Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik
No. No, no, no, no. First, congrats on disincentivizing 1st seeds picking 2nd seeds. 2nd seed sure would think twice about accepting if winning meant they'd only go to the Loser's Championship.
|
Not sure if post was unclear, but meant the 2nd and 3rd picks as in 17th-32nd picks of the serpentine drafts - you know, the teams that "ride the coat-tails" of the 1st and 2nd seed.
Quote:
|
Second, yes, you really would be creating a Loser's Championship. Your whole purpose is to create a "real" Champs with all the "good" teams, and, well, that other Champs with all those other teams. Two geographically segregated Champs may or may not be a good idea, but I'm pretty sure a "premier" Champs and "that other" Champs is a terrible one for the health of the community.
|
There would still be a competition, and while in this scenario the winning alliance in the non-premier event wouldn't be able to claim to be the World Champions, winning an event that big would still be an impressive feat.
__________________
Be Healthy. Never Stop Learning. Say It Like It Is. Own It. Like our values?
Flexware Innovation is hiring!. We're looking for Senior Automation, Software, and System Engineers.
Check us out!