Seniors floats to first place; is it rigged?


Carson Paul

Sophmore President Ian Ho working on float.

Senior: ( this message was provided by the wolfpacket since seniors did not have the guts to give their opinion). The float judging is rigged, but who cares? Seniors always win because it’s their last year, so if the judging process continues it keeps for a fair way. I mean our float was good, but not first place material. Our car was the thickest and smallest car in the history of cars. Our gas station looked like a tombstone and I’m pretty sure Lightning McQueen did not look that ugly in the movies. I liked how all the classes put stuff on the back of the float too, but because we knew we would win, we did not care to do the same. The underclassmen should not worry, when it comes their turn they will win. The homecoming parade is not even really a competition; it is more of a joke and some take it too seriously. It’s like, “Hey, we are doing so good guys, but who cares, we will not win.” Just to show how rigged the system is, we had some seniors sabotage our own float, and we still won regardless. On top of that, we did not have wood until the second to last day, so ours looked super rushed. But who cares, yet again. Also, Senior Springs was the best theme. Perhaps not the best float, but we were still really good.

Junior: To put it simply, the juniors were robbed. In no way was the expertly crafted “Al’s Toy Barn” on wheels deserving of last place. It may have been outdone in terms of pure spectacle by the seniors, and maybe even by the freshman and sophmores. But what the juniors were certainly not lacking was authenticity, something in today’s society that is sorely missed. Rather than relying solely upon the help of parents, like the freshmen admit they did, or on store bought assets, the juniors put their float together themselves.
Composed of hand painted cutouts of various characters from the “Toy Story” movies, the float did an excellent job portraying the franchise. The float was docked a huge amount of points for exceeding the height limit. This is ridiculous. The juniors should not have been punished for this, but rather rewarded due to the engineering prowess that’s required in order to build to such height. Rigged or not, the juniors should not have finished out in last place.

Just spitting facts, the sophomores’ breathtaking float definitely won this year with its amazing theme of Sophomores of the Caribbean. While some other classes may say that the use of store-bought items should bring us down to fourth place, they should first read the rules, which clearly allowed the practice in the float building. With a multitude of glorious items such as a fog machine, an actual guard dog, and the wonderful booty of our treasure, the float definitely showcased the sophomores’ preparation. The decorations, the effort spent in making our float (unlike fellow freshmen who had parents do the work), and the collaboration by the sophomores are all contributions to earning an unsatisfactory second place. Only one place behind seniors, their float did not deserve first place at the least. While it can be recognized that the seniors’ float was the top two, we can see that seniors only won due to the biased judging. The freshman did nothing but sit around while waiting for the three dads to finish their work and the freshman president just watched. On the other hand, sophomore president Ian Ho showed great abilities of control and leadership. The juniors tried their best even though their float was a mess, which is all that can be said for their float. We all know the float competition is rigged, since the seniors have been winning every single year despite other classes doing much better. Even though sophomores did not win this year, our float still won first place in the true system. If seniors win every year, then the actual winner is the one who gets second. Although the sophomores may be second on paper, the whole school knows that sophomores won.

Freshman: The freshman float was sabotaged from the beginning, especially with an unorthodox theme of Peter Pan. The rest of the classes received popular themes such as Cars, Toy Story, and Pirates of the Caribbean, which all have a trademark symbol. Peter Pan, on the other hand, was just irrelevant and ended up looking like a copy of the sophomores’. However, a question of work ethic still remains up in the air: from any onlooker, it was clear to tell the parents of the freshmen were doing most, if not all, of the work while the underclass students sat near the dumpsters eating pizza. For the few who did try to help out, they were usually not given any orders to fulfill. It is to be said that the sophomores and the seniors both deserved the top two rankings, but the float-building contest remains rigged in favor of the seniors every year. The root of the problem comes from the judges. There’s a clear pattern each year, but in the end all of this responsibility falls on the judges’ morals. The judges should choose the winners in an objective manner, and there are rules that they must follow. Therefore, assuming that the judges selected the winner using a set of rules and without bias, the results would surely be a lot more varied than they are now. That’s the question we must answer, are these judges following these guidelines and is the moral responsibility upheld?