|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Quote:
|
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Quote:
|
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Quote:
|
|
#19
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Quote:
|
|
#20
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
It's mind boggling to me that FIRST doubled their need for volunteers and then went and further caused a need for 50% more volunteers per event by making 6 divisions.
Not to mention the fact that the level of competition in the southern half Champs is going to be just atrocious. I'd gladly trade 2 matches for 25% deeper divisions. |
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Quote:
|
|
#22
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Quote:
Perhaps FIRST will choose to move some teams from the North down South. That may help a little. |
|
#23
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Quote:
It looks like SSR will still have ~100 waitlist spots? Some in the community do expect NSR to have a deeper competitive field than SSR. -Mike |
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Agreed, but that's assuming the seeding bracket is the same as it has been the past couple of years. (excluding recycle rush that is)
|
|
#25
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
That's true. It could even very well be 6 alliances for each division/event. In this case the best* 2 alliances would generally find themselves in the finals.
Last edited by Rangel : 17-08-2016 at 18:26. |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
6 divisions -good.
Round Robin --OK. May make it harder for a lower seed to upset a higher seed by fluke or exceptional 2 match effort. Division pairs--NO. Should judge each of the 6 divisions separately. "Spread the wealth" a bit. Compatible with the round robin playoff structure. I believe it will be EASIER on the judges. The Pairings are very artificial and for judged awards only so they don't make any sense to me. Yes it will cost a few more medals. Wild cards-THANKS. I wonder if there would be a positive effect by spreading wildcards down the Alliance captains in order after the Finalist teams. Last edited by Big Ideas : 17-08-2016 at 18:31. Reason: added thought |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Subdivisons - Wish they would do the reverse, matching up subdivisions for alliance section but having awards based on subdivisions.
Wildcards - So... less wait-list slots available for mid-level teams now and more 23rd/24th ranked teams getting to worlds? |
|
#28
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
It really stinks that they are getting rid of a lot of north Champs wait list spots. As a team who has 8 waitlist 'tokens' next year our shot at Champs through the waitlist is much much smaller now.
If the goal is really to have more new teams come to Champs shouldn't waitlist slots be prioritized over wild cards? |
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Quote:
If my team couldn't impress the judges enough to win a particular award at a regional, why should we bother at championships? Perhaps with the judges spread around a bit more, they'll target regional/district winners rather than trying to visit all 150 teams in their area. |
|
#30
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [FRC Blog]2017 Updates
Quote:
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|