Best Team by State

[robochick1319]

I hate to sound like a kill-joy, but I find this whole discussion to be slightly pointless. There will never be a way any of us can agree on the order or rank of teams. Even if we develop ranking systems, there are discrapencies in the results. Furthermore, there are circumstances relating to awards and regionals that cannot be explained.

After 7 pages of posts, it seems clear that the "best teams" are usually chosen off of whims, biases, or general perceptions. What is worse, we seem to be comparing teams of different ages! A team that has won a lot in the past, but has been falling in glory over the past 5 years is often put above a team that has explosive and tremendous success in their short existence.

I wish I could see more discussion of current successes, rather than older reputations. As horrible as it might sound, we should be asking, "What have you done lately?"

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by robochick1319

I hate to sound like a kill-joy, but I find this whole discussion to be slightly pointless. There will never be a way any of us can agree on the order or rank of teams. Even if we develop ranking systems, there are discrapencies in the results. Furthermore, there are circumstances relating to awards and regionals that cannot be explained.

After 7 pages of posts, it seems clear that the "best teams" are usually chosen off of whims, biases, or general perceptions. What is worse, we seem to be comparing teams of different ages! A team that has won a lot in the past, but has been falling in glory over the past 5 years is often put above a team that has explosive and tremendous success in their short existence.

I wish I could see more discussion of current successes, rather than older reputations. As horrible as it might sound, we should be asking, "What have you done lately?"

Which is partly why this discussion is so interesting. Everyone has different criteria and reasoning. This leads to facts about teams that others did not know becoming more common knowledge.

(Plus, not to be a jerk but if you find a discussion pointless don't participate... (not that I am discouraging your posts or opinions, I actually agree with them for the most part))

[robochick1319]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Which is partly why this discussion is so interesting. Everyone has different criteria and reasoning. This leads to facts about teams that others did not know becoming more common knowledge.

(Plus, not to be a jerk but if you find a discussion pointless don't participate... (not that I am discouraging your posts or opinions, I actually agree with them for the most part))

It is somewhat funny that when a person says "not to be a jerk", they usually follow with a somewhat rude comment. But I do understand what you mean. I didn't mean to suggest that the whole discussion was pointless (and I apologize if it came off that way). I was merely suggesting that the quality of the discussion could be better. For instance, people could provide concrete examples or legitimate statistics to show their opinions as opposed to simple speculation.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by robochick1319

It is somewhat funny that when a person says "not to be a jerk", they usually follow with a somewhat rude comment. But I do understand what you mean. I didn't mean to suggest that the whole discussion was pointless (and I apologize if it came off that way). I was merely suggesting that the quality of the discussion could be better. For instance, people could provide concrete examples or legitimate statistics to show their opinions as opposed to simple speculation.

Well, it wouldn't make much sense to say "not to be a jerk", or, "no offense". then say something nice...

[robochick1319]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

Well, it wouldn't make much sense to say "not to be a jerk", or, "no offense". then say something nice...

Lol well that is true. However, it is not necessary to precede such negative comments with promises of positive intentions. I'm a big girl; I can handle just the comment.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Lee Reid 3136

An excellent point. I hadn't even thought of 122 mainly because I'm a rookie, i haven't been around that much and they didn't really strike me as that good of a team the little I saw them this year.

They won the Chairman's Award at VCU, and they didn't strike you as "that good?"

[sgreco]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

They won the Chairman's Award at VCU, and they didn't strike you as "that good?"

This sort fo brings up a good point, some people are looking for all around qualifications for greatness and others are looking at performance on the field. To a rookie member who was presumably just looking at robot performance, although 122 was good, I can agree that this year some teams were on higer competitive level. The conversations are interesting because everyone has a slightly different percenatge of each factor that weighs into a teams accomplishments.

[Lee Reid 3136]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

They won the Chairman's Award at VCU, and they didn't strike you as "that good?"

*facepalm* Forgot able that... and I was thinking a bit more in the terms of robot performance. Taking in to account the Chairman's award...I don't know who I put in the top spot...1086 and 122 would probably be top two. 1522 in third and 422 in fourth. Beyond that I don't know, maybe 1676, they're from New Jersey but they pretty handily cleaned up the Virginia Regional.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Lee Reid 3136

*facepalm* Forgot able that... and I was thinking a bit more in the terms of robot performance. Taking in to account the Chairman's award...I don't know who I put in the top spot...1086 and 122 would probably be top two. 1522 in third and 422 in fourth. Beyond that I don't know, maybe 1676, they're from New Jersey but they pretty handily cleaned up the Virginia Regional.

I started writing a post about several Virginia teams and their histories. But I don't want to divert this thread further. You should do a little research into what Virginia teams have done at other regionals/championship and the history of teams like 612, 384, and 1731.

[ttldomination]

Originally Posted by robochick1319

I hate to sound like a kill-joy, but I find this whole discussion to be slightly pointless. There will never be a way any of us can agree on the order or rank of teams. Even if we develop ranking systems, there are discrapencies in the results. Furthermore, there are circumstances relating to awards and regionals that cannot be explained.

After 7 pages of posts, it seems clear that the "best teams" are usually chosen off of whims, biases, or general perceptions. What is worse, we seem to be comparing teams of different ages! A team that has won a lot in the past, but has been falling in glory over the past 5 years is often put above a team that has explosive and tremendous success in their short existence.

I wish I could see more discussion of current successes, rather than older reputations. As horrible as it might sound, we should be asking, "What have you done lately?"

What I find funny is that we'll go on for a while about a team in a specific state, and then a member from that team will post about how their team isn't actually the best.

Of course we'll never actually agree. But that's the point of discussions. That you enjoy talking about things and maybe butting heads with someone. That's what all of the "What's next year's game going to be" and "Who will win worlds" threads are. Just speculations based on biases and likes.

- Sunny