Chief Delphi
Page 4 of 8 < 123 4 5678 >
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Future First Championship News (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136491)

Botsup 09-04-2015 15:20
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Just called FIRST and was on hold a LONG time. Person I finally spoke to:

-Had never been to a single competition, let alone champs.
-Kept telling me this was great because it would be so much less expensive to get to champs for everyone (um...no).
-Had never heard of 254 or 1114, did not even know they were teams that I was referring to.
-Had no idea what VEX was.
-Sounded like they were frazzled from all the calls.

scooty199 09-04-2015 15:20
Re: Future First Championship News
 
This really is a bad way to get to the Districts -> Regional -> Worlds format.

Maybe I'm too much of a College Basketball fan, but I thought of this concept that I believed FIRST to be moving towards.

The Districts are like the conferences and what not.

The Super Regionals are the like the NCAA tournament regions. You have four of them.

A certain number of teams move on to what would be the deciding World Championship.

MattRain 09-04-2015 15:21
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnFogarty (Post 1468140)
The location choices are lnteresting. not sure it's going to save my team any money. Both Houston and Detriot are out of the question in terms of driving distance from SC. I miss having the championship in my backyard.
Now you know how the west coast feels. We haven't had a good location yet. Houston is still a 17 hour drive from Phoenix.

Cory 09-04-2015 15:23
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botsup (Post 1468539)
Just called FIRST and was on hold a LONG time. Person I finally spoke to:

-Had never been to a single competition, let alone champs.
-Kept telling me this was great because it would be so much less expensive to get to champs for everyone (um...no).
-Had never heard of 254 or 1114, did not even know they were teams that I was referring to.
-Had no idea what VEX was.
-Sounded like they were frazzled from all the calls.
Hilarious, yet sadly not surprising.

Bob Steele 09-04-2015 15:24
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon_L (Post 1468471)
This might be a good point to start some constructive discussion.

I'm also a fan of the district->district CMP->super regional->CMP concept. The only true concern I have with it is the amount teams will most likely have to spend in just registration costs for 4 tiers of events assuming they go all the way. If any one of those tiers (or more if FIRST wants to be nice) were free for teams it could work. Perhaps district CMP? 5k/year for the entire district model sounds fair. Meanwhile less populated areas still in regionals would pay the same amount with one less tier, dropping DCMP and just having a single regional with winners moving on to the super regional.
This is a great point... particularly for Districts..... Another level of qualification for District teams after playing in 3 events? and paying as if you had been in 2 regionals... Why not have Super Regionals for non-District teams and use the District CMPs as the "Super Regionals" for the teams in Districts? This would mean that all teams would go through a set of qualifiers to get to CMP. Right now... it is $5000 to enter and $4000 to play at District CMP...just like attending 2 regionals.

For Super Regionals... if a team qualified at a regional to go to Super Reqional they could go for the same cost.... 2 regionals would cost more..of course.

MikLast 09-04-2015 15:24
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botsup (Post 1468539)
Just called FIRST and was on hold a LONG time. Person I finally spoke to:

-Had never been to a single competition, let alone champs.
-Kept telling me this was great because it would be so much less expensive to get to champs for everyone (um...no).
-Had never heard of 254 or 1114, did not even know they were teams that I was referring to.
-Had no idea what VEX was.
-Sounded like they were frazzled from all the calls.
Sounds perfect.

waialua359 09-04-2015 15:25
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123 (Post 1468530)
You will only be able to attend one Championship and which one that will be will be geographically assigned.
I understand and read that.
One of the best things about FIRST is giving our students from a very tiny rural community, a chance to compete, collaborate and converse with the many great teams around the world.
Being assigned to 1 of the 2 events, would further limit our chances to do that, much the same way Districts have already prevented programs from competing at those events.

I feel very fortunate to have been able to compete at different areas across the US prior to these specific areas going to Districts.

Connor Mulkey 09-04-2015 15:26
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Is this the part where we elect Jared or Cory the FRC players union president, and then go into a lockout? The NFL, NBA, and MLB can do it. So if FIRST is truly a sport, why can't we?

OAXACA 09-04-2015 15:27
Re: Future First Championship News
 
I have a plan to show FIRST how upset we are: Let's just not go to champs this year. No one show up. You know what? No one just ever go again until we get this issue resolved!! :D

cgmv123 09-04-2015 15:28
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connor Mulkey (Post 1468549)
and then go into a lockout?
Employers (the leagues) lockout employees (the players). Employees go on strike.

Navid Shafa 09-04-2015 15:28
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connor Mulkey (Post 1468549)
Is this the part where we elect Jared or Cory the FRC players union president, and then go into a lockout? The NFL, NBA, and MLB can do it. So if FIRST is truly a sport, why can't we?
Nominations seconded.

waialua359 09-04-2015 15:28
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwnageNick (Post 1468537)
I think that would probably come off a bit selfish.. to deny a team a wild card slot to champs so you can go to both..
I see your point.
But I was looking at it from the perspective that Champs would increase 2 fold?
600 to 1200 teams? That's about 1/2 of the current FIRST participation numbers.

AdamHeard 09-04-2015 15:29
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123 (Post 1468552)
Employers (the leagues) lockout employees (the players). Employees go on strike.
We're not employees, we are customers. We all give FIRST a giant pile of money each year.

dodar 09-04-2015 15:29
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Navid Shafa (Post 1468553)
Nominations seconded.
All in favor, say "Aye".

MikLast 09-04-2015 15:30
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connor Mulkey (Post 1468549)
Is this the part where we elect Jared or Cory the FRC players union president, and then go into a lockout? The NFL, NBA, and MLB can do it. So if FIRST is truly a sport, why can't we?
ill be the only one on my team striking, the rest may not even know about this till next year... :rolleyes:

cgmv123 09-04-2015 15:31
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OAXACA (Post 1468551)
I have a plan to show FIRST how upset we are: Let's just not go to champs this year. No one show up. You know what? No one just ever go again until we get this issue resolved!! :D
Better plan: The two finalist alliances on Einstein delete all code from their robots (replacing it with a placeholder delay function). All matches would end in a tie and be replayed until a winner is declared. Since no robots would ever move, there will never be a winner of one match, let alone two different winners of two matches. FIRST will have little choice but to declare co-champion alliances, which is apparently what they want to do in two years anyway. (Please don't let it come to this.)

