Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Potato
...because currently, nothing the community is doing is really affecting FIRST's decision-making logic at all. Unless the community takes an obvious and impaction stance on pointing out the issues with champs AND rallying behind a straight-forward, obviously superior solution, FIRST is going to give us talk without really DOING anything at all. No single community member or group of passive members, as I see it, is influential enough to impact the doings of an organization that large. It will almost literally take an army.
|
And that "army" can do so in a respectful manner. That army can also understand that the contracts are already signed. There are better ways to move forward than stamping your feet on the ground and personal attacks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Potato
And, obviously, this whole 2-destination championship means there is no champion anymore. It's like the AFL versus the NFL. Teams can use the metrics all they want, but if it's not settled on the filed, it's never going to be official. People are going to miss witnessing the "true champion" because there's another one being crowned in some city hundreds of miles away. That, and FIRST is going to live on and see a bunch of diffrent teams doing well, and probably doesn't mind a lack of a concluding event so long as "everyone has fun." Well, I only have 4 years I know I'm going to be actively in this program, and I can speak for more than myself when I say that crowning "co-champions" is a rather diluted way to end the season.
|
We crowned "co-champions" ever since alliances were introduced in 1999. There hasn't been a "true champion" in more than a decade. The champion alliance has emerged from a sub-set of all teams in which it was impossible to play with all teams since divisions were implemented in 2001.
There's plenty to be displeased about with the championship format. The "true champion" gripe is simply not legitimate. We don't have a "true champion" now as it stands.