Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Line
I, for one, happen to agree with Jared. Many students and teams, mine included, take a great deal of pride and inspiration out of the product that we place on the field. Keep in mind that we are a multi-time chairman winner, so I think our kids 'get' what the program is about.
It is not inspiring when the primary driving force behind your Championship robot result is pure random chance. That's the most non-inspiring situation I can think of. It's tantamount to randomly picking a Chairman's winner. How truly inspiring would that be?
|
I think we all agree that would not be inspiring, but that wasn't the case even this year. The number of matches only affects the seeding which is a big deal but doesn't make the final outcome completely random (hence we had a VERY competitive Einstein).
Secondly, that comparison is not accurate. I won't even go into why it is so far off base I think that is obvious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Line
I would eliminate the purchase / wait option and (gasp) the auto-chairmans invites as well.
|
I must have misunderstood this? Are you going to stop inviting Rookies too? FIRST has proven that the competition can be competitive and allow "less than championship quality" robots in at the same time. The MAIN problem here is with the number of matches not the "quality" of the play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Line
The only option I see to bringing the number of matches up to what they should be (12 or more)
|
Good Luck! I think it is far too restrictive and exclusive to get 12 or more matches with the current championship setup. You are talking about cutting 1/3 or more of the teams that is quite drastic.