Brandon_L 09-04-2015 15:32
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1468556)
We're not employees, we are customers. We all give FIRST a giant pile of money each year.
Roughly 3k teams * 5k entry fee, not including the 6k rookie fee (is that still a thing? not sure) = $15,000,000
15 million per year, and rising
Where does it all go?
Nobody knows

KeeganP 09-04-2015 15:33
Re: Future First Championship News
 
How can we, the FRC community, best fulfill the goals of FIRST and FRC? Having fewer events with the best of the best, or more events where we have a mix of great and mediocre teams?

If we want to have people get excited about FIRST, and have people "tune in" (whether in person at an event, or online, etc.), do we want all the matches to be exciting (best of the best, even if there are fewer total teams) or do we want to have a ton of teams (and thus some not so great matches/"shows")?

Does having two champs, and twice the number of teams, lower the level of competition and excitement? Does that actually detract from the goal of exciting more people? Or does more events (more teams, but a lower level of competition) cause a greater impact and excite more people?

Personally, I feel that having a smaller world champs where the matches are all more exciting, and you can focus more on each team during the event would be more effective and exciting.

cricket66 09-04-2015 15:34
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysterE (Post 1468128)
Maybe it's time for the US to have 2 Presidents and split the country into 2 halves.

This makes as much sense as having 2 half robot championships.

International teams have to decide north or south competition.

Lets cut down on domestic travel and have 4 competitions E, W, N & S. This will reduce school travel costs.

This has not been thought through very well.

JeffersonMartin 09-04-2015 15:34
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1468556)
We're not employees, we are customers. We all give FIRST a giant pile of money each year.
$15,246,023 to be exact.

pastelpony 09-04-2015 15:34
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon_L (Post 1468561)
Roughly 3k teams * 5k entry fee, not including the 6k rookie fee (is that still a thing? not sure) = $15,000,000
Where does it all go?
Nobody knows
That's not including DCMP/CMP registration fees either.

efoote868 09-04-2015 15:35
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cricket66 (Post 1468564)
This has not been thought through very well.
Not to play devil's advocate, but you don't know that. We're just not seeing the opposing viewpoint in this thread.

Knufire 09-04-2015 15:36
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon_L (Post 1468561)
Roughly 3k teams * 5k entry fee, not including the 6k rookie fee (is that still a thing? not sure) = $15,000,000
15 million per year, and rising
Where does it all go?
Nobody knows
http://www.usfirst.org/sites/default...Financials.pdf

PayneTrain 09-04-2015 15:36
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123 (Post 1468560)
Better plan: The two finalist alliances on Einstein delete all code from their robots (replacing it with a placeholder delay function). All matches would end in a tie and be replayed until a winner is declared. Since no robots would ever move, there will never be a winner of one match, let alone two different winners of two matches. (Please don't let it come to this.)
dae 2soon http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibti...?itok=QfMs5Q96

If primary and secondary contacts of teams are organizing, that could be fun. I should talk to the secondary contact of 422. Wait, that's me... I'm in.

Brandon_L 09-04-2015 15:36
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pastelpony (Post 1468566)
That's not including DCMP/CMP registration fees either.
Or 2nd regionals, and in rare cases 3rd, ect.

meg 09-04-2015 15:37
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123 (Post 1468560)
Better plan: The two finalist alliances on Einstein delete all code from their robots (replacing it with a placeholder delay function). All matches would end in a tie and be replayed until a winner is declared. Since no robots would ever move, there will never be a winner of one match, let alone two different winners of two matches. FIRST will have little choice but to declare co-champion alliances, which is apparently what they want to do in two years anyway. (Please don't let it come to this.)
Sadly, there would still only be 3 matches. After all of the tie breakers in a match comes the "random" selector so FMS would just arbitrarily pick a winner. Who wants to see how random their random function actually is?

(I am absolutely not advocating for this. I think we, the community, need to find a way to resolve these issues without interfering with the students learning.)

bduddy 09-04-2015 15:38
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123 (Post 1468560)
Better plan: The two finalist alliances on Einstein delete all code from their robots (replacing it with a placeholder delay function). All matches would end in a tie and be replayed until a winner is declared. Since no robots would ever move, there will never be a winner of one match, let alone two different winners of two matches. FIRST will have little choice but to declare co-champion alliances, which is apparently what they want to do in two years anyway. (Please don't let it come to this.)
Actually, it would be a perfect preview of the new system: two "winning" alliances who never get to interact with each other.

Siri 09-04-2015 15:38
Re: Future First Championship News
 
1 Attachment(s)
Though I'm not personally as appalled as the thread standard (but I get it), I found myself wondering what this would've actually looked like. With all the talk of who you will and won't be able to play with, here's the last two year's worth of Division Winners and Finalists by which Half-World Championship they would've been at. ...Sort of. It's a rush job off TBA that relies on my geography skills. There are quite a few borderline teams--I gave PNW to Houston and was pretty random about our friends in Missouri-ish areas.

Travis Hoffman 09-04-2015 15:38
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuclearnerd (Post 1468470)
You know that that article has St. Louis as 2nd most dangerous right? We manage to chaperone thousands of kids through that city, and I haven't heard of any violent crime injuring FIRSTers yet (I hope I'm not mistaken).
Atlanta is #6. :rolleyes:

bduddy 09-04-2015 15:40
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knufire (Post 1468569)
Expenses
FIRST Robotics Competition ("FRC") 36,203,436

Wow, I'm informed...

cgmv123 09-04-2015 15:41
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by meg (Post 1468573)
Sadly, there would still only be 3 matches. After all of the tie breakers in a match comes the "random" selector so FMS would just arbitrarily pick a winner. Who wants to see how random their random function actually is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Game Manual Section 5.4.3
There are no tie breaker rules awarding additional MATCH points during Final MATCHES. If after two (2) MATCHES the ALLIANCES each have a win, a third MATCH will be played. Additional matches will be played if needed.
No tiebreakers this year. In previous years, a match tied after tiebreakers was considered a 'true' tie and replayed.

