View Single Post
  #58   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-04-2012, 15:12
KrazyCarl92's Avatar
KrazyCarl92 KrazyCarl92 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Carl Springli
FRC #5811 (The BONDS)(EWCP)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 521
KrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond reputeKrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond reputeKrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond reputeKrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond reputeKrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond reputeKrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond reputeKrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond reputeKrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond reputeKrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond reputeKrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond reputeKrazyCarl92 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The Rest Of The Best

Personally, I think the way to go is to do away with the wait list as the primary source for allowing teams into championships after qualifying. If teams who have already qualified qualify again at an event by winning, getting an RCA, EI, etc., then they should have some way of looking to the next best teams at the event and offer them a spot at Championships rather than immediately going to the wait list. Then if these teams cannot make it, by all means use the wait list as a fall back plan! They could choose to use either seeding or even OPR as a metric for this.

For example:
This years qualifying teams from the Connecticut Regional were 694 for RCA, 1511 for EI, 4055 for Rookie All Star, and the winning alliance of 195, 181, and 20. Of these 6 teams, 2 of them had already qualified for the Championship (181 with their Chesapeake Regional victory and 20 with original and sustaining status). With these 2 spots that are now open, FIRST should invite the next highest seeded teams to the Championship or the next highest OPR teams to Championship rather than resorting directly to the wait list. If these teams cannot go, then fine go to the wait list. If you go by highest remaining seed, 2168 and 177 would get the additional bids. If you go by highest remaining OPR, 118 and 558 would get these bids, and 177 would have gotten a bid earlier in the year at WPI because 190 already qualifies with original and sustaining status and won the event, and they have the next highest "adjusted OPR" according to Ed Law and Team 2834's scouting database.

So to summarize: if you go by seed 2168 and 177 would have qualified, with 118 still having an even greater chance of getting a bid next week given that many of the teams there have already qualified. If you go by OPR, 118 and 558 would have gotten the bids at CT, and 177 would have already received a bid from WPI. If any of these teams could not make it or raise funds for the Championship, then by all means, the wait list is reasonable.

As for those who argue that the less competitive teams should be able to go to the Championship for inspiration, I wholeheartedly agree! But there are other ways to get there. Many regional winning alliances are comprised of 2 highly competitive teams and a less competitive team (not saying this is always the case, just a trend). The Rookie All Star award, RCA, and EI awards offer another avenue for less competitive teams to earn their way to the Championship. Also, these less competitive teams who earn their way in will also happen to be the ones who will best be prepared to implement what inspires them at the Championship in subsequent years and become competitive.

I'm saying this because having teams like 118 and 177 this year miss out on the Championship DOES NOT, in my opinion, best achieve the mission of FIRST. There can be better criteria in place to ensure that deserving teams such as these are very likely to be at the Championship when they perform as they have this year. However, everyone must understand that no matter what system FIRST has in place, there will always the remain the possibility that a deserving team is left out.
__________________
[2017-present] FRC 0020 - The Rocketeers
[2016] FRC 5811 - BONDS Robotics
[2010-2015] FRC 0020 - The Rocketeers

Last edited by KrazyCarl92 : 02-04-2012 at 15:15.
Reply With Quote