why you don't see people monitoring/predicting them closely this year.

Last year, your luck was poor in being the same division as 368 and 358. Every team from 358 to 368 was in Newton except you (Galileo). Better luck this year!

Carol

06-04-2010, 08:34

I think you are all looking for a solution in search of a problem. Beware of what you wish for. Remember the seeding algorithm that was supposed to make the competition "balanced". And how everyone screamed about it until they changed it? Any selection process based on strength, history, records, etc. is going to cause more problems that it solves.

GaryVoshol

06-04-2010, 08:39

I'm not thrilled with the idea of sticky divisions. I can see the point in making for divisional pride (I never understood the point of divisional cheers, for example). But any scheme for defining the sticky has problems.

Geographic is least desirable. Wildstang could never play with or against Poofs or Pink? I don't think so.

"Once you win, you're in" sounds somewhat reasonable, but still creates never-again matchups. If last year was used as a base, Wildstang and HOT would always be competing together, and never see ThunderChickens or Rhode Rage.

I think part of the appeal of CMP is getting the opportunity to compete with and against a variety of teams. That's one reason the A-B-C-D schemes for assigning were not fair. Adjacent team numbers never got to play together.

I think one way of assigning teams would be based on the regional they qualified from. For example, first take all the teams that pre-qualified (originals, HoF, past winners) and distribute them randomly in the divisions. Then take teams that qualified from BAE NH and divide them among the divisions. Then from San Diego, Washington, and the other Week 1 events. Follow through week by week. At the end, distribute teams that got there by means other than qualifying. This would tend to distribute the teams both geographically and strength-wise.

GODUX123

06-04-2010, 09:14

It's an ok idea, but i could see districts/ regionals will end up splitting according to division, and none of the teams could see eachother untill Einstein which could cause havoc. Also, the teams could still end up in a division of all "not so good" teams and the same problem could occur.

Collin Fultz

06-04-2010, 09:39

Dr. Joe - It's so funny you bring this up. Late last year I was surfing the Archives of CD (I lead such a glamorous life) and found your post (from around 1999?) highlighting your thoughts on how (at that time) Nationals needed to be restructured into it's current format. You even called the names of the divisions and naming the "big" field Einstein. I wish I could find that post again. It's incredible how many of your suggestions are now common rules and practices (I think in that thread you also advocated unlimited material usage).

I like the quasi-randomness of the way it currently is. I have been told that the GDC puts some thought into some of the division selection. I see it as similar to the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament. Your Regionals are your conference. You typically play against the same group of teams each year. Win your conference (in FIRST, by any of the auto-qualification methods), you're guaranteed a spot in the Championship tournament. If you don't win, you have to hope for at "at-large" selection to the Championships (in FIRST, you have some control over this).

But the Champsionships are like the NCAA Tournament. The Regions in the Tourney aren't based on geographic location of the schools (except for the #1 seeds) but are supposed to make the Regions as balanced as possible. I believe that the GDC tries to do this each year with the Divisions at Champs.

Cyber Blue has not yet made it to Einstein. But, if we did, I'd be willing to bet I'd be more excited that we made it there then that we had specifically won the Curie Division. And if we happened to win the Division that was considered "weaker" than another, it wouldn't really bother me either, because we made FIRST's Final Four.

I don't think this is a problem that needs to be fixed. It's fun the way it is now. I do, however, fully support Mr. Baker's idea (linked earlier in the thread) about televising the "selection" show. If we'll all gather around for three hours to see exactly what the game is on a Saturday in January, I'd be willing to bet we'd watch a webcast as a team of them announcing the divisions.

Enigma's puzzle

06-04-2010, 10:34

Quick thoughts:
-You would have to start with the Original Teams and HOF teams since they qualify every year) and assign them to divisions. It would be good to have a mix of regions in these teams per division. These teams could act as division captains.
-Division Winners become a one year captains for their division.
-CA winners obviously become HOF teams and stay with their division.
-EI winner becomes a one year captain
-Some way to appoint permanent captians

-Each division captain submits an online draft list of their top 100 (arbitrary) registered teams to join their division that year.
-Computer program randomises a division draft order then randomises the captain order in each and assigns the top pick on that list. Moves to next division in the order (serpentine) makes a pick from a division captain in the that division. Repeats till a 100 (again arbitrary) teams are selected.
-Rest of the teams are randomly assigned
-This would probably even out the strength of the divisions in a decentralised manner, without anyone knowing who selected who or in what order.

