|
Like Andy, I agree with every one of the points except for #5, about normalizing points based on the size of the regionals.
I'm sure that no one would dispute that some of the regionals are larger then others and some regionals are more difficult then others. If you were to normalize the point based on size of the regionals, the large regionals would stay large.
If you do not normalize the points, eventually teams will start to move away from the large regionals to the weaker regionals. Fairly soon, the strengths of the regionals would be fairly equal. I think this is a much better situation then artificially normalizing the points.
Another benefit is that teams would move around more. Right now, most of the west coast teams don't know many (or any) midwest or east coast teams and vice versa. Having just made the switch from a west coast team to an east coast team, I know that it can only help FIRST if there is more continuity between coasts. I think that this is one way to help promote that.
As for passing down the points for winning awards, I'm not really sure. On one hand, it would increase the quality of the nationals. On the other hand, it leaves a spot open for another team to get in randomly.
|