Quote:
(I am absolutely not advocating for this. I think we, the community, need to find a way to resolve these issues without interfering with the students learning.)
This. I will be very disappointed if the Einstein matches are anything but the best matches of the FRC season.

cgmv123 09-04-2015 15:43
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siri (Post 1468575)
Though I'm not personally as appalled as the thread standard (but I get it), I found myself wondering what this would've actually looked like. With all the talk of who you will and won't be able to play with, here's the last two year's worth of Division Winners and Finalists by which Half-World Championship they would've been at. ...Sort of. It's a rush job off TBA that relies on my geography skills. There are quite a few borderline teams--I gave PNW to Houston and was pretty random about our friends in Missouri-ish areas.
It won't be strictly geography. There will be an attempt to balance attendance numbers at both events.

pastelpony 09-04-2015 15:45
Re: Future First Championship News
 
I can honestly see this model taking the same route the Roman Empire did when it was partitioned into two empires; one decent entity split into two for the sake of "ease" with both resulting entities eventually severely declining into nothingness (though Byzantine took much longer to completely dissolve).

pwnageNick 09-04-2015 15:45
Re: Future First Championship News
 

Cory 09-04-2015 15:46
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123 (Post 1468579)
It won't be strictly geography. There will be an attempt to balance both events.
Where do you see that?

It says an attempt will be made to balance the number of teams at each event. That has nothing to do with competitive balance.

Anupam Goli 09-04-2015 15:46
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwnageNick (Post 1468581)
I would watch this.

George Nishimura 09-04-2015 15:46
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cricket66 (Post 1468564)
International teams have to decide north or south competition.
I think international teams would be assigned geographically as well, or used to balance the numbers.


Quote:
This has not been thought through very well.
It's almost certainly the opposite. A calculated decision that prioritises the number of teams over the sporting and cultural significance of the event.

Nemo 09-04-2015 15:48
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Please, no FRC Super Regionals.

Three Championship level events in one month is too many. It's too much of the following:
  • Adult helper vacation days
  • registration fees
  • trip payments by families
  • general exhaustion

3 Tiers is good:
Districts --> District Champs --> Worlds

cgmv123 09-04-2015 15:49
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory (Post 1468583)
Where do you see that?

It says an attempt will be made to balance the number of teams at each event. That has nothing to do with competitive balance.
His post had most teams going Detroit. Obviously, that won't be the case. (Post edited for clarity)

jman4747 09-04-2015 15:49
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman (Post 1468576)
Atlanta is #6. :rolleyes:
Hay now... I mean come on? How about that airport though right? #6 is better than #1-2! ;)

Carl C 09-04-2015 15:50
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo (Post 1468586)
3 Tiers is good:
Districts --> District Champs --> Worlds
My thoughts as well. As more areas move to the district system, many of the issues this change is trying to address will likely be less of a problem.

KeeganP 09-04-2015 15:52
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123 (Post 1468587)
His post had most teams going Detroit. Obviously, that won't be the case.
That post shows the winners and finalists of each division, and what region they would likely be assigned, had there been 2 venues in 2014 and 2013. There may well not be an even distribution of the winning teams from last year at the two venues -- but there would be an even distribution across the entirety of both championship events.

What the post shows, is that the strongest teams last year would have all been at Detroit, and thus the Detroit event would have been a stronger event than the Houston event.

Cory 09-04-2015 15:55
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123 (Post 1468587)
His post had most teams going Detroit. Obviously, that won't be the case. (Post edited for clarity)
But you can only balance it with fringe cases. You can't split half the Michigan teams between Houston and Detroit. You'd have to pick teams that are on the border of right between the two locations. You are going to see a competitive difference between the two events, at least until more locales get districts to help them improve that way.

Andrew Lawrence 09-04-2015 15:55
Re: Future First Championship News
 
While we're talking venues, the new Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara is awefuly nice...

smistthegreat 09-04-2015 15:56
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory (Post 1468591)
But you can only balance it with fringe cases. You can't split half the Michigan teams between Houston and Detroit. You'd have to pick teams that are on the border of right between the two locations. You are going to see a competitive difference between the two events, at least until more locales get districts to help them improve that way.
I, for one, welcome our new Ontario CMP "North" overlords.

Thad House 09-04-2015 15:57
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeeganP (Post 1468590)
That post shows the winners and finalists of each division, and what region they would likely be assigned, had there been 2 venues in 2014 and 2013. There may well not be an even distribution of the winning teams from last year at the two venues -- but there would be an even distribution across the entirety of both championship events.

What the post shows, is that the strongest teams last year would have all been at Detroit, and thus the Detroit event would have been a stronger event than the Houston event.
And I could tell you that would basically always be the case. Detroit would get Ontario and Michigan, plus many strong teams from NE and MAR, and many more.

Houston would get California and Texas as their strong teams, plus a good amount of teams from the south, and most likely the PNW.

Sorry if this hurts anyone, but Ontario and Michigan are stronger then California and Texas, at least in the tier right below the elite. Maybe when California and Texas go to districts this will change, because they do bring up the middle, but for now Detroit would probably have greater depth.

cgmv123 09-04-2015 15:58
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence (Post 1468592)
While we're talking venues, the new Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara is awefuly nice...
The roof it has is so nice you can't even see it, hear it, feel it or even be protected from the weather by it...

Arpan 09-04-2015 15:58
Re: Future First Championship News
 
From the perspective of a mentor for a team that has attended Champs once in our seven year history( back when I was a student):

Yes, the FRC World champs are a wonderfully inspiring thing for teams who attend - It is incredible to be able to play with 2056 in one match and try to stop 67's full court shooter in the next. Yes, it would be wonderful if more teams could attend, and yes, it is terribly expensive for teams on the coasts to travel to champs as-is.