-Captains are responsible for the pageantry and social events of their division. Division Hug anyone?

Issues:
-This is alot of power/responsibility for the captains, may make others feel left out. However this the only way to guarantee those teams will be there.
-Division winners need to be qualified for next year. (Should be that way anyway IMHO)
-Need other ways to appoint permanent captains
-Numbers of Captains in each division could become out of balance, as well as their regional alignment.
-Miss out on chances to be in division with different teams (anticipate that opposing captains will interact in friendly rivalries so that is perhaps better than being with them)

Thoughts?

What if the Divisional Captains were put in charge of freezing teams. There would be an number of alotted freezes, maybe equal to the number of HOF and Original teams. Each of these HOF and Original Teams make a selection of a team, that was in their division, to become FROZEN. Then the teams would be frozen for 4 or 5 years, depending how the numbers worked, and in the end of that time they are either let go, or reUped for another 4 or 5 years of service. All the left over teams would be added to round out the division.

I personally believe sorting geographically is an aweful idea, all the Michigan teams have already played at the state championship, and Canadian and Minnesota teams only have 2 regionals, so most of them have seen most of their neighbors already. However if they sorted the teams into geographic areas then distributed them into divisions evenly, so we got a great mix of teams from every area, fun would be had by all.

Peter Matteson

06-04-2010, 10:45

Cyber Blue has not yet made it to Einstein. But, if we did, I'd be willing to bet I'd be more excited that we made it there then that we had specifically won the Curie Division. And if we happened to win the Division that was considered "weaker" than another, it wouldn't really bother me either, because we made FIRST's Final Four.

You pretty much summed up the way I always explain it and feel about. My team's goal every year is to make "the show" as we also refer to Einstein, division doesn't matter that much even though we would like to have a trophy from each one, as I'm sure the other teams who have won 3 out of 4 would like to (25, 217).

Chris Hibner

06-04-2010, 10:54

Dr. Joe - It's so funny you bring this up. Late last year I was surfing the Archives of CD (I lead such a glamorous life) and found your post (from around 1999?) highlighting your thoughts on how (at that time) Nationals needed to be restructured into it's current format. You even called the names of the divisions and naming the "big" field Einstein. I wish I could find that post again. It's incredible how many of your suggestions are now common rules and practices (I think in that thread you also advocated unlimited material usage).

It was discussed in this thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=64755#post64755) in 1999, but it was also briefly discussed at the end of 1998 in some "predictions for 1999" type of thread. Chiefdelphi.com was a real small, tight community back in those days.

EDIT: The topic was revisited in 2000 in this thread. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=70252#post70252)

A lot of ideas from these boards wiggle their way into the FIRST landscape. For example, Dr. Joe had the great idea of weaving the awards into the Einstein matches a number of years back, and that has stuck around for a while. That's the great thing about having a bunch of smart people on one message board - a good idea can be turned into an excellent, highly-refined solution. I'm so happy that Joe is back in his old form throwing out some great ideas again. I missed those days.

Sticky divisions is an interesting idea. I like the idea of divisional pride, yet I also like the play amongst different teams every year. That makes for a bit of a conundrum. Hmmmmmm.

xzvrw2

06-04-2010, 10:56

I love the idea of having divisions that are sticky. FIRST has already kindof done this with Michigan. Back in the day, I'm making it seem like I'm old here, when I was on my team, we knews tons of teams from around the country due to we traveled to the different regionals. But now with the Michigan Districts, we dont see or get to know any of these teams any more. Why should it be any different then at other compititions. Who is the best at this division is going to play who is the best at this other division. I think that if FIRST is going to have a district format at one place, why not have it for the rest. Do I think that it is the right way, maybe maybe not. But if we want to be FAIR like so many of us have said, than I think we should go this route.

Joe Johnson

06-04-2010, 11:24

You pretty much summed up the way I always explain it and feel about. My team's goal every year is to make "the show" as we also refer to Einstein, division doesn't matter that much even though we would like to have a trophy from each one, as I'm sure the other teams who have won 3 out of 4 would like to (25, 217).

Just to be clear, I am not saying that the current system is broken. I LOVE the current system. So to all those who say that this is fixing a problem that doesn't exist, you are correct but misguided.

