Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery
What [US] sport(s) actually follow that format all the way through a national tournament, let alone a world championship event? For the most part, there aren't "official" high school sports championships beyond the state level, and only rarely are there actual competitions/tournaments to decide them. For instance, the High School football national champion is typically decided by a poll.
While the appeal of that format is obvious, there are significant challenges that it poises as well. The financial costs and time comittments to teams, volunteers, and FIRST/planning comittees increase with each level of competition added. For many teams, it's simply not feasible to compete four or five times in a single season.
The appeal of that structure is obvious, and the logic behind it is easy to follow. But there should also be a parallel discussion. Rather than adding layers of competition, when is it time to start removing them? At what point is a "champioship event" simply not feasible? At what point is it no longer the best return on investment for the time and cost sunk into it by the participants, sponsors, and volunteers? Would FRC benefit from more of a "world festival" event similar to FLL?
|
I agree. Our team would be really hard pressed to attend a fourth event. Three is already tough.
Super regionals could be the top level. It would remove the need for a gigantic championship event, and most teams wouldn't have to travel a ridiculous distance to get to them. Certainly I'd miss the chance to compete with teams in other regions, BUT if everybody is eventually in a cross-compatible regional system, teams can sign up for competitions in other regions if desired.
I pointed out in another thread that a configuration topping out with super regionals still leaves the door open for a really small Einstein type event that only invites super regional winners. No Georgia Dome + World Congress Center required for that event. And if that wasn't in the cards, there's still IRI.