|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: [FRC Blog] Team Advancement, 2017 Progress, and History Patches
Would one more EI winner be one less team qualifying by points?
|
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog] Team Advancement, 2017 Progress, and History Patches
Yes, each region is given a number of qualifying spots for Championship proportional to their representation within the overall team count. From there each region gets to choose how to allocate spots based on the guidelines set forth by FIRST. As such if a team decides to give out the maximum number of spots within a given criteria, it would then reduce the number of spots available via qualification by points.
|
|
#3
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog] Team Advancement, 2017 Progress, and History Patches
I am going to use Indiana as an example of hypothetical real quick so humor me:
Indiana has 9 slots for championships. 4 slots can be used by the winners of the district championship (3 alliance members and a potential back up) 1 Chairman's Award 1 Rookie All Star 1 Engineering Inspiration Award. Leaving us 2 slots left. However 868 and 5484 are going to Queen City and if they win the competition or Chairmans/EI then those two slots go to them. What if there would have been a 3rd team who traveled out of state and won their way to championship? I am sure FIRST would let them all go but the rules right now don't say what happens if the number of qualifying teams exceeds the number of slots. Also I think the above answers why Indiana can't have 2 EI winners |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog] Team Advancement, 2017 Progress, and History Patches
Looks like PNW is staying the same except for taking the number of Dean's List Finalists from 6 to 5 -- not sure why.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|