I am proposing a thought experiment along the lines of "can it be better?"

I think perhaps it can. The idea came to me listening to Verbrugge talk about this or that team at the MSC having success in Curie or Newton in year X. It struck me that while Einstein means something, Curie, Newton, Archimedes or Galeleo are meaningless other than that they are CMP divisions and they are not Einstein.

I think it may be better if they actually developed an identity. Now the down side is that if they are identifiable, then they are not identical, which is bad news to the members of the Fairness Cult but perhaps there are enough positives to overcome this negative.

Let's keep the ideas and discussion going.

Joe J.

Andy Baker

06-04-2010, 11:54

I do, however, fully support Mr. Baker's idea (linked earlier in the thread) about televising the "selection" show. If we'll all gather around for three hours to see exactly what the game is on a Saturday in January, I'd be willing to bet we'd watch a webcast as a team of them announcing the divisions.

That would be very very cool. What if, tonight, at 9:00pm, we all would gather to watch a webcast with Dean and Woodie describing each of the divisions. Better yet, we could have key people from around the country Skype-ing in with their assessment for each grouping. Looking Forward could chime in, wearing a ski mask. The amazing CarNack could even give his input. I would be willing to help make this work next year.

I think that 3 things would be needed to do this:
1. some broadcasting method (NASA, etc.) maybe multiple methods from various locations (dedicated website, etc.)
2. a committee to organize this
3. cooperation from FIRST (they give the committee the division teams, and then wait to publish after the selection show is done)
4. some minimal sponsorship

I would pony up some effort to help make this happen.

Andy

DarkFlame145

06-04-2010, 11:55

Think of the NFL's black and blue division (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFC_North) (Bears, Packers, Lions, Vikings... ...and the Bucs)

Errrrrrrrrrrrr I know the bucs where in the NFC North when they first started.

But I think the biggest problem with using a regional division system is that some teams dont go to the world competition every year. Or what about that team that only goes every few years? The number of teams in each division would fluctuate from year to year

ExTexan

06-04-2010, 12:01

I am proposing a thought experiment along the lines of "can it be better?"

I think perhaps it can. The idea came to me listening to Verbrugge talk about this or that team at the MSC having success in Curie or Newton in year X. It struck me that while Einstein means something, Curie, Newton, Archimedes or Galeleo are meaningless other than that they are CMP divisions and they are not Einstein.

I like keeping in mind "can it be better?" Along with that comes "let's define better".

I agree that if each field had an identity, i.e. Big 12, Big 10, it would mean something and that part would be better. If the end result was that a lot of better teams (significantly more than now) consistently didn't go to Einstein because of the depth of quality of a particular field then it may not be better, or even fair for that matter. That happens in the various college conferences. Also the college conferences rise and fall in quality and depth of quality.

I don't have a ready idea for creating a lasting identity for each field but I will think about it. It would be a nice affect assuming the repercussions were not bad.

I wonder how it would be possible to assign teams to an Atlanta (St. Louis) field at the beginning of the season? It would give somewhat of a one year identity in which you could know who you may be playing against, plan, have discussions and rivalry throughout the season and build a little identity.

Obviously the qualifying, attending, etc. implications are huge but just another thought. I am not a fan of a regional situation (for the four fields) being in Michigan for all the reasons stated. Michigan needs to be spread out in my opinion.

The Lucas

06-04-2010, 12:01

What if the Divisional Captains were put in charge of freezing teams. There would be an number of alotted freezes, maybe equal to the number of HOF and Original teams. Each of these HOF and Original Teams make a selection of a team, that was in their division, to become FROZEN. Then the teams would be frozen for 4 or 5 years, depending how the numbers worked, and in the end of that time they are either let go, or reUped for another 4 or 5 years of service. All the left over teams would be added to round out the division.

Good idea but I am concerned about the repercussions. Will teams have their feel like no one wants them if they are not FROZEN? There is already some animosity towards the "elite" teams (search CD if you dont believe me but it is not pretty) and this might make it worse.