However, splitting Champs into two drives FRC away from it's 'varsity sport for the mind' model and risks losing much of what drives at least my team.

My team's students are - and always have been- driven to be the very best.
Teenagers are competitive people. They don't want just want to play- they want to win. The drive to win is what pushes my team and my students to keep learning and improving, year after year after year.We find the best - teams like 254 or 1114 - and try as hard as we can to emulate them.

That's something you don't see in Science Olympiad or Debate team or any other "academic sport". It's unique to FIRST.

The reason that finals in St. Louis have the energy that they do is that, after all our weeks of work, we're finally going to see who the best of the best are.

Splitting champs will probably not impact anything quantifiable. The scores at the top across events might be similar. To a volunteer that visits Houston and Detroit, the events might even seem the same.

However, the opportunity to find out who's robot really is the best in the world and recognize them as champions will be gone and will take one of the most important intangibles that drives teams to succeed with it.

smart1 09-04-2015 15:59
Re: Future First Championship News
 
I don't speak for my team this just my opinion. Having Muscular Dystrophy and not being able to play sports, Frc gave me a way to compete, the whole sport for the mind thing. When I got go to atlanta as the driver in 2010 competing (well playing)along side the best of best was such a rush. But when I watched the finals (still can't believe 469 lost) That Inspired me to help my team build the best robots they can. Prior to 2011 if we didn't qualify at 1 regional we would get on the waitlist for champs. In 2011 my first year as a mentor we went to 2 regionals for the first time and won 10,000 lakes with 525 and 3642 at championships we got picked for the first time ever but got beat in the quarterfinals. The fact that to go championships we had to earn our way in gave the team drive, 2010 was the last time we didn't make eliminations.

lemiant 09-04-2015 16:03
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jared Russell (Post 1468257)
The ideals that are held by myself and by many of the longtime FRC mentors and volunteers whom I consider friends and colleagues are bigger than FIRST, and we will find (or make) another vehicle for them if we are forced to.
My thoughts exactly, Jared, thank you for putting them so eloquently. I've been a FIRST fanatic (both as student and mentor) for 7 years now, and I suddenly have no interest in returning for the 2017 season.

dlavery 09-04-2015 16:04
Re: Future First Championship News
 
I suspect that the full, complete extent of this story has yet to be revealed. ;)


-dave





.

:rolleyes:

Navid Shafa 09-04-2015 16:04
Re: Future First Championship News
 
I just got off the phone from lodging my first formal complaint. I was recommended to send an email as well, I will be doing so shortly as I wait for FedEx to come pick up our crate...

cgmv123 09-04-2015 16:04
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory (Post 1468591)
But you can only balance it with fringe cases. You can't split half the Michigan teams between Houston and Detroit. You'd have to pick teams that are on the border of right between the two locations. You are going to see a competitive difference between the two events, at least until more locales get districts to help them improve that way.
The events may not be equally competitive, but at least teams will have an equal shot at winning a half-championship numbers-wise!

To balance event numbers, FIRST may have to send teams to the Championship that's further away from them. (Houston is actually a few hundred miles farther than Detroit from St. Louis, but I suspect that due to the large concentration of teams in the Midwest and Northeast, Missouri teams will be sent to Houston to avoid overloading the Detroit Championship.) So much for reducing travel costs.

Eugene Fang 09-04-2015 16:05
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123 (Post 1468596)
The roof it has is so nice you can't even see it, hear it, feel it or even be protected from the weather by it...
No worries. It won't rain in California.

Siri 09-04-2015 16:05
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123 (Post 1468579)
It won't be strictly geography. There will be an attempt to balance both events.
By attendance, not by strength. Unless HQ intends to put FiM, Ontario, NE FIRST and/or MAR in Houston, this list doesn't change much. I put the Capitol Region and Illinois in Detroit (Missouri in Houston), but that would only move a handful.

EDIT: Yes, what everyone else said. Jeez, you guys are moving quickly. Also, that's "her post" [my post].

Yipyapper 09-04-2015 16:08
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Man, at least FIRST had the courtesy of waiting until I was done as a member of a team to ruin everything.

efoote868 09-04-2015 16:11
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yipyapper (Post 1468609)
Man, at least FIRST had the courtesy of waiting until I was done as a member of a team to ruin everything.
Quote:
We know there are lots of questions for us to answer. We will be working hard on many details in the months to come, and as that process takes place, we’ll share additional information, so please stay tuned.
The sky is not falling. The details are not settled. We don't have all the facts. Take a deep breath, it'll be OK.

Cory 09-04-2015 16:13
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468610)
The sky is not falling. The details are not settled. We don't have all the facts. Take a deep breath, it'll be OK.
One interpretation of that second quote is that "the details" amount to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

bduddy 09-04-2015 16:13
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlavery (Post 1468602)
I suspect that the full, complete extent of this story has yet to be revealed. ;)


-dave





.

:rolleyes:
Are you talking about the "what", the "why", the "how", or all of the above?

Siri 09-04-2015 16:14
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468610)
The sky is not falling. The details are not settle. We don't have all the facts. Take a deep breathe, it'll be OK.
Considering they've announced specific venues and dates, I'd say all the details people are upset about are probably settled. I'm in full agreement with the other statements, depending on what your definition of "OK" is. <Glances up at the sky.>

Also, Aye to that Jared/Cory for union president motion.

efoote868 09-04-2015 16:15
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory (Post 1468612)
One interpretation of that second quote is that "the details" amount to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
We know that FIRST through Frank has been very receptive to feedback, so I'm betting they will figure out how to incorporate this thread and positive ideas on how to make it better.

dodar 09-04-2015 16:18
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468616)
We know that FIRST through Frank has been very receptive to feedback, so I'm betting they will figure out how to incorporate this thread and positive ideas on how to make it better.
There isnt any middle room between both sides here. Everyone on here has been vastly against 2 separate championships. FIRST has already gotten venues and dates, which means these events are in stone and going to happen. There is no incorporation.

