Quote:
Originally Posted by s0uthw3st
I wholeheartedly agree - to get people's interest, you kinda have to turn the year's game into an elevator speech. AA does not work terribly well for that while still keeping the depth of the game (like the scoring and penalties) intact.
Now that I think about it, perhaps that's why there was no endgame - the referees were too busy monitoring scoring and penalties for another aspect to be added to the game in a manageable way.
|
I agree about the confusion that AA can create in non-FIRST spectators, and even in students! There were a lot of rules and elements to keep track of conceptually, but when it got on the field, the game was usually slow and hard to understand if you hadn't poured over the rules for six weeks (I'm not saying all matches were boring, of course).
Also, it's kinda bad when many people agree that the Dean's List interview was shoddy. I was disappointed about how carelessly they treated this award, especially when it's treated in such high regard. It's no Chairman's, I agree, but it's important.