|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Keep in mind getting into MSC itself with upwards of 260 michigan teams is very hard. And almost all of the teams getting into champs by qualifying at MSC generally deserve to be there.
|
|
#17
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
I see your point. However going in to a competition (especially a state championship) knowing that there is a 50% turnover of teams going to STL leaves a pretty sour taste in my mouth. Maybe I'll get used to it.
|
|
#18
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Quote:
It seems more unfair to me if a district sends 2x as many teams %wise. |
|
#19
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Quote:
![]() |
|
#20
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Quote:
Adding more teams to MSC stills send the same top teams, but dilutes one of the most talent rich events. |
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Quote:
Quote:
New England has 24 slots for 161 teams. That's 14.9%. MAR has 18 slots for 108 teams. That's 16.7%. Texas has 111 teams and four regionals, for 24 slots. That's 21.6%. Ontario has 113 teams and 5 regionals, for 30 slots. That's 26.5%! In fact, qualifying for the MI State Championship is harder than qualifying for the World Championship in Ontario. Only 23.3% of Michagan teams qualify for their State Championship. I think it's fair to say that the size of MSC could be increased without diluting the talent at the event. These numbers could change slightly as more rookies register, but they'll still show that it's tougher to qualify for the World Championship in Michigan than elsewhere. Last edited by AGPapa : 07-11-2013 at 16:30. |
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Those last 2 Texas and Ontario percentages are a little misleading. They are open regionals, not districts. Teams from other areas can win those slots.
|
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Quote:
Quote:
Concerned that the transition period to the district system is going to be more difficult to sell. It would be easier if it was possible to make it more consistent for all teams.That's true... but those teams are also allowed to travel to any other regional as well and earn slots there, further increasing their percentage. However, this is not true for teams in the districts. If they were to go outside their district and win, they lose a spot for the district. |
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Quote:
Eight non Texas teams qualified from Texas last year. Ignoring borders, around 15.5% of all teams qualify for Championship. |
|
#25
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Quote:
If we look at the number of districts, and the number of spots feeding to championships.. (I assumed 40 teams per district) FIM = 32/260 teams = 12.3% PNW = 24/80 teams = 30% NE = 24/180 teams = 13.3% MAR = 38/120 teams = 15% I have heard rumblings around Michigan of a need to add another district to support the number of rookie teams that joined this year. That will be 14 districts, about 280 teams, and a 11.4% TORC is currently waitlisted for both our events we wanted to attend. So yes, when you make it to MSC you are halfway there. You've eliminated the 200 teams you were capable of beating from the pool. Now all you need to do is finish the weekend better than average... That is easier said than done. One dose not simply walk into Championships through MSC. (but it is kind of exciting either way.) |
|
#26
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers from, but last I checked about a week ago, the PNW district (WA and OR) had 189 teams registered for 2014, which is 12.7% for PNW.
|
|
#27
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
As Jim and Jon put it last night, the district system is not meant to get more teams to champs, but to give the vast majority of teams who don't make it to champs a greater number of matches per season, or a greater return on investment. Keep in mind that at those 5 regionals, at least a few of the spots went to teams picked in later rounds that wouldn't qualify otherwise (although there are always exceptions). In a district system, this pretty much never happens. You have to be one of the best to get to champs. The 24th team at MAR champs, for example, was on Einstein this year.
|
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Quote:
29 slots were given out to teams (GSR did not have a Rookie All star). Of the 29 only 20 teams were from New England. Of these 20 teams only 18 attended the World Championship. Of the teams who came to New England events 7 of them qualified for the Championship. Of the 20 New England winners two of them double qualified (126 BOS winners and RCA & 2648 PTR winners and EI). The way I see it you could argue that NE should be getting 30 but if every district took what they originally had you won't fix the scalability issue. If anyone thought NE our any district would keep their original number they weren't looking at the reality of FIRST moving forward. Also looking at NE events in the past, our events have been home to many teams from outside of our borders such as Canada, New York, out the country, and many teams who traveled to New England over the years. Technically, New England will be sending the most teams we have ever sent to the Championship in 2014 which is something I am very excited about! |
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FRC Blogged - Standard District Points Ranking System More Info
Quote:
BrendanB - The one thing you didn't include in your analysis was the NE teams that qualified at events outside of NE regionals. I'm just curious where that number puts us. I would argue that those teams should count in your analysis because they are included in the total district spots in the current system. I personally need to try to remember that and I will try to remind myself of that when I start thinking "it's not fair..." It's never been about fair; it is about learning and inspiring. It is about life, and everyone knows that life is not fair. At least that's what my mom always told me. ![]() Last edited by MamaSpoldi : 07-11-2013 at 17:05. Reason: added a comment |
|
#30
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Quote:
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|