JohnSchneider 09-04-2015 16:18
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468616)
We know that FIRST through Frank has been very receptive to feedback, so I'm betting they will figure out how to incorporate this thread and positive ideas on how to make it better.
Well obviously they haven't.

Wetzel 09-04-2015 16:20
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dodar (Post 1468617)
There isnt any middle room between both sides here. Everyone on here has been vastly against 2 separate championships. FIRST has already gotten venues and dates, which means these events are in stone and going to happen. There is no incorporation.
When you refuse to look for solutions, all you will find are problems.

Carl C 09-04-2015 16:20
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468616)
We know that FIRST through Frank has been very receptive to feedback, so I'm betting they will figure out how to incorporate this thread and positive ideas on how to make it better.
The contracts have already been signed. If FIRST wanted to hear feedback, it would have been more helpful to have asked before the final decision was made.

efoote868 09-04-2015 16:21
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dodar (Post 1468617)
There isnt any middle room between both sides here. Everyone on here has been vastly against 2 separate championships. FIRST gas already gotten venues and dates, which means these events are in stone and going to happen. There is no incorporation.
The distribution of teams across events hasn't been announced. What I've read on this thread is that we're afraid of the Championship competition becoming less competitive through splitting of powerhouse teams.

What if it doesn't have to be that way?

What if the 2nd/3rd pick on each winning alliance, the wait-listed qualifiers and other teams are invited to one championship, and the alliance captains and 1st picks are invited to the other championship?

That seems to maintain the competitiveness while simultaneously including more teams.

dodar 09-04-2015 16:22
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetzel (Post 1468620)
When you refuse to look for solutions, all you will find are problems.
Well when FIRST gives up before trying...

Cory 09-04-2015 16:23
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468623)
The distribution of teams across events hasn't been announced. What I've read on this thread is that we're afraid of the Championship competition becoming less competitive through splitting of powerhouse teams.

What if it doesn't have to be that way?

What if the 3rd pick on each alliance, the wait-listed qualifiers and other teams are invited to one championship, and the alliance captains and 1st picks are invited to the other championship?

That seems to maintain the competitiveness while simultaneously including more teams.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JVN (Post 1468158)
"One of the important things about FIRST and maybe what separates us from other sports is that we're an inclusive organization we're about not about picking a winner at the expense of others but celebrating everybody's accomplishments and success."
I suppose you can dream that it will end up that way, but the quote from Don Bossi suggests otherwise...

dodar 09-04-2015 16:24
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468623)
The distribution of teams across events hasn't been announced. What I've read on this thread is that we're afraid of the Championship competition becoming less competitive through splitting of powerhouse teams.

What if it doesn't have to be that way?

What if the 2nd/3rd pick on each winning alliance, the wait-listed qualifiers and other teams are invited to one championship, and the alliance captains and 1st picks are invited to the other championship?

That seems to maintain the competitiveness while simultaneously including more teams.
Yeah, all the starters from the AFC/NFC champion teams go to SuperBowl A; whereas, all the benchwarmers from both teams goes to SuperBowl B. But the outcomes of both will decide who's the best.

Carl C 09-04-2015 16:26
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468623)
What if it doesn't have to be that way?

What if the 3rd pick on each alliance, the wait-listed qualifiers and other teams are invited to one championship, and the alliance captains and 1st picks are invited to the other championship?

That seems to maintain the competitiveness while simultaneously including more teams.
FIRST has already made it clear that teams will be assigned based on geography:

Quote:
Based on geographic location, teams from all four programs will be assigned to attend one of the events.

Each Championship will serve a still-to-be-defined geographic region in an effort to minimize travel distance and travel cost, while balancing team attendance at both events.
This is probably preferable over sending the 3rd picks from Michigan to the Houston Champtionship.

efoote868 09-04-2015 16:26
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dodar (Post 1468626)
Yeah, all the starters from the AFC/NFC champion teams go to SuperBowl A; whereas, all the benchwarmers from both teams goes to SuperBowl B. But the outcomes of both will decide who's the best.
Think NCAA vs. NIT

audietron 09-04-2015 16:26
Re: Future First Championship News
 
This year's game was the start of something different and in many peoples opinion, "aweful". I think the system of average qualification points is simply taking away from the excitement and competition. This is another level of everyone is a winner. Essentially this is saturating the competition with large amounts of qualifying teams and making it less inspiring and motivating to go to worlds. Several people have pointed out that teams that have been to worlds through winning an award or winning a regional makes them work that much harder next year to do better. After seeing the Poofs at worlds in 2013, it became a passion to go to worlds again and be able to make it farther yet. With more ability to make it to Einstein or simply get picked at worlds, just reduces the inspiration. Not being able to see half of the qualified teams that you may never see in person are now not around to be inspiring.
For some teams this is OK but for what seems to be the majority this is unacceptable.

ASmith1675 09-04-2015 16:28
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468623)
The distribution of teams across events hasn't been announced. What I've read on this thread is that we're afraid of the Championship competition becoming less competitive through splitting of powerhouse teams.

What if it doesn't have to be that way?

What if the 2nd/3rd pick on each winning alliance, the wait-listed qualifiers and other teams are invited to one championship, and the alliance captains and 1st picks are invited to the other championship?

That seems to maintain the competitiveness while simultaneously including more teams.
I would fear this as much or more than the alternative. This ends up separating teams that are most likely to be inspired, from those most likely be inspiring.

Not having a true champion is a problem, but not the biggest. I don't think teams would be nearly as excited about attending the "2nd level" competition. They would also not have nearly the opportunity to learn from the powerhouses (both outreach and engineering) of the world.

dodar 09-04-2015 16:29
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468628)
Think NCAA vs. NIT
Yeah, but the NCAA doesnt claim the NIT winner to be the best.

And also look at how many teams decline non-NCAA invites.

KeeganP 09-04-2015 16:29
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468623)
The distribution of teams across events hasn't been announced. What I've read on this thread is that we're afraid of the Championship competition becoming less competitive through splitting of powerhouse teams.

What if it doesn't have to be that way?

