Clash of Objectives.

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by Sam_Mills

To be inspired by the act of competing, do you not have to be competing for something? Even if only bragging rights, there's little glory in winning a half championship. The OP says the act of competing should be enough to be inspirational, and I contest that with no real winner, there is no real competition.

Going to quote myself because I don't want to type it all again:

Originally Posted by efoote868

Is a regional win today worth less today because there are more regional competitions and more teams winning them? Is a district win today worth less because there are more districts?

Is a championship win 10 years ago worth more or less because a larger percentage of teams qualified? Can you even tell me who won the championship event 10 years ago?

The championship event has never been about hosting the most competitive robots all under one roof. Every year for my entire FRC career (and this year included with an expanded field), there has been a thread about the best teams not to make it to the championship event that year. If the goal was to get the best competition, the structure for invites would be different.

Winning an event with 400 teams is a HUGE accomplishment, on par with winning any championship event in previous years. Having two sets of winners, in my opinion, does not diminish the achievement in the slightest.

However under this new format there are solutions to get the final co-champions to play against one another. If that is the singular concern, I would argue the fix is trivial.

Having read the majority of the posts in other threads, I think that is not the only concern and I think other concerns are more difficult to address, such as allowing Michigan teams to mix with Texas teams in a reasonable/fair way. Bringing the winners of the North and South together does not address that in any way.