Re: Future First Championship News
 

No, it's just easier to endure if you know that it's temporary. I think that's part of the problem: for all we know for sure, it's permanent. But we hope it's temporary.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

You make some fair points. I was probably stretching it with Kyle Hughes, (we had a match with 27 last year at it was a lot of fun. She was a very impressive drive coach), but I wouldn't say that 90% of teams "don't know anything about team 254".

And if not for meeting all of these great people, how exactly are these teams getting inspired? Is it just the fancy lights and the arena? Is that all it takes to inspire someone to become an engineer? I think we can aim a little higher.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I had this great idea and posted it in another thread and only one or two people have commented on it and I'm just dying to know what other folks think. Since this thread seems more active and I'm very impatient, I'm putting a link here in hopes of getting some feedback on my idea for improving the new "two championship" idea. So here it is.

If there's even a tiny bit of interest in this I have a whole 'nother post (ready to post but I didn't want to seem too hyper, which I know I now am so what the heck) with my analysis of what it will cost FIRST (somewhere between $500,000 and $1,000,000) and why.

I mean we're a bunch of "engineers" (OK, I'm actually a lawyer, but I just engineer solutions with words instead of stuff or code), why aren't we all over the place with solutions for this? I thought the "preparing for the town hall" thread was the place to do that but it seems folks would rather hang here and spout opinions than actually propose a lot of ideas (there have been some). Well, I had one, what do you think of it?

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I think it is a great idea. But I'd rather see the following (some teams have restrictions on how much school students can miss and other restrictions).

Assuming all districts (or mostly all districts). A world championship and a "US Open" (similar to what FLL does). Send some teams to one and some to the other based on certain criteria.

Maybe that is the winners on the field and Chairmans/ei/ra-s to one event, and all the other wild card/district points teams to the other.

Maybe it's just the alliance captains of the winning alliance and Chairmans/ei go to one and the rest go to another.

Or some other combination. Have one "real" world championship and have one more of a FIRST festival or "World Open" style.

Either that or put everyone in districts and go back to only inviting 6 teams from each district championship. But I'm liking that idea less the more I think about it.

I think FIRST has outgrown one venue. It is impossible to do an 800-team championship. But 400 teams just doesn't fit the size of FRC anymore. We have doubled in size since I joined 8 years ago. I think what I mentioned above is a reasonable solution. I've seen a number of people on here advocating for that.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I think a lot of people just skimmed the post. I know I did, initially.

It sounded like something that's already been posted, about having the winning alliance from the earlier event attend the later event to compete against the winners from that event. That's probably why I skimmed it at first.


Here's the #1 problem with having teams attend both events. It's not funding (though that's nice to get some help with). It's "time off". For both mentors and students, doing an extra event means taking extra time off of work or school, which in some cases may not be possible. There are ways to work around this, yes--but they involve sending partial teams, both of students and of mentors.

As for all the regional winners...There are 56 regionals and 5 DCMPs this year, and expect those numbers to grow (until some folks start admitting that they have to go district). 61 events, and if I read you right, that's either 2 or 4 teams per event going to both. 122 to 244 teams attending both--that's easily a quarter of each event, and possibly over half. That's not a small number. Then you gotta transport robots and team members. Now you add in the HoF and Legacy teams (7 of the latter, and something like 20 of the former). You're talking a third of the event is the same, minimum. A THIRD. Maybe two-thirds.

I don't think that that's a viable option, honestly. You've got at least a couple more semis in the caravan with the fields there, you've got 1400+ extra round-trip flights to book, and you know that those teams aren't going to just want 12 people (HoF teams gotta man their displays), so they'll have to bring the rest of the team or as many as they can manage on their own funding which may or may not be adequate... On top of arranging for the time off of work and school.

Don't get me wrong, I like the general idea of having a group of teams attend both Championships, but I would suggest instead having it be the HoF teams (in force, with or without their robots), the Legacy teams (same condition), the winners of the earlier event, and the entirety of the Conference presenters. Maybe include some of the higher-ranking teams at the earlier event (let's just say the division winners and/or division finalists). Maybe let the FRC community have a vote on a certain number of robots to get a Wilder Card to go to both championships. It's a smaller group, but probably has a bigger impact.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Thanks for the input! Here's my analysis:

As you say, there were 56 regionals this year, and 5 DCMPs. Assuming a few more districts are created, in a year or two there might be 8 DCMPS and maybe only 44 regionals? Is that reasonable (I don't know how many regionals typically disappear when a District is created, I'm assuming 4 but let me know if that's off). In a couple more years there might be 10 Districts and only 36 regionals? Maybe fewer?