What if the 2nd/3rd pick on each winning alliance, the wait-listed qualifiers and other teams are invited to one championship, and the alliance captains and 1st picks are invited to the other championship?

That seems to maintain the competitiveness while simultaneously including more teams.
That only solves ½ the issue most people on here are discussing. What you propose effectively creates the NCAA tournament and the NIT tournament. Those going to the NCAA-FRC tournament will be greatly inspired and excited about what they see. Those going to the NIT-FRC tournament will almost certainly be less-excited, and they won't get the full "championship experience" because they won't get to see the best of the best teams compete.

The problems most of us seem to be having with this announcement are:

a) FIRST didn't ask teams what they feel may be the best course of action and instead effectively divided the community into North/South

b) Championships is no longer championships, which invokes the questions like "who really wins?" "Do we have enough volunteers?" "Is Championships really Championships anymore?" and dozens more

c) The general direction FIRST seems to now be heading is not what most of us envisioned FIRST should be heading in. FIRST is not always incredibly open with what their goals are and what their methods of achieving their goals are, and that has become a frustration for many over the past years.

(These are my opinions and may not directly reflect the thoughts of all others on this thread, but I tried my best to summarize.)

efoote868 09-04-2015 16:29
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl C (Post 1468627)
FIRST has already made it clear that teams will be assigned based on geography:
Right, but assigning all 1st place teams to the premier event will not get to 400 teams, so the supplemental teams can be assigned based on geography.

Point is that details are not set in stone, and I trust Frank to do right by us.

Alex2614 09-04-2015 16:29
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by audietron (Post 1468629)
This year's game was the start of something different and in many peoples opinion, "aweful". I think the system of average qualification points is simply taking away from the excitement and competition. This is another level of everyone is a winner. Essentially this is saturating the competition with large amounts of qualifying teams and making it less inspiring and motivating to go to worlds. Several people have pointed out that teams that have been to worlds through winning an award or winning a regional makes them work that much harder next year to do better. After seeing the Poofs at worlds in 2013, it became a passion to go to worlds again and be able to make it farther yet. With more ability to make it to Einstein or simply get picked at worlds, just reduces the inspiration. Not being able to see half of the qualified teams that you may never see in person are now not around to be inspiring.
For some teams this is OK but for what seems to be the majority this is unacceptable.
I've often wondered over the years if the current competition and championship model can be sustained. Most other high school sports don't really have such a championship model.

My solution: Everyone is in districts. Restrict access to champs to the "traditional" 6 teams (maybe even top 10 or 15). Build up district/region championships as a big important "championship" event. Maybe even expand the districts to beyond the geographic extent that they have now. Have a 200-300 team world championship. Move it to Atlanta or Indianapolis. Problem solved.

Rangel(kf7fdb) 09-04-2015 16:33
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Since the venues are already booked, what if we had FRC in one venue and FLL/FTC in the other. As I understand, FLL and FTC already don't have enough teams at champs. I know here in Arizona, we are only able to send a team to championships bi yearly for FLL(Not sure if this has changed). If FTC and FLL had their own venue, they could have more teams that go to their championship event so that it isn't so much of a problem. FLL and FTC have more representation and FRC keeps its world championships. What does everyone else think about this?

efoote868 09-04-2015 16:35
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeeganP (Post 1468632)
they won't get the full "championship experience" because they won't get to see the best of the best teams compete.
Nothing prevents teams or individuals from showing up to the championship event as spectators.

edit: I hope you all realize I mean FIRST rules - championship is free and open to the public.

jman4747 09-04-2015 16:36
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangel(kf7fdb) (Post 1468635)
Since the venues are already booked, what if we had FRC in one venue and FLL/FTC in the other. As I understand, FLL and FTC already don't have enough teams at champs. I know here in Arizona, we are only able to send a team to championships bi yearly(Not sure if this has changed). If FTC and FLL had their own venue, they could have more teams that go to their championship event so that it isn't so much of a problem. FLL and FTC have more representation and FRC keeps its world championships. What does everyone else think about this?
This I feel would be better to an extent. I think it should be combined with having districts everywhere as well.

Matt_Boehm_329 09-04-2015 16:38
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468638)
Nothing prevents teams or individuals from showing up to the championship event as spectators.
Except money, vacation time, and convincing a school district to allow a team to go to just watch

connor.worley 09-04-2015 16:38
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468638)
Nothing prevents teams or individuals from showing up to the championship event as spectators.
Except, you know, cost.

mwmac 09-04-2015 16:39
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl C (Post 1468627)
FIRST has already made it clear that teams will be assigned based on geography:



This is probably preferable over sending the 3rd picks from Michigan to the Houston Champtionship.
Now I am waiting to see how the 2017 Championship assignments will work in our favor monetarily. Will the trailer get dragged to Houston (1939 miles) or Detroit (1963 miles) vs. St. Louis (1626 miles)? Already counting the money Tators will save with this change...

Seems like a coin flip is in our future...

madhav 09-04-2015 16:39
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence (Post 1468592)
While we're talking venues, the new Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara is awefuly nice...
Do I get a free pair of pants?

Alyssa 09-04-2015 16:39
Re: Future First Championship News
 
"We are excited about the prospect of two Championship events, but understand it comes with its share of challenges and concerns from our Community. We value your feedback, and it will be helpful to us as we delve into the planning process in the coming months and years. Stay tuned for updates, and please continue to share your constructive thoughts with us as we move forward. Thank you!"

FIRST just posted this as a comment to the video on their FaceBook page...

KeeganP 09-04-2015 16:40
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468638)
Nothing prevents teams or individuals from showing up to the championship event as spectators.
Totally in agreement there in respect to the idea. The event is free and open to anyone to attend.

Sadly, for most teams getting to the venue is expensive, especially those coming from outside the US, or even the East/West Coasts. I don't doubt that some teams currently do attend champs even though they don't qualify, but I highly doubt that those paying to travel to the "weak" champs event will then turn around and travel back out to the "strong" champs event.