The key to the Randomised Autopick draft in my first post no one knows (even the Captians, FIRST HQ etc...) who was picked and what order (but it still should even out the divisions strength among the non Captains and give the Captains some control). More teams will feel like they were picked than actually were. Since there are representatives from most regions in each Division teams, even lesser-known-nationally teams can believe they were noticed and picked. If you are often in the same division, then you believe your division really thinks highly of your team. If you bounce around divisions, then you believe the division captains are competing over your team. Overall, it really doesn't matter whether you were picked or not but it is nice to think you were :)

I want Division Captain role to be more about the pageantry than the power (figureheads :D ). Organise the HOF booths by division and have some space for the other Division Captains, this is your division HQ to display what makes your division great. Make college football style traveling trophies using the themes of your divisions for match-ups on Einstein. For example when Curie beat Archimedes on Einstein last year, wouldn't it have been better if afterwards the Archi captains presented Curie captains with The Radioactive Archimedes' Screw trophy :D (for the other match-up I am thinking about the Apple Telescope but it could be better). Right now few people even remember which divisions meet in Einstein Semis. If we had these trophies, Archi division would be thinking "We gotta get the Screw back from Curie!". Captains would also lead planning of social events for their divisions (this could turn into a mini competition of its own).

Joe Johnson

06-04-2010, 12:19

<snip> Make college football style traveling trophies using the themes of your divisions for match-ups on Einstein. For example when Curie beat Archimedes on Einstein last year, wouldn't it have been better if afterwards the Archi captains presented Curie captains with The Radioactive Archimedes' Screw trophy :D (for the other match-up I am thinking about the Apple Telescope but it could be better). Right now few people even remember which divisions meet in Einstein Semis. If we had these trophies, Archi division would be thinking "We gotta get the Screw back from Curie!". Captains would also lead planning of social events for their divisions (this could turn into a mini competition of its own).

Now THAT is what I'm TALKING ABOUT!!! That there is some 1st rate brain work.

I love the idea of divisional rivalry spurred on by a trophy. NICE!

What other ideas are out there?

Joe J.

Emily3204

06-04-2010, 12:36

I think the alliance winners from each regional should be placed in the same division:D

artdutra04

06-04-2010, 12:41

A web-casted drafted selection process for the four divisions on Atlanta would be interesting, but I'm worried about the whiner squadron. They're the reason why we can't have nice things.

But let's say we can placate the whiners and anti-elitist/anti-powerhouse sentiments, and we're actually able to implement a drafting system. We'd need four "Chief Inspirers" to do the picking. But who could we choose? Would we want them to be FIRST leadership figures like Dean, Woodie? Or how about we randomly choose four Championship Woodie Flowers Award winners each year. Let's say the latter is chosen, and then let's have them do some kind of a challenge on the webcast, and the four winners get to be the Chief Inspirers.

Now that they get chosen, they make it into some kind of game show or similar venture where they get to make their division picks in rounds. Each round they get ten teams. Depending on how successful each Chief Inspirer is as their tasks, they get a set number of chosen picks and a set number of random picks. Let's say the "winner" of a challenge gets 8 chosen teams and 2 random teams; the 2nd place gets 6 chosen and 4 random, 3rd place gets 4 chosen and 6 random, and 4th gets 2 chosen and 8 random.

The challenge for each round is created by a specific Region of the country/world, with each Region having an identical number of teams. So you'll get the Midwest Challenge, the Canada Challenge, and New England Challenge, the Florida Challenge, etc. The order of the challenges would be randomized each year. The challenge should be something related to FRC and the specific region, and also something funny. Each region gets to select and vote on their Challenge each season prior to the drafting selection.

Because some challenges might not have a definite winner, there will be a judges panel. Let's say we get three of four other well known FIRSTers, plus Dave Lavery. Each of them gets a whiteboard for "feedback", not unlike the IRI talent show. :D

This goes through the eight rounds. If the initial selection of the Chief Inspirers takes six minutes, and each of the eight rounds take another six minutes, with a final six minute conclusion, that's a one-hour webcast program. If each round is cut to five minutes, then it allows for a brief commercial break between each round for sponsors who are sponsoring the Championship event.

Joe Johnson

06-04-2010, 12:56

<snip> but I'm worried about the whiner squadron. <snip>

I like the term Whiner Squadron. I think I am going to steal it.

I have an idea for how to determine the pickers at the Championships but it is a bit involved and I will have to craft the message with love and care I cannot commit during lunch. So...

...stay tuned for my evil genius plan. Muahahahahah!!!!

Joe J.

Rob

06-04-2010, 13:05

Ok I am going to throw some ideas out there. I know that some of these may have some big problems, but hopefully they can get more ideas flowing!