So with no overlap, with two teams from each regional and DCMP qualifying for my "double champs ticket" that would be between 122 (61 events) and 92 (46 events) teams qualifying that way, plus the HoF and Legacy teams (you say 27, so we'll go with that). We could even leave out the HoF and Legacy teams (many of those will get a double ticket anyway by winning something).

However, it won't be that many, because some of the same teams will be winning or finalist captains at multiple regionals, and some of those are also HoF teams (e.g., this year, Team 359 would have gotten a "double ticket" 3 ways - captain of winning alliance in Hawaii and Australia, and HoF; but with the new arrangement, they might have elected to stay AC of the #2 alliance at IE, rather than accepting the invitation of the #1 captain, and gotten a ticket that way too if they ended up winner or finalist). With more districts, this multiple qualification will decrease some. Let's say that about 20% of the total slots would be filled by teams that already have a ticket. No wildcards here! (However, these teams may elect to skip a 2nd or 3rd regional if they know they can go to 2 champs instead, so duplication may decrease. This is hard to predict but someone looking at the winners this year could maybe make a better estimate.)

So that leaves about 95-120 teams that would get a "double ticket". Half of these (well, +/-) will be "Region A" teams that get to also go to the Region B Championship, and vice versa. So about 50-60 teams from each region that would otherwise go, will get "displaced" by a 'double-ticket' team. With 400-team regionals, that means 50-60 fewer waitlist teams, and each regional would have maybe 90-100 of these elite teams (depending on whether a larger or smaller number could afford to make the extra trip), and 300 "not-so-elite" teams. A pretty good balance for inspiration of ALL teams, I think - just as "inspiring" (if top-caliber teams are where you get your inspiration) as the 2014 400-team champs, no?

What would this cost FIRST? Well, they would lose the registration fee for the teams that got displaced by the double-ticket holders, so about 50 x $5000 for each competition, or a total of about $500,000 (but they could get it back by increasing the total size of each championship to 450). If FIRST gave each team $5,000 toward their travel and hotel costs, that's about $1,000,000 total, to create what I think would be a really awesome experience for ALL of the teams attending both events. The teams that have earned a Top Spot would get 2 championship experiences, with all (or most) of their top competition at both (or at least at one or the other), and the ability to inspire 600 other teams in total (300 at each event).

FIRST could get whatever they are getting out of having two championships (more teams able to go, less travel distance/cost for many); the cities would get what they have bargained for (maybe actually more); the top teams would have what it seems they are looking for (top competition, to be able to inspire and be inspired by ALL of the best, to see their opposite-region buddies, etc.); the other teams would not lose out on the inspiration provided by top teams in the 'other region' and more of them could go - yet they could still aspire to becoming a "double ticket" team themselves. And the championships couldn't really get too stacked one way or the other, since a "double ticket" (DT) team could not eschew their "own" championship to go to the other. (I guess there could be an agreement that all DT teams from Houston would go to Detroit, and no DT teams from Detroit would go to Houston, making Detroit into the stronger competition - or vice versa - but I wonder if that would/could actually happen? They could implement some kind of swap, where a team from Region A had to agree to go to Region B before one could actually go from B to A - and vice-versa - as has been proposed in the basic swap idea. But here there would also be MORE top teams at both, not just different ones.)

$1,000,000 seems a small price for FIRST to pay for this much awesomeness.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

That strongly depends on the region. If the Capital region (MD/VA, possibly WV if they're interested) goes district it's 2 regionals. Indiana replaced 2 regionals with 3 districts. On the other hand, if TX goes district, they lose 4 regionals; CA would lose SEVEN. MI lost 3 when it made the move. HI, Israel, and Australia would lose one apiece. 6 Districts created, 13 Regionals disappeared.

Yeah, I think you're off slightly. OTOH, long-term, 4 is more realistic. (If MI was just now switching, I'd really hate to think how many events they'd have.)


There's something you're missing in the cost, BTW. I hinted at it already, but somehow the robots have to make the trek between the Championships for the double teams. 100-120 robots have to go between the two (you know, because there are 100-120 double-ticket teams). In crates. Shipping and drayage costs will need to be