Re: Split Champs assignment
 

Actually this is primarily a controversy on CD. I had to work so didn't get to go to Champs and would not have heard about Will's statement without CD. Actually I probably would not have heard it at Champs either since my tolerance for large crowds & stadium seating would have be way overstretched by the time he spoke. :]

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

I think we may be forgetting abut this. Hallry shared it in a different thread earlier. I wonder what Frank will have to say about 2016?

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

Guess this is relevant again.

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

I suggested exactly this to Don Bossi at MSC 2015. He didn't seem too keen on the idea. I think that was because FIRST has no involvement in planning district CMPs (and probably doesn't want to step on anybody's toes).

Exactly what I'm looking for in a World Championship /s

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

Largely unsurprising decision... seems reasonable enough. This seemed like the default decision once the split championships was announced. A little saddening, as this adds the extra note of finality.

It would be interesting to see which CMP would have more teams from the 2016 CMP elims, Einstein, and which would have higher OPRs.

So, the next big question for me, is with 400 teams how many divisions will they have? 100 team divisions were awful for the integrity of the rankings and logistics, but a 50 team division would seem pretty weak and shallow... particularly when the CMP team lists are already being dilluted by being split!

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

>tfw class of 2017

I think this is the end goal - and it it's not, I think it should be. If more and more regions move to Districts (lets say, 85% of FRC teams), then FRC could operate much like the FTC Super Regional model, except DCMPs are the the Super Regionals. This way, all teams will get 1-3 small events (Districts/Qualifiers), one big event (DCMP/Super Regional*), and one (hopefully singular) Champs. This way, mid-tier teams get an opportunity to advance to additional levels of competition, while perennial powerhouses get the satisfaction of an "undiluted" CMP.

*yeah, I know FTC has State Champs in most/all places. imo four levels of competition is too much

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

Based on the Final Top 25 for this year...

13 of those teams would attend Houston next year, 12 in St. Louis.

Out of the Top 10 of those teams, 6 would compete in Houston, 4 in St. Louis.

Definitely more balanced than I originally thought it would have been. Definitely still absolutely hate the idea though.

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

[expletive]

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

Well, 330, it was a hell of a ride this weekend, but it looks like we won't have a chance to team up again for quite a while. At least not at an official event, anyways. We kind of already acknowledged that a bit in St. Louis, but it still sucks to see it made official. You guys are awesome. Best of luck. We'll be rooting for you in Houston!

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

This is the approach I'd like to see as well. Someone earlier in the thread referenced an old slide from 2011 that included this vision of FRC (note that none of this was ever official in any way)


But District Champs aren't to that point yet either. Like Basel said, FIRST and their event management companies don't run district champs - it's all the local people. And I don't know of any DCMP that runs conferences and has all the flashy lights like CMP does. As far as international/regional teams go, I though this thread from last year was a great start on the problem. Maybe as more areas move to districts, FIRST's event planning people have some more bandwidth they can apply to running District Championships.

Of course, none of this is anywhere near official, but if someone asked me where I envisioned FRC in a few years, this is what I would tell them.

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

I'm very confused as to why Tennessee is going to Houston and why Kentucky and Tennessee aren't going to the same place. The Smoky Mountains Regional is the TNKY Regional, because Kentucky and Tennessee don't have enough teams to support their own Regionals (yet). I'm really disappointed that they are planning on splitting a Regional practically in two. Also, Knoxville is closer to Detroit. If anyone has information on why Tennessee is going to Houston, I'd love to hear it.

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

Keep in mind that the concentration of teams is for the most part closer to Detroit than Houston however not everyone can go to the Championship that is closer to them.

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

True. But the distance is not as much of a concern for me. I'm more wondering why they would split up a Regional in this way.

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

All I really have to say is this looks quite like the old 400 team version of champs times two. To fit everyone in (including the FLL's and FTC) that probably means 100 team divisions.

So, if you thought a 600 team CMP with 75 team divisions was watered down and saw how your "random" assignment of 10 matches could affect your potential to rank high during the qualification matches, think again ... just add another 25 teams.... how do they get there? Are they from waitlist? Do they add some other type of qualifying position at Regionals? Do they go even deeper into the Districts?

I hope that the powers that be look quite hard at this issue next year when they figure out how teams get points for qualifications.

I will miss seeing all of our new and old friends from the East Coast and Canada.

Good luck to you all!!

Re: Split Champs assignment
 

It will be just another (Super) Regional to add to their new streak...:(