An in depth look at the Michigan State Championship

[Gary Dillard]

Originally Posted by Carolyn_Grace

I do not believe there's a waitlist based on previous year's experiences. You can only attend MSC based on the current year results.
217 qualified for MSC because they are ranked 32nd in the state.

You can see the full rankings here: http://firstinmichigan.org/FRC_2013/...13_season.html

I was referring to THE Championship, not the Michigan Championship. 217 has apparently cleared the Championship waitlist, which they would have been able to get on early since they didn't go last year.

[Adam Freeman]

Originally Posted by Ronnie314

I dont mean this in an "cocky" way but I do feel that our full court shooting is as good or better than HOT's FCS. Just a personal opinion maybe but number wise it shows.

I'm really not trying to call you out...but, I'm just wondering what numbers do you have that shows that?

Max Teleop OPR would say we have a 51 to 33 advantage in scoring/match. That data was spot on with our actual teleop scoring contribution/match @ Troy.

I know you guys are really good...and any FCS on the opposite alliance scares the crap out of me...so hopefully if we are in the same match, we end up on the same side.

Honestly, I hope that we never attempt a FCS all weekend. I doubt that will be the case, but we have plans that will hopefully be more conducive to elimination style play.

[Adam Freeman]

Originally Posted by Jared341

I predict that the winner will not come from the #1 seeded alliance.

I believe that 3 out of the 4 years of MSC, the winner has come from the #1 alliance.

- 2009 - 217/67/65 - #1 alliance
- 2010 - 1918/469/2834 - #1 alliance
- 2011 - 33/67/70 - #2 alliance
- 2012 - 469/67/830 - #1 alliance

If I had to make a prediction, I would say whatever alliance 469 is on, will be the winner.

[Carolyn_Grace]

Originally Posted by Gary Dillard

I was referring to THE Championship, not the Michigan Championship. 217 has apparently cleared the Championship waitlist, which they would have been able to get on early since they didn't go last year.

Gotcha. I was confused, as this was a thread about MSC. Sorry about that.

[Joseph Smith]

Just to clarify, team 3539 has not yet utilized the feeder station. At both of our events, we've been scoring discs from the ground, averaging 3-6 loads per match. However, with the likely increase in shooter accuracy at MSC, we feel that there will be matches where there aren't enough discs on the floor for us. We're looking to begin utilizing the feeder station for the first time at MSC.

[nikeairmancurry]

Originally Posted by Adam Freeman

I believe that 3 out of the 4 years of MSC, the winner has come from the #1 alliance.

- 2009 - 217/67/65 - #1 alliance
- 2010 - 1918/469/2834 - #1 alliance
- 2011 - 33/67/70 - #2 alliance
- 2012 - 469/67/830 - #1 alliance

If I had to make a prediction, I would say whatever alliance 469 is on, will be the winner.

Well since 67 has been on three out of four of those winning alliances, I would like to put my money on HOT. Isn't 67 the only team to be playing in the finals all 4 years?

[kwotremb]

Originally Posted by Ronnie314

I dont mean this in an "cocky" way but I do feel that our full court shooting is as good or better than HOT's FCS. Just a personal opinion maybe but number wise it shows.

I think a lot of teams feel this way here and there. Hey I feel that we 3414 are better than some of the teams on here, but I also feel some very good robots where left off, even just from honorable mentions: 3641

Originally Posted by Adam Freeman

I'm really not trying to call you out...but, I'm just wondering what numbers do you have that shows that?

We have this proof that we are better, our max OPR (50.5 from Livonia) is better than other cycle teams on the list, 27, 1189, 3656. Our average OPR will put us ahead of some others as well. Plus a finalist and district winner is nothing to hold back either. Truthfully with our history and capabilities at the start of the season, its just an honor to be mentioned on the same playing field as some of these teams.


Overall these are always great to read and bring up great points and always get close to what will actually happen. I think that 469 is the team to beat right now and I have a feeling that they have the inside track to the #1 seed, with 33 being right behind them. I'm still hedging on the bet that there will be no tall full court shooters in the finals. Then again there will be some good ones available for teams like 33 or 469 to pick the second time around, and we all know what that could mean....

[FIMAlumni]

Just for fun... Assuming FIM current rankings are used to accurately show team rank...
Alliance,Captain, First pick, Second pick
#1 33, 469, 1189
#2 2054, 2474, 3234
#3 1718, 862, 68
#4 1918, 2959, 314
#5 3656, 245, 67
#6 27, 3618, 2619
#7 3414, 2851, 3641
#8 70, 1684, 3539

Honorable mentions to missing teams, 1701, 2612, 2000, 51, 217, 573, 326, 1025, 910, 2771, 494, 1023, 2337, 503

[RonnieS]

Originally Posted by Adam Freeman

I'm really not trying to call you out...but, I'm just wondering what numbers do you have that shows that?

Max Teleop OPR would say we have a 51 to 33 advantage in scoring/match. That data was spot on with our actual teleop scoring contribution/match @ Troy.

I know you guys are really good...and any FCS on the opposite alliance scares the crap out of me...so hopefully if we are in the same match, we end up on the same side.

Honestly, I hope that we never attempt a FCS all weekend. I doubt that will be the case, but we have plans that will hopefully be more conducive to elimination style play.

Our scouting data base was where I have information from. But yes I agree with the not shooting full court all the time, agree 100% with you and feel the same for us. I was more referring to the fact that we weren't even on the list. But I do want to have a match with 2 FCS.

[nikeairmancurry]

Originally Posted by Ronnie314

Our scouting data base was where I have information from. But yes I agree with the not shooting full court all the time, agree 100% with you and feel the same for us. I was more referring to the fact that we weren't even on the list. But I do want to have a match with 2 FCS.

At Bedford, there was a match with 326 vs 910 and 503...

[Link07]

Would be interested in seeing this type of analysis for MAR champs as well

[qzrrbz]

Originally Posted by nikeairmancurry

At Bedford, there was a match with 326 vs 910 and 503...

And there was one with *all* of 326, 910, 469 v 33, 3302, 3357 (match 40). What a shootout!

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by Adam Freeman

I believe that 3 out of the 4 years of MSC, the winner has come from the #1 alliance.

- 2009 - 217/67/65 - #1 alliance
- 2010 - 1918/469/2834 - #1 alliance
- 2011 - 33/67/70 - #2 alliance
- 2012 - 469/67/830 - #1 alliance

If I had to make a prediction, I would say whatever alliance 469 is on, will be the winner.

Yep. And I still think it won't be the #1 seed who wins

[Dragonking]

Originally Posted by FIMAlumni

Just for fun... Assuming FIM current rankings are used to accurately show team rank...
Alliance,Captain, First pick, Second pick
#1 33, 469, 1189
#2 2054, 2474, 3234
#3 1718, 862, 68
#4 1918, 2959, 314
#5 3656, 245, 67
#6 27, 3618, 2619
#7 3414, 2851, 3641
#8 70, 1684, 3539

Honorable mentions to missing teams, 1701, 2612, 2000, 51, 217, 573, 326, 1025, 910, 2771, 494, 1023, 2337, 503

Alliance 3 all the way!

[Chris Hibner]

Originally Posted by Jared341

Yep. And I still think it won't be the #1 seed who wins

Ok, Jared, you have to let us in on your thought process. Your posts have me interested.

There's one reason why I think the #1 seed might not do it this year: the field is so even that many (if not most) of the matches will be a crap shoot. The schedule will be important and there's a decent chance of a surprise team being the #1 seed.