1) What if instead of registering for Champs, you were able to register for a division at champs?

2) How about doing something to tie in the division names to the team after-party on Saturday night?

3) (I'm going to get killed on this one...) What if each division had a slight nuance that varied the game rules (like the American League vs. the minor..eh National League)?

4) What if you play all your qual rounds against teams from your division but your elimination matchups are against other divisions?

5) How about some little side competitions between the divisions? Such as longest kick..quickest hang, etc. This is inspired by team 180 doing the "pull tests" back in 2002...

Just jumping outside the box for a bit...have fun!

Rob

Chris Hibner

06-04-2010, 13:28

Rob has some interesting ideas.

The old story from the University of Michigan football program under Bo Schembechler was that in order to provide some motivation to play hard in the spring game, the winners got to eat steak for the post game meal while the losers had to eat hot dogs.

What about something like that for the team party? All team members from the winning division gets one or more of the following at the party: a) better food, b) "fast passes" to jump the line at the games/rides, c) special seating, d) VIP entertainment, etc.

That won't help division history, but it will make people cheer more for their division to win while at the event.

TD78

06-04-2010, 13:35

4) What if you play all your qual rounds against teams from your division but your elimination matchups are against other divisions?

I find this one the most interesting. It would certainly spice things up!

ExTexan

06-04-2010, 13:40

thefro526

06-04-2010, 13:45

What about something like that for the team party? All team members from the winning division gets one or more of the following at the party: a) better food, b) "fast passes" to jump the line at the games/rides, c) special seating, d) VIP entertainment, etc.

That won't help division history, but it will make people cheer more for their division to win while at the event.

To expand upon this idea:

Perhaps the Division Winners get a $5000 Credit to be used towards registration or event entry fees the following year? Also, I think Division Winners should qualify for the following year's Championship and be placed in the same division they won to "Defend their Title".

Maybe the World Champions could get this $5000 and perks plus Free Entry to the following year's Championship?

Maybe the Championship Chairman's Winner could get the same as the World Champs plus a a reduced entry fee for all subsequent Championships?

If you created a system like this, I'm sure you'd see teams playing a hell of a lot harder in the Finals.

rulesall2

06-04-2010, 13:46

I really like this idea, however the implication may get complicated... let's just see how this plays out.

Some suggestions:

1) What if teams attending could submit a form that had one(or any amount really) team they wanted to be in the same division with and why. This would be the basis for division formation. Then some sort of rule would make up who stays and who moves divisions for the following year. This would guarantee teams the ability to play against teams they don't normally see, but still have partnerships with. (ex. 2791 and 1726, etc.)

2) At the beginning of the first year, all veteran teams would be assigned a division based on some random algorithm that accounted for frequency of attendance of teams (to prevent imbalances). At the end of Week 5 once all teams have qualified, any imbalances would be accounted for with the non-permanent placement of the rookie qualifiers in the divisions. Each year afterwards, the teams that attended championships the previous year would remain in that division and teams that did not attend would be redistributed throughout the divisions, with rookie teams once again providing the balancing of the numbers.

Thoughts? (P.S. Great idea Joe.)

HashemReza

06-04-2010, 14:13

Just to be clear, I am not saying that the current system is broken. I LOVE the current system. So to all those who say that this is fixing a problem that doesn't exist, you are correct but misguided.

Absolutely, we're taught that it's through iteration that our creations become more perfect. In the end, if there is room for improvement, I believe it's our duty to strive for it.

Now, my only criteria for an improved system is that it doesn't cause some incredible powerhouse alliance guarantees. By this, I mean that if, for example, 2056 and 1114 are in the same division each year by virtue of whatever method used to "lock" teams to a division, I would be quite worried of the two teaming up each year. What would the harm be? History has shown that those teams consistently seed high. What's stopping them from making a pact that each year they'll always choose the other? Who's to stop them?

Perhaps that's a moot point, but I worry about some of those elite teams forming championship alliances that last a lifetime.

4) What if you play all your qual rounds against teams from your division but your elimination matchups are against other divisions?

I must say, that's an interesting idea. It would certainly complicate scouting, which I don't really appreciate (as the manager of scouting for my team) ;) .

Inevitably, decisions regarding the placement of teams will result in some griping about fairness towards one person or another. It might be better to consider leaving the means by which divisions are created, and instead mess around with some creative bracketing like what Rob proposed.

