Split Champs in '17 and '18

[Michael Corsetto]

Originally Posted by TDav540

This. I imagine they specifically put the second weekend in Detroit so MSC could stay where it currently is. I imagine we'll see a reshuffling of when DCMPs will be held; those going to Houston will be held Week 6, those in Detroit Week 7. The rest will probably be based on team location or the location of the regional where the team qualified.

While I agree they will likely do it this way, it really stinks for areas in districts that have to go to Houston. These areas have to pack districts into one less week, rush travel plans more often, etc. Overall, things gets more expensive for teams going to Houston, as well as the districts that support those teams.

Alternative strategy, CA waits to go to districts until there is a "West Champs" in 2021. Maybe we'll be waiting until then anyway...

-Mike

[TDav540]

Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto

While I agree they will likely do it this way, it really stinks for areas in districts that have to go to Houston. These areas have to pack districts into one less week, rush travel plans more often, etc. Overall, things gets more expensive for teams going to Houston, as well as the districts that support those teams.

Alternative strategy, CA waits to go to districts until there is a "West Champs" in 2021. Maybe we'll be waiting until then anyway...

-Mike

I imagine the largest districts (MAR, NE, and FIM) will be Week 7, like they are this year. All of them would probably attend Detroit anyway, based on their location. Smaller districts who can pack the events into 6 weeks (CHS, PCH, NC, and maybe PNW/IN) would probably go to Houston. With the exception of Indiana and PNW, who could go either way, those districts are are also relatively equidistant or closer to Houston. However, I don't disagree: I've never been on a planning committee, but I'm sure a smaller timeline makes planning more difficult.

[Liam Fay]

The biggest problem I have with the two champs system, and I'm sure this isn't unique to me, is the fact that whether you divide it East/West or North/South, 2056/1114/1241/33/27 will never again play 254/1678/118/148/987.

One of the greatest parts of being able to go to champs is being able to see the best of the best all in one place. While I don't necessarily think that only PLAYING half of the FIRST teams is a big deal (divisions are still just as hard to win), it definitely is a big deal not being able to MEET them.

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by Liam Fay

One of the greatest parts of being able to go to champs is being able to see the best of the best all in one place. While I don't necessarily think that only PLAYING half of the FIRST teams is a big deal (divisions are still just as hard to win), it definitely is a big deal not being able to MEET them.

I think even greater than seeing all of the power houses duke it out for a title (IRI notwithstanding) is getting to see all of the friends you've made through the years. Champs is a pretty good yearly chance to see them all again.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by JohnSchneider

The real conflict is with teams that do VEX...

This is a major issue on so many levels starting with teams that do both programs and finding volunteers.

Hopefully, there will be a possible solution soon that will address this.

[lynca]

Any updates from Championship about the process for selecting which championship teams attend ?

[ATannahill]

Originally Posted by lynca

Any updates from Championship about the process for selecting which championship teams attend ?

Announcement coming soon, supposedly.

[rwodonnell]

I think it's curious that they boxed themselves in a little by declaring that it would be based on geography in the original announcement. I'm not sure how other teams would react to this, but I think our team would welcome a "division 2" sort of experience until we were strong enough to graduate to the "division 1" field.

This sort of breakdown (by team strength if you will) would solve the obvious problems of "who are the world champions" (div 1 winner) and "dang we probably won't ever see 1114 and 254 together at champs again".

[EricH]

Originally Posted by rwodonnell

I think it's curious that they boxed themselves in a little by declaring that it would be based on geography in the original announcement. I'm not sure how other teams would react to this, but I think our team would welcome a "division 2" sort of experience until we were strong enough to graduate to the "division 1" field.

This sort of breakdown (by team strength if you will) would solve the obvious problems of "who are the world champions" (div 1 winner) and "dang we probably won't ever see 1114 and 254 together at champs again".

But then you have the problem of how to determine the strengths. And if you're wrong, then SOMEBODY's going to be unhappy. (And, to be honest, you can't get it right.) If you do it in-season, you're telling teams to book flights to X without enough time to do it. If you do it preseason, you'll get it wrong for the current season (just trust me, you will).


If you use geography, with some sort of allowance to change which event a team goes to (to get a mixture), then EVERYBODY's going to be unhappy roughly equally. That generally translates to less "ruckus" around that.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by rwodonnell

I think it's curious that they boxed themselves in a little by declaring that it would be based on geography in the original announcement. I'm not sure how other teams would react to this, but I think our team would welcome a "division 2" sort of experience until we were strong enough to graduate to the "division 1" field.

This sort of breakdown (by team strength if you will) would solve the obvious problems of "who are the world champions" (div 1 winner) and "dang we probably won't ever see 1114 and 254 together at champs again".

I would wait until the official announcement is released on how they plan to split up the teams for the 2 events.
For many, the decision to not want to go to the other one instead, will be primarily based on finances/logistics rather than the teams they want to compete with.
If the event is 45 minutes away from my hometown, I cant why any team or school district would allow travel to the other champs due to cost.
After speaking with many teams this past weekend, this seems to be the primary issue for them which makes sense.

For our team, cost to go to Houston is much cheaper than flying to St. Louis. But given the chance, we will choose St. Louis and Detroit the following year, because we do VEX. If we have teams qualifying for VEX Worlds, we would elect to skip Houston since its planned for the same weekend.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by rwodonnell

I think it's curious that they boxed themselves in a little by declaring that it would be based on geography in the original announcement. I'm not sure how other teams would react to this, but I think our team would welcome a "division 2" sort of experience until we were strong enough to graduate to the "division 1" field.

This sort of breakdown (by team strength if you will) would solve the obvious problems of "who are the world champions" (div 1 winner) and "dang we probably won't ever see 1114 and 254 together at champs again".

This also doesn't address the complaints of not being able to see 254, 1114, etc. at a Champs you're attending.

[bdaroz]

I look at the geography in 2 simple views....

First, "X" Championship is close to me and decreases my travel/lodging time/cost/complication.

Or, neither championship is close enough to me to make a significant difference.

For the former the cost/hassle savings would dictate the championship I would want to attend, and I'd be a bit miffed if I got forced to go to the other one for some reason.

For the latter, the decision on which we would want to attend may come down to schedule (perhaps the one taking place of the students' spring break), or what other teams may be attending (seeing other teams we may know, look up to, or have a relationship with).

Either way, some subset of teams are going to be unhappy, it's just a matter of how many, and what severity.

[rwodonnell]

But then you have the problem of how to determine the strengths. And if you're wrong, then SOMEBODY's going to be unhappy. (And, to be honest, you can't get it right.)

If the event is 45 minutes away from my hometown, I cant why any team or school district would allow travel to the other champs due to cost.

This also doesn't address the complaints of not being able to see 254, 1114, etc. at a Champs you're attending.

I could be wrong, but I feel like all these problems are solvable with the same system.
1. Allow teams to opt in to whichever division they want
2. Sort teams that don't declare for one or the other using some point system that includes historical results, team size or budget.
3. Don't let 254, 1114, etc. choose. (That's a joke...)

So it really doesn't solve the last problem of all the great teams at one championship (with those wanting to see them opting in there as well) unless they somehow cooperate to choose that one.

But, it does introduce the idea of divisions, and if this is really simulating the sports world, that's somehow the direction we need to go. I mean, can you imagine Notre Dame playing Local Yokel U. in football? Or Duke thrashing Faber College in basketball?

Just tossing it out there...

[Pault]

Originally Posted by EricH

But then you have the problem of how to determine the strengths. And if you're wrong, then SOMEBODY's going to be unhappy. (And, to be honest, you can't get it right.) If you do it in-season, you're telling teams to book flights to X without enough time to do it. If you do it preseason, you'll get it wrong for the current season (just trust me, you will).


If you use geography, with some sort of allowance to change which event a team goes to (to get a mixture), then EVERYBODY's going to be unhappy roughly equally. That generally translates to less "ruckus" around that.

I really don't buy this argument at all. Seriously, when was the last time you heard someone say they didn't want districts because of the district ranking system?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Pault

I really don't buy this argument at all. Seriously, when was the last time you heard someone say they didn't want districts because of the district ranking system?

I don't understand how you can connect what I'm saying to the district ranking system. If you care to explain, then I'll care to respond.


But if it has anything that involves teams making FLIGHT reservations <1 week before CMP, you bet your boots that it'll be a non-starter. 2 weeks is pushing it as it is. Hotel reservations? HAH! At least those can be held by FIRST...