|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
#46
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well, this has always been something I've thought about for a while...
First off, let me start by saying I've been in FIRST for almost 3 years. I havent' been to Nat's yet. Now, this doesn't entirely disappoint me, but I know that we would really like to go, If we could. Every form of selection is prone to have it's own problems. The best way to determine a good method is by which can please the most people, and give a fair chance to all. The fair chance is something that needs to stick. If something based on your robot, or your points was implemented, you would find the number of rookies at nats decreasing, and piles of trophies growing in vet's closets. I'm not saying ALL rookies, but, the first year in itself is learning the flow, and seldom do rookies get "in the flow" well enough. Anyway, I think I agree with the fact that more awards need to be weighted toward Nats. We received the Rookie All Star for VCU(or one of them). This didn't qualify for nats. If you think about the rookie all star awards, they're picking a team who is different from the rest, and who shows great teamwork, community involvement, etc. If you're one of the 2 outstanding rookies of 60 -some teams at your regional, think of how many "outstanding" rookies would get to compete at Nats? Now, I also like the idea of Being a Semi-Finalist getting you in. I think that just getting into elimination matches is a job in itself. Random systems would work, but I'm not too keen toward the idea. Just think of watching Jeff Seaton (sorry Jeff, but I'm gonna pick on ya ) draw number from a hat for an hour or so, and certain teams going "Awww" because they weren't picked. Another thing that needs to be considered is cost. There are some teams (like mine) who need to pick between 2 regionals or shooting for 1 and nats. This is a tough and time-constrained decision. Going to 2 regionals increases your chance of getting into Nats, but you might not have the money to go. And vice versa. I'm not saying team's that can't pay their way shouldn't be admitted, but I think that the system need some form of incentive to shoot for nats. Almost like, FIRST has some funds set aside to pay for teams to go to nats. Maybe they could earn them through higher ranked awards? I know with the economy and so forth this would be difficult to implement as well. I think Championship Selection should Reflect Elimination Match selection, Where teams who might not have been the best go get in off the bat can have a second chance. Now, I'm not saying teams should literally pick other teams to go...but a system of "second chance" should be implemented. I also think team's should be asked to accept/decline entry to nats, and have runner-ups selected, so those who can't/don't want to go (I can't think of a single team who wouldn't WANT to go) can decline, or team's who have already gotten in through one way or another can open the slot for another team. I think that the number of teams allowed to attend should be increased, to fit the growth of teams across the US. This also opens more room for earning your way in. Well, that's just a few of my ideas. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|