It's a great idea, and in theory it works well, but in reality there is a cost to going to championships, even if you aren't competing.*

*unless you live in St. Louis, or the immediately surrounding area

Landonh12 09-04-2015 16:40
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangel(kf7fdb) (Post 1468635)
Since the venues are already booked, what if we had FRC in one venue and FLL/FTC in the other. As I understand, FLL and FTC already don't have enough teams at champs. I know here in Arizona, we are only able to send a team to championships bi yearly for FLL(Not sure if this has changed). If FTC and FLL had their own venue, they could have more teams that go to their championship event so that it isn't so much of a problem. FLL and FTC have more representation and FRC keeps its world championships. What does everyone else think about this?
This is what I was imagining when I first heard about this. I assumed that since FIRST was spreading to more venues in St. Louis (Union Station), this was a way to seperate FRC/FTC/FLL Championships.

madhav 09-04-2015 16:42
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene Fang (Post 1468606)
No worries. It won't rain in California.
I think we need it though

Carl C 09-04-2015 16:43
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468638)
Nothing prevents teams or individuals from showing up to the championship event as spectators.
I have traveled to championships both as a participant (in 2011) and as a spectator (in 2014). Personally, I found the experience to be quite different and I am very happy to be coming as a participant again this year.

Matt_Boehm_329 09-04-2015 16:44
Re: Future First Championship News
 
I do have a question about how this will effect international teams. It would seem easier to sell attending THE World Championship than attending A Championship event to sponsors and administrators.

Nate Laverdure 09-04-2015 16:45
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1468638)
Nothing prevents teams or individuals from showing up to the championship event as spectators.

edit: I hope you all realize I mean FIRST rules - championship is free and open to the public.
As an aside: CMP isn't all that welcoming to the uninitiated spectator. Per a recent email blast, all attendees at the 2015 Championship (students, mentors, spectators, etc.) will be required to register in order to gain access to "activities."
Quote:
Attendee Registration: FIRST is requiring that all Championship attendees (students, mentors, spectators, etc.) register for the Championship event. Attendee registration grants participants access to activities and event transportation. We encourage you to register your team members in advance to save time when you arrive on-site at the Championship. You can complete attendee registration here: http://registration.experientevent.c...aultTeams.aspx

Alex2614 09-04-2015 16:46
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnSchneider (Post 1468332)
Every region gets districts... place some flex regionals in low population areas If needed. Progress teams to Champs from district championships. Low level teams get the "champ experience" at the district champs. High level teams still get to compete for a world title. Everyone wins.
Yes! I don't understand why that is so hard for many to understand! Why can't we build up our current regionals/region championships as a true championship experience instead of inviting everyone to huge world events? I would be perfectly happy if my team was in districts and we only advanced as far as our district/region championship, especially if it was built up as a huge "experience" event.

dcarr 09-04-2015 16:48
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Boehm_329 (Post 1468650)
I do have a question about how this will effect international teams. It would seem easier to sell attending THE World Championship than attending A Championship event to sponsors and administrators.
This concern is certainly not limited to international teams.

Kevin Sevcik 09-04-2015 16:49
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory (Post 1468545)
Hilarious, yet sadly not surprising.
Seriously? Have we actually stooped to harrassing some poor phone staffers at HQ and laughing about it? You guys do realize that FIRST has more programs than just FRC, right? And that not everyone at HQ is an ex-FIRSTer? I realize that in your bubble, 254 and 1114 are world famous and everyone should know them, but that's simply not true. I guarantee you I can find veteran FRC teams that have never heard of either of those teams. You know why? Cause they've never been to Champs. EDIT: As noted by JVN, it's unfair of me to imply Cory et. al. are assuming everyone should know about 254 and 1114. I retract that implication.

Okay, I haven't had time to read every post in this thread, because I work and I can't spend all afternoon keeping track of this, so forgive me if I'm not up to the minute on the debate. You can all mark me down as in favor of the change. Here's some comments:
  1. Can we please try to be adults about this? Calling HQ enmasse and harrassing staffers there seems childish. Especially on Thursday of district champs. Especially when people are trying to work out actual problems for getting to the 2015 Champs. HQ isn't going to change this policy over a single day of CD exploding. You may as well settle in for a long fight if you want to fight this. Meanwhile, stop causing problems for normal teams.
  2. No one is suggesting giving out awards in the KoP or trophies for participating in Champs. Suggesting FRC is moving to that is childish, stop. If you really think having two best in the world alliances instead of one is equivalent to participation trophies, I invite you to congratulate the Champs Finalists on their participation trophies.
  3. Really, complaining about two world champions not being champions is unpersuasive to me in general. MLB has the NL and AL Championships and then proceeds to a World Series that only involves US teams + the occasional Canadian team. Not-actually-world-championships are a time honored tradition in sports. If you think this will confuse the general public, you may need to get out more.
  4. It's laughable to declare that Champs was already deciding the top 3 teams in the world currently anyways, due to divisions. Einstein typically doesn't even have the top 4 alliances on it thanks to some divisions being packed.
  5. We already have multiple EI winners at Champs. I'm finding it difficult to believe that WFA winners and Chairman's winners are going to feel cheated because someone else is recognized for extreme excellence in the same year. Petulantly whining that now you're not the absolute best at spreading the message seems out of character.
  6. Champs is already pretty darned elite. About 33% of teams at Lone Star have EVER been to Champs before this year. I suspect this is fairly representative. You want to complain about not seeing all your favorite inspiring teams at Houston Champs? What about the 66% of FRC teams that haven't EVER seen these teams?
  7. OTOH, Champs is already watered down. Waitlist teams, 2nd picks. 2nd pick wildcards. Are we really pretending that Champs is the absolute best of the best? Super Regionals may have gotten it closer, but you'd still have 2nd picks riding tailcoats in.
Really though, it all comes down to the teams for me. I see a ton of people in here declaring how inspiring Champs is, how great it is to see all these elite teams. And 66% of Lone Star teams have ever had that experience. I suspect Frank and those behind this decision might be a little more concerned about inspiring that 66% than the top 5% of teams splitting hairs over who's the #1 all-time greatest ever in the world this year.