J_Miles

06-04-2010, 14:46

Well, I quickly thought of two ways to organize such a thing:

1:
Organize geographical divisions, based solely on region. Based on the number of divisions, they would be distributed randomly between the four divisions at FWC, this way there would be some type of random aspect involved, but it wouldn't be entirely random.

2:
Organize divisions based on performance. Use an international points system to view the international rankings of qualifying teams, and then divide divisions up by ranking. Once this has been done, the teams from each division could be evenly distributed throughout the divisions at FWC. This way, you'd have an even mix of teams of every caliber throughout the entire competition, no one field would be "stacked," and the possibility of a close, if not necessarily even, match-up on Einstein would be improved.

The issues with that idea are that placing top ranked teams in every division would very possibly take away any chances for some certain teams to compete in the division, but even if there weren't top-ranked teams in every division, these less-powerful teams would simply be routed at Einstein anyways. It's the best system I could come up with.

sammyjalex

06-04-2010, 15:05

I really like a lot of these ideas. I'm hopeful that they would at some point be implemented.

My favorites include having teams locked into divisions thus in this way networking for students across the world at CMP becomes much more convenient having seen the same teams year after year for getting to know and recognize the members and also the idea of allowing winning teams for that year to draft their alliance thus encouraging scouting across regionals for the entire team and getting involved in FIRST on an international level more than just a team level; learning more design techniques than just those discussed as a team that build season.

These are striking to me because I know many teams struggle to get their students to watch matches other than those their team is in and a draft may encourage this and also simply because a great tool FIRST offers that is not utilized enough is CD; it's the networking between students and teams which is not utilized enough. Adolescents (and adults) inherently find some difficulty meeting people in large social atmospheres like regionals and CMP but it is a fantastic advantage of FIRST to make friends all over the world and a lock on divisions someway would provide this.

For this reason of inter-regional scouting and mingling, I am against the idea of regional divisions. The best ideas I have heard with regards to who make up the divisions have been the idea of a draft using winning teams as division captains in charge of socials etc. as well as incentives like a divisional trophy passed around from year to year. It is my belief that if there will be better teams around strategically when inter-regional scouting is done than just that one you know locally thus preventing dynasties of nearby powerhouses as Cameron mentioned.

Jiust my $.02

Sam Alexander

mama_tree

06-04-2010, 15:33

When do we know what Division we are in?

Racer26

06-04-2010, 16:01

History says we should know divisions tomorrow.

Joe Johnson

06-04-2010, 23:10

Okay, if I were King of FIRST and I had decided that we were going to have a public draft of the teams in the divisions, here is how I would do it.

Whole idea: Establish a tiered scholarship structure that awards points for prediction regional outcomes. Teams that are the best at predicting the outcomes win college scholarships for their team members. The better the team is at predicting the outcomes, the more scholarship dollars that team earns for its team members.

The 4 best teams at predictions during the regionals become the drafters for the CMP (to avoid conflicts of interest, if your team is competing in the CMP your team is automatically your first draft choice).

Additional scholarships are available based on the "goodness" of your division. Goodness can be something as simple as winning on Einstein, but I think that there should be some other measures included to more broadly reflect the goals that we'd like in a division*

Each team playing the prediction game predicts the outcomes of each qualifying match of a regional n minutes prior to the start of each match. Same for each elimination match. A grand prize scholarship is given to the team that does the best at predicting the winners of the matches together with the strength of the division.

It is a crazy scheme. I admit that. But I think it would be great for a number of reasons. First, it would make people become serious about tracking FIRST teams and their performance week to week and game to game. Second, it would provide another "horse race" to follow (which team is leading in the prediction game). Third, it would provide valuable information to teams as to the strength of various teams. Fourth, it could start a sort of punditry class where we are all talking about FIRST because we have an interest in the outcomes of the various games around the country.

Fifth and finally, it would be a hoot. I think that it would really be fun to be a part of the game.

Call me nuts, but at least it is a bold plan...

Joe J.

*I know I am going far afield here but what about this additional crazy idea. What if there was a "second chance" tourney going on backstage (i.e. on the two fields farthest from Einstein) where teams that are eliminated from the divisions get a second chance to play for their own glory but also for that of their division.

Teams that are eliminated from the divisional tourneys are not "done."
After the divisional champs are crowned, the "second chance" tourney takes place on the two fields farthest from Einstein. Here is how it could work:

The 16 alliances that lost in the QF would play 8 matches among themselves - of course, they would play alliances from other divisions.
The losers are done.
The winners are matched up with the 8 losing SF alliances -- again pairings are arranged to avoid divisional re-matches as much as possible.
They play another 8 matches. The losers are done.
The 8 remaining alliances and the 4 Finalists from the division give us enough alliances for 6 more matches which produces 6 more winners and 6 more alliances that are done.
Those 6 alliances now play 3 more matches which produces 3 more also rans and 3 alliances (9 teams) that can call themselves "Second Chance Champions"It is a total of 25 (=8+8+6+3) matches on 2 stages with 6 minute cycle times that is an hour and 15 minutes. It would be over before the teams even realized it happened. I don't think we allow time outs or subs or even 4 minutes between back to back matches. Play when and where you're called. If you're ready you play if not, you're done. Also, we don't make a big deal about these games. Perhaps we don't even announce the team names and numbers. "Thumbs up red, Thumbs up blue, 3 2 1 go..." As to awards, we hand them the trophy as they exit the field and that is that.

Even so, do not underestimate how great it would be to participate in this second chance tourney. Redemption is a funny thing. It requires so little to heal so much. At a minimum, it lets 9 more teams go home from the CMP having won their last match. This is a non-trivial boost to the overall mood of the event, as it allows more teams to go home winners... ...and it gives you more comparisons between the divisions so that we can decide which drafter deserves the best scholarships.

M.Wong

06-04-2010, 23:10

As a team member from a Michigan team, we've had our share of playing other Michigan teams. The great part of Atlanta is getting to see teams you don't normally get to see (330, 1538, 365, etc.)

Chris Fultz

06-04-2010, 23:18

That would be very very cool. What if, tonight, at 9:00pm, we all would gather to watch a webcast with Dean and Woodie describing each of the divisions. Better yet, we could have key people from around the country Skype-ing in with their assessment for each grouping. Looking Forward could chime in, wearing a ski mask. The amazing CarNack could even give his input. I would be willing to help make this work next year. Andy

Maybe half-time of the NCAA Championship game!

Half of the division on the Mens night, the other half on Womens night.

keneajer

06-04-2010, 23:55

BHOP

07-04-2010, 00:13

I would definetly second the effort for better stuff for winning alliances at the "after party" (VIP, food(steak haha),etc...)

After winning you are tired from yelling, screaming, and changing batteries. All you want is some decent food and a place to sit. Now you have to go back, pack up the crate, pack up the trailer, then walk over to the championship celebration thing. You arrive only to see old food that is left out, and no good seats left in the house for that nights entertainment. The party is even practically over.

Teams "stuck" on einstein should definetly get some sort of reward, because both times I've done it, the after part sucked.

JackG

07-04-2010, 01:45

After giving this some thought, I've realized that plenty of the suggestions people are proposing stem from varying priorities. I think we can sum up the priorities people have in mind.

Equal distribution of power/ balanced arrangement of powerhouse teams
Regional representation/ regional pride
Divisional pride/tradition/rivalries
See/play teams from other parts of the world/country
Not being stuck permanently in a division
Creating an event out of the selection process
Teams being able to select their own divisions
Teams being able to select other teams for their own division
No hurt feelings for drafting, nobody being able to know who was picked last
Playing for permanence (i.e. winning to become part of a certain division)
Division-wide prize for winning division

The "best" idea will probably incorporate as many of those as possible, so as to placate the most people. Many of the systems that people are proposing have aspects that are not mutually exclusive, so taking parts from one system and adding them to another might produce a good idea that (almost) everyone can get behind.

flippy147852

07-04-2010, 19:57

If all the 50 states had a Championship event and thats how they get to the FISRT Championship, you would take the top two finals and they would be the reps for that state. So you would have 300 USA reps at the the FIRST Championship. At the FIRST Championship all the teams will get devide in to North/East/South/West.

Not all states have enough teams for this to work. District events with a regional championship (such as in Michigan) would need to be implimented through all of FIRST for this to be feasible.

Chris is me

07-04-2010, 20:01

Not all states have enough teams for this to work. District events with a regional championship (such as in Michigan) would need to be implimented through all of FIRST for this to be feasible.

I'm opposed to the state based idea for many reasons, mainly that state boundaries are completely arbitrary, and that state based representation would be unfair to almost every states (Only 3 Michigan teams? Good to hear all 3 Rhode Island teams are going..., etc)

ExTexan

07-04-2010, 20:06

Fifth and finally, it would be a hoot. I think that it would really be fun to be a part of the game.

Joe, there is a whole lot that I like about your idea. I think it does accomplish the initial goal of emphasizing some divisional pride.

I think it would accomplish filling a void in larger First teams. There is only so much building a robot that can be done by only so many people. There is only so much award work, website, etc. that can be done and not everyone likes to do either. This offers a lot of creative opportunities in developing scouting systems and new ways to perfect processes and systems. And the students are doing something with huge benefits to the team and having their efforts and results displayed weekly (unlike many of the functions performed by students).

And, win or lose, it's a competition in itself. Not every team can build a robot to compete on Einstein. But every team can do this very well. I think we need more competition opportunities not involved with building the best performing robot. And it would be great fun! Great thoughts!!

Also, I think some posters missed the intent of another suggestion, additional rewards, i.e. VIP party stuff etc. I did not interpret the initial suggestion to go to Einstein competing teams but to every team on a particular field. Divisional pride. Winning Einstein has its own rewards!

Dancin103

07-04-2010, 20:10

BTW we usually know divisions by now. I don't remember having to wait this long in the history of FIRST.

Oh, this is my 365 post, go Moe.

Cass

davidalln

07-04-2010, 20:52

BTW we usually know divisions by now. I don't remember having to wait this long in the history of FIRST.

Oh, this is my 365 post, go Moe.

Cass

Yeah, tonight was definitely a terrible night for the divisions to "supposedly" come out. Why do I find myself constantly refreshing the 2010 Championships web page hoping to see "Team List" links under the four divisions when there is an unopened textbook and all of World War II to study for tomorrow's test...

Joe Johnson

07-04-2010, 21:07

Joe, there is a whole lot that I like about your idea.<snip>

Thanks. Everyone likes complements (me especially ;-)

I have been thinking more about this and I think that it may be a very cool aspect of the game. Suppose just before we got the match started, you revealed the predictions? It would be another thing to motivate teams to do well to "prove em wrong" as well as something to kill time during a time out.

Imagine if there was an iphone and android app to allow teams to enter data about there robot -- "just got our hanger working" "drivetrain whacked" etc. I am thinking about some sort of Twitter/Facebook/Hot or Not/Google analytics mash up that would let teams track the various players on the chess board.

It would be a huge effort, but FIRST IS ALREADY a huge effort. This would be building in a new direction.

I also have been thinking about the "Second Chance Bracket" idea.

I think that is probably worth a new thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=949720#post949720). Stay tuned...

Joe J.

Vikesrock

07-04-2010, 21:13

Imagine if there was an iphone and android app to allow teams to enter data about there robot -- "just got our hanger working" "drivetrain whacked" etc. I am thinking about some sort of Twitter/Facebook/Hot or Not/Google analytics mash up that would let teams track the various players on the chess board.

Joe J.

Hmmm.... This just gave me an idea totally unrelated to whether this division thing gets off the ground or not.

Thanks Joe!

Nawaid Ladak

07-04-2010, 21:17

Thanks. Everyone likes complements (me especially ;-)

I have been thinking more about this and I think that it may be a very cool aspect of the game. Suppose just before we got the match started, you revealed the predictions? It would be another thing to motivate teams to do well to "prove em wrong" as well as something to kill time during a time out.

Imagine if there was an iphone and android app to allow teams to enter data about there robot -- "just got our hanger working" "drivetrain whacked" etc. I am thinking about some sort of Twitter/Facebook/Hot or Not/Google analytics mash up that would let teams track the various players on the chess board.

It would be a huge effort, but FIRST IS ALREADY a huge effort. This would be building in a new direction.

I also have been thinking about the "Second Chance Bracket" idea.

I think that is probably worth a new thread. Stay tuned...

Joe J.

Forming a list on Twitter with accounts associated to Teams or significant individuals should do the trick. that is if everyone is willing to use twitter. Other teams/FIRSTers would be able to follow this list and get updates on various teams from each division. (5 total lists, one for each division and one for everyone in general).

from there users can just use whatever Twitter app they like to stay updated to the list (or even text messages for that matter).