The Divisions...

[bigbeezy]

I really like this idea. My first year ('05) we were in Archimedes and I was told this was the "best" or the "hardest" division mainly because of Beast (correct me if i'm wrong they one 3 Championships in and short period of time from Archimedes). However each year we switched divisions. It turned out, until last year, that only Archimedes and Newton (or Galileo i could be wrong) had won on Einstein. The divisions need some sort of consistency so they can build a "history."

sorting by region would not be very fun, you'd just see the same teams again.

My idea on how to qualify to have a permanent division:
Division Champion
Division Finalist Alliance Captain
Chairman's Winner at Championships (chooses their division)
Any team over 5 years old can request a certain division, but not guaranteed with older teams getting priority.

what do you think?

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by dodar

You could do it by region: Southeast, Southwest, Northwest, Midwest, Northeast, Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, International

Then at Championships each year you randomly assign 2 regions to 1 field and then duke it off and then go to Einstein or whatever the final stage would be called lol

I would absolutely positively hate that system. I can't imagine having to play every year against 27, 33, 45, 51, 67, 68, 70, 71, 111, 469 etc year after year. Point of fact, we already get to see enough of the Michigan Teams! Don't force me to go through them all again in a division at Nationals!

[TheFish]

I think geography is definitely not the way FIRST should organize divisions; teams too often compete in Regionals close to home and it is much more exciting to be paired up with new teams at the Championships.

I think overall this is a great idea.

One of the biggest things to consider is Division-Pride. Under the current system, teams who don't make the Championships have no interest as to which Division wins Einstein, because they aren't tied to any specific one. If we had a system where each team, over time could get assigned a division then there would develop a much bigger sense of community and pride within that Division.

A big example are conferences within collegiate sports. Even though two schools might be big rivals, they still want their rivals to win so that their conference will get more credibility and they can take pride in something bigger than just their school.

My suggestion: during the first 4 times a team goes to the Championships, FIRST tries as hard as possible to make sure that they are put in all four divisions. After these four times you would be placed in the division where you performed your best (tie breakers being: winner/finals/semis, then to win-loss record, then seed).

Clearly there are risks to a system like this, of having one Division become stronger over time than the others... but as we all know, anything can happen in FIRST and teams get better/worse from year to year, so you never know how things are going to develop.

I'm curious to see what other ideas this thread comes up with.

-TheFish

[The Lucas]

Quick thoughts:
-You would have to start with the Original Teams and HOF teams since they qualify every year) and assign them to divisions. It would be good to have a mix of regions in these teams per division. These teams could act as division captains.
-Division Winners become a one year captains for their division.
-CA winners obviously become HOF teams and stay with their division.
-EI winner becomes a one year captain
-Some way to appoint permanent captians

-Each division captain submits an online draft list of their top 100 (arbitrary) registered teams to join their division that year.
-Computer program randomises a division draft order then randomises the captain order in each and assigns the top pick on that list. Moves to next division in the order (serpentine) makes a pick from a division captain in the that division. Repeats till a 100 (again arbitrary) teams are selected.
-Rest of the teams are randomly assigned
-This would probably even out the strength of the divisions in a decentralised manner, without anyone knowing who selected who or in what order.

-Captains are responsible for the pageantry and social events of their division. Division Hug anyone?

Issues:
-This is alot of power/responsibility for the captains, may make others feel left out. However this the only way to guarantee those teams will be there.
-Division winners need to be qualified for next year. (Should be that way anyway IMHO)
-Need other ways to appoint permanent captains
-Numbers of Captains in each division could become out of balance, as well as their regional alignment.
-Miss out on chances to be in division with different teams (anticipate that opposing captains will interact in friendly rivalries so that is perhaps better than being with them)

Thoughts?

[WJF2011]

I like this idea however it seems overly complicated, yet more fair.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

I like the idea of a draft. It would be fun to watch some of the experienced mentors (and aspiring students) try to snatch the best up and coming teams.

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

I like the idea of a draft. It would be fun to watch some of the experienced mentors (and aspiring students) try to snatch the best up and coming teams.

Kind of like this: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...49&postcount=8

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

Kind of like this: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...49&postcount=8

I never saw the original thread back then, but man, that has got to be the best idea I've read all season!
Imagine the hype for championships!!

[Brandon Holley]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

I like the idea of a draft. It would be fun to watch some of the experienced mentors (and aspiring students) try to snatch the best up and coming teams.

I definitely like the idea of a draft.

The popularity of drafts for professional sports has been skyrocketing in the past couple of years. Whether it was randomly assigned (out of a hat) or chosen by "captains" of sorts doesn't really change much. I think the idea of making an event out of the division selections would be very cool to do.



I also really like the idea of winners being frozen into one division. It would be really cool to know that perennial powerhouses need to "defend" their title year to year. There would certainly be some pride knowing your a team who has been locked into a division because of your performance.


-Brando

[Chris is me]

Don't let teams know whether they were "picked" or randomly placed and I'm all for it.

[Cory]

I hate the idea of being placed into divisions geographically. I want to play with all the teams we never get to see, not all the teams we ALWAYS see.

[TKM.368]

For any given year, let the previous four Championship Chairman's Award Winning teams serve as Division Captains for a draft. It's an added bonus for the CA winners and there would be rotation through the years as to who is Division Captain...

[Cartwright]

This may seem odd...

But, what if division were by major sponsor type. Like what if there was aerospace, automotive, military, construction, uncategorized, etc. It could get interesting; plus, it might be a way to get sponsors more involved...just a little competition perhaps? I think it would definitely give some sentimentality to the divisions. Think of all the hype. You might get completely GM alliances. Or perhaps the Big Three might join up. I think that would make the Championship very exciting.


There would have to be a process for teams with more than one type. Some sort of lead sponsor status or something. Also, some teams might go into an uncategorized category if they have lots of small sponsors.


just a concept.

- Jamie

[dtengineering]

To be fair, I've been to Atlanta once... so I'm probably not as fired up about this as those for whom it is an annual spring ritual.

However when I went, I had no problem knowing who I wanted to cheer for on Einstein. It had nothing to do with their division, and everything to do with the team and their machine. So, based on my one experience there, it seems to be that there are lots of great solutions here... but I just don't seem to see that there is a problem.

FIRST tried a few years back to play around with the match scheduling algorithm for regionals, reducing the randomness by pre selecting qualifying alliances based on team number.

I think we all agreed after that, that randomness was a good thing. So I'd be very careful about reducing randomness in Atlanta.... even a little bit.

Jason

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by dtengineering

FIRST tried a few years back to play around with the match scheduling algorithm for regionals, reducing the randomness by pre selecting qualifying alliances based on team number.

I think we all agreed after that, that randomness was a good thing. So I'd be very careful about reducing randomness in Atlanta.... even a little bit.

Jason

Jason,
I'm with you on this on. The only problem is that the divisions now weren't really random also.
I always joke with Mark from 358 that we never get a chance to be in the same division because of our no. and its not random.
Its also hard for us to be in the same division as 368 when the only consistent team between us attending is MOE.