Steven Smith 09-04-2015 16:51
Re: Future First Championship News
 
This whole discussion and the problems it raises does put in perspective all my concerns with how Texas is going to be ready for the district model by 2017.

I know it is pure fantasy, but OK FIRST... we call your bluff. We'll put in the time to be ready for districts by 2017 like you asked... use the Houston venue for Texas state champs, and we can all go to worlds in Detroit ;) Deal?

Mike Martus 09-04-2015 16:52
Re: Future First Championship News
 
All I can think of is WOW! I never expected this.

I am waiting for someone to create a Yes or No poll (unless I missed it)?

Siri 09-04-2015 16:52
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangel(kf7fdb) (Post 1468635)
Since the venues are already booked, what if we had FRC in one venue and FLL/FTC in the other. As I understand, FLL and FTC already don't have enough teams at champs. I know here in Arizona, we are only able to send a team to championships bi yearly for FLL(Not sure if this has changed). If FTC and FLL had their own venue, they could have more teams that go to their championship event so that it isn't so much of a problem. FLL and FTC have more representation and FRC keeps its world championships. What does everyone else think about this?
I don't mind it, but realize that FIRST probably would've had to plan for this contingency in the negotiations. Getting the Worlds bid is a significant competition for cities (remember when STL won), and it's likely that FIRST's negotiations included verbiage that would make this difficult (even if they didn't mention FRC directly, which I'd imagine they did). This isn't a shot at FLL or FTC, I just wouldn't count on them being interchangeable.

MechEng83 09-04-2015 16:54
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botsup (Post 1468539)
Just called FIRST and was on hold a LONG time. Person I finally spoke to:

-Had never been to a single competition, let alone champs.
-Kept telling me this was great because it would be so much less expensive to get to champs for everyone (um...no).
-Had never heard of 254 or 1114, did not even know they were teams that I was referring to.
-Had no idea what VEX was.
-Sounded like they were frazzled from all the calls.
I don't have time to read through the 100 posts since this went up, but I'd give FIRST a pass on this one. They employ some local folks who aren't necessarily robot fanatics to answer calls and take care of administrative duties. These aren't decision makers or people who have the means to attend events around the world.

216Robochick288 09-04-2015 16:54
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangel(kf7fdb) (Post 1468635)
Since the venues are already booked, what if we had FRC in one venue and FLL/FTC in the other. As I understand, FLL and FTC already don't have enough teams at champs. I know here in Arizona, we are only able to send a team to championships bi yearly for FLL(Not sure if this has changed). If FTC and FLL had their own venue, they could have more teams that go to their championship event so that it isn't so much of a problem. FLL and FTC have more representation and FRC keeps its world championships. What does everyone else think about this?

On paper I like this Idea, but just like having 2 championship competitions it has issues. I know several teams that have FLL, FTC, and FRC teams going to worlds. If you split the parties, suddenly the teams have to deal with the overlapping mentors. It could end up being a real pain for teams, maybe even going down to telling highschoolers that they cant go due to lack of chaperones because you dont want to crush the excitement of LL kids that got to go to one location while you were assigned to the other, or crushing some poor LL kid's excitement saying "Sorry FRC is a bigger investment".

FIRST has certainly found themselves in a weird situation. I certainly hope that more things get fleshed out. I am feeling skeptical of the idea, and Im saddened by the saturation of "Everyone is a winner" in competitions as of late. I hope we arent traveling down that path. While yes, the competition is about inspiring, inspiring others isn't what most highschool students are in the program for.

FIRST, I love you dearly. You are the reason that I am alive right now. I know its hard to run such a giant program, but please hear out our concerns. I was skeptical about "woodie math" back with rankings in Breakaway, I dont like the removal of the win/loss, but I dont feel like splitting our family into areas is harsh.

It hurts bad enough in Michigan when I cant see teams from other states or countries (I was lucky enough my team traveled to Canada anyhow), but not being able to see half the competitive field- as well as my friends from there- hurts. I have worked with several teams via Skype, and I look forward to seeing them all at worlds... if they dont get put into another competition. I feel like this change will limit the amount of collaboration there will be with teams that are far away.

I also hate to boast about the state, because there are lots of other places that pump out good teams, but Michigan is crazy as far as team skill goes. It would be a right shame to see teams from Michigan, Canada, MAR and whatnot seperated from Teams over in Cali and Texas. You cant ignore the fact that you are separating some of the most insane competition we have ever seen.

Ill give you the benifit of the doubt. I need more information until I am willing to pass my ultimate judgement on this, but as someone whos only been around since 2009 (I suddenly realise this is longer ago than I was thinking it was) I am NOT a fan of what is on the table right now. I will continue to support FIRST through changing times. I know that FIRST is a huge competition and is paving the way for competitions like it in the future. There has to be a first time for everything, and you cant expect everything to be perfect, but I feel like there may be better options than what have been put out.

Im curious to see if we can get FIRST to explain its reasons behind 2 World competitions as apposed to super-regionals or anything else like that.

Anupam Goli 09-04-2015 16:55
Re: Future First Championship News
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik (Post 1468656)
Really though, it all comes down to the teams for me. I see a ton of people in here declaring how inspiring Champs is, how great it is to see all these elite teams. And 66% of Lone Star teams have ever had that experience. I suspect Frank and those behind this decision might be a little more concerned about inspiring that 66% than the top 5% of teams splitting hairs over who's the #1 all-time greatest ever in the world this year.
Excuse me sir, you've seemed to dropped this microphone of yours. Do you want it back? ;)

I think everyone's frustration is really at how we were all somewhat blindsided by this announcement. We knew that championships was evolving, but a change from 600 teams to "2 championships, multiple cities, region locked" is just a large step. There was no announcement of potential changes, no feedback or ideas bounced from the community. Had there even been a rumor of 2 championship events earlier, I'm sure we wouldn't be this upset at the moment. It reminds me of the backlash against microsoft when the Xbox One was first announced...


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 21:36.
Page 4 of 8 < 123 4 5678 >
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi