[FRC Blog] 2015 FIRST Championship (and beyond) Eligibility

[Bryan Herbst]

Originally Posted by Boe

Love the changes to the wild card system. If I'm reading it right teams that receive a wild card slot at an earlier event will also generate one if they compete later on right, or can wild cards qualifications not generate other wild cards?

Yes. A team that earned a wild card slot at a previous event has earned a spot at championships, and thus would generate a wildcard slot if they earned another spot at another event.

[MARS_James]

Echoing everyone else's statements about the changes, I think they are fair, and easily understood

Originally Posted by Boe

If I'm reading it right teams that receive a wild card slot at an earlier event will also generate one if they compete later on right, or can wild cards qualifications not generate other wild cards?

The way I am reading it ANYTHING that gets you to champs gets the wildcard slot so should make for some teams who are perennially "bridesmaids" finally making it.

I am not so sure about the RAS change though, I get why but how would you feel if you were a Rookie Team and get the Rookie Inspiration Award, and then there is no Rookie All Star, it is almost like the Regional telling you: "Aren't you cute playing in the sandbox, now stay off the jungle gym that is for the big boys" . Like I said, I get why just I think there are going to be some hurt feelings from rookies

EDIT:
Interesting to note that under the new system the entire finalist alliance at both Orlando and South Florida in 2013 would have qualified for championships

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by MARS_James

I am not so sure about the RAS change though, I get why but how would you feel if you were a Rookie Team and get the Rookie Inspiration Award, and then there is no Rookie All Star, it is almost like the Regional telling you: "Aren't you cute playing in the sandbox, now stay off the jungle gym that is for the big boys" . Like I said, I get why just I think there are going to be some hurt feelings from rookies

Depends what kind of mentality the mentors have. Teach your kids what's worth earning versus what's being handed to you if you're the only rookie at an event.

I think it's fair. I'd want to earn my award if I was on a rookie team again.

[orangemoore]

Originally Posted by MARS_James

I am not so sure about the RAS change though, I get why but how would you feel if you were a Rookie Team and get the Rookie Inspiration Award, and then there is no Rookie All Star, it is almost like the Regional telling you: "Aren't you cute playing in the sandbox, now stay off the jungle gym that is for the big boys" . Like I said, I get why just I think there are going to be some hurt feelings from rookies

It really isn't a change but going back to how the award was meant to be awarded and not always awarded.

Also there was an issue with the rookie awards at the Central Illinois Regional because there was only one.

[indubitably]

This is great news, would have been the edge 2338 needed in 2014 to make it.

I'm curious how long this system can be maintained.

[Taylor]

If the powers-that-be determine that they have no rookies eligible for the RAS, does that mean that regional sends 5 teams to CMP?

[orangemoore]

Originally Posted by Taylor

If the powers-that-be determine that they have no rookies eligible for the RAS, does that mean that regional sends 5 teams to CMP?

That is what it sounds like.

[PayneTrain]

I imagine virtually none of these changes come as too much of a shock to anyone. Allowing the full force of the wild card system to come into effect was an obvious result of an expanded championship. I'm sure this was always the end-game of the wild card system, it just would have generated too many bids if it didn't have all the proper qualifiers attached to it in the 2013/2014 season. It goes a long way to discontinue the idea teams can be underrepresented, and doesn't paint double or more blue banner winners out to be bad guys (not saying it should happen anyway, but it does).

The RAS changes are going to come with some apprehension but I feel there isn't a silent majority against the change. Until recently you could have made the case for RCA's to have the same kind of added criteria but I think in the last couple years the bar for that award has been substantially raised worldwide.

In my opinion, the new implementation of the waitlist is a long time coming anyway. There is a selection system for waitlisted teams at regionals that is more than first-come, first-serve, so why not for Championships? It's too important of an event to have it boil down to a fastest-finger competition; save it for the veterans trying to cram themselves into the Palmetto Regional

Big fan of all 3 moves.

[Jared Russell]

Prediction: There will be at least 5 times in 2015 where at least one wildcard slot vanishes due to the number of created wildcard spots exceeding the number of previously-not-qualified finalist teams. At least twice, you will see multiple wildcard bids go unused at the same event.

[pimathbrainiac]

I like the new wildcard and wait list changes, as they appear to be a bit more fair.
As for the eventual capacity overload, is one of the potential solution ideas moving the championship location? I'd love to see it back in Atlanta.
In all seriousness, approximately how long do we have until we run out of room in St. Louis, and simply can't do it there anymore?

[MrTechCenter]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

Prediction: There will be at least 5 times in 2015 where at least one wildcard slot vanishes due to the number of created wildcard spots exceeding the number of previously-not-qualified finalist teams. At least twice, you will see multiple wildcard bids go unused at the same event.

*Cough Cough* Silicon Valley Regional *Cough Cough*

[Patrick Flynn]

I'm wondering if there is anyone out there that will take these new rules into consideration when picking alliances?
Would anyone decline to stay on the opposite side of the bracket from a powerful 1 seed? Will competitions now be a battle for the finals with winning the event not being as important?
What does everything think?*

*i don't want to debate the ethics on making this decision.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by Patrick Flynn

I'm wondering if there is anyone out there that will take these new rules into consideration when picking alliances?
Would anyone decline to stay on the opposite side of the bracket from a powerful 1 seed? Will competitions now be a battle for the finals with winning the event not being as important?
What does everything think?*

*i don't want to debate the ethics on making this decision.

This has already happened and will continue to happen. It's also more beneficial to be the captain of your alliance than to accept an invitation. Teams are still going to try to win but they also have motivation to ensure a 2nd place finish over a hard fought semifinal loss to the eventual champs.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by Patrick Flynn

I'm wondering if there is anyone out there that will take these new rules into consideration when picking alliances?
Would anyone decline to stay on the opposite side of the bracket from a powerful 1 seed? Will competitions now be a battle for the finals with winning the event not being as important?
What does everything think?*

*i don't want to debate the ethics on making this decision.

This has been occurring since wildcards were first introduced. I've had a team ask me not to pick them since I was on the 'wrong side' of the bracket.

[waialua359]

HOF teams can now generate a wild card spot.
Does this mean that at every event we attend (most likely 3), we generate a wild card each time?

If so, that would be pretty neat!

The wild card we gave out at Dallas, turned out to be the 2014 Championship winner.