**FIRST EMAIL**/2013 Championship Registration/2013 FRC Season Dates and Deadlines/As

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Michael Blake

BTW... the 16 teams in the Texas District was told to me months ago before Lubbock was announced, so I think you're right about the increase to 24 teams.

Texas still had four regionals last year, with both Dallas East and Dallas West.

Originally Posted by IndySam

You can't imagine? I know you have a better imagination than that Oh and I never use the word fair.

I have quite an imagination, but with that imagination I can also imagine the gripes and objections that can be created to any system put in place.

Originally Posted by IndySam

My biggest objection is not to giving those extra spots out on a merit basis it's more about giving it to the runner-up alliance, I just don't think that would be the best way. How are they really anymore deserving of the spot than any other alliance that the regional winner defeated? They just had better timing.

I would much rather see them reward teams that did well during the qualifying part of the tournament. That would at least give some extra emphasis to doing well in qualifying.

If you're going to make that argument, you should probably disclose that 829 was the #1 seed at two events last year, but didn't reach the finals at either event. You pretty clearly have circumstances that would impact your opinion on this matter. It's only natural you would favor a system that rewards qualification success.

I can see and understand the logic behind that argument, but why is that any better of a system than finalists? Basing championship qualification off of a series of matches played with random partners and against random opponents? Hardly any less based on luck than where you fall in the elimination bracket.

And of course the finalists are more deserving than the other teams the winning alliance defeated. Are they "better" than the other alliances? Not automatically. But they are certainly more deserving. They defeated two opposing alliances in the elimination tournament. They won their matches. The same can't be said of alliances that fell in the quarter or semi-finals.

[Michael Blake]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Texas still had four regionals last year, with both Dallas East and Dallas West.

Yep... but I got the 16 slots number from someone pretty-high in the FIRST hierarchy... that's all I know regarding proposed in Texas.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

If you're going to make that argument, you should probably disclose that 829 was the #1 seed at two events last year, but didn't reach the finals at either event. You pretty clearly have circumstances that would impact your opinion on this matter. It's only natural you would favor a system that rewards qualification success.

Yes, 829 was a #1 and #2 seed but would not have received a wild card in either instance had the top unqualified seed been given a spot last year.