Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH
That's not exactly what I'm getting at here. As a whole, the number of sports teams stays the same, right? (Barring any school closings or openings or suspensions and all.) And between any two random years, the skill levels ain't gonna change all that much, right? Barring some random luck of getting a superstar on a low-level team, of course.
|
this is true for the usual popular sports but other sports like Lacrosse in California can be very turbulent. Coaches come and go, sports get canceled, I recall several lacrosse teams in California that moved to different leagues every year. Its just like FRC, many small tier sports struggle for money, places to practices, finding good coaches, loosing students to other activities and sports. Even popular sports, borderline teams find themselves being regulated every few years. Teams that find great windfall after being relegated have to wait to the following year to be promoted. Its just an accepted part of life for those leagues.
However proposal C will be a tough sell. Relegation is always a somber affair. I prefer teams that have a break out year can carry to their success to the very top of that very year. proposal C would make more sense if we had 10 times the number of current FRC teams.
I like B a lot better. Plus district points is a system our teams are more familiar with.