I'm quickly becoming confused by this thread. There are a fair number of people arguing against this top 25 list on these grounds:
- It can be discouraging to rookie and "weaker" teams
- It has a ridiculously small sample size
- It's based on relatively little besides popularity
Basically, those against are arguing that the validity of the list is extremely low, and it might be harmful to other teams, theirs included. Meanwhile, the supporters are arguing:
- It will be encouraging to rookie and "weaker" teams
- It has a ridiculously small sample size
- It's based on relatively little besides popularity
So it seems that people supporting the list are arguing that it has little validity, so people shouldn't really care what it says, and it might encourage some teams, theirs included. Also, anyone who's discouraged by something like this is just silly, a wimp, or doesn't have the right priorities.
So, it seems like everyone can agree that the list itself has little bearing on reality and how teams will perform this season. It seems the argument is mainly down to whether having a public display of popularity and notoriety is a good thing or not. It is perhaps obvious at this point that I don't think trying to create a FIRST based popularity contest is a good thing.
So, I'll argue that this pointless poll is harmful. At the very least, it's not beneficial in any meaningful sense. As we can see in this thread, it's primarily generating argument over whether particular "elite" teams are ranked properly or deserve to be on it. I can guarantee you that none of the teams on this list and none of the teams with a remote chance of getting on this list actually need the "motivation" purportedly provided by it. They know they're excellent, and they strive for excellence every year in everything they do. I seriously doubt the prospect of moving up or down a rung on such a silly poll is really going to matter. Especially considering the teams that actually have a chance of making it on this list.
And yes, let's be honest and admit that there are a huge number of teams that have no chance of making it on this list, or the post-build list, or whatever other lists there are. Teams that don't post on CD about their robots won't be on this list. Rookies teams that win regionals probably won't be on this list next year because they don't have enough "history". Middle of the road teams that are consistently good partners, but rarely alliance captians... One regional teams... Basically, this list is set up to celebrate "elite" multiple regional teams that wins tons of matches, championships, etc. that everyone already knows about. Which seems very wrong to me given the rhetoric I often hear around here about good support robots for 2nd and 3rd picks being important for a winning alliance, etc. etc. To me, all a list like this is saying to these teams, is that they're only important in so far as they help these elite Top 25 teams maintain their eliteness. And that the only way these teams are going to achieve their own eliteness is to forget about being a supporting robot, forget about being a team player, and go all out for being a top seeded team that consistently dominates the other teams. Which is perfectly fine if we actually want to go that route and model ourselves after the cut-throat, win at all costs, nobody matters but my team mentality that pervades (nearly all) college and professional sports... But I could have sworn we were really aiming for a different kind of culture in FIRST.
So, in summary, I think it's a useless, meaningless "poll" with little bearing on reality and can be safely ignored as a predictor of actual success of any teams. I also think that it's one of the many aspects of the over-hyped college sports media complex that we would be much much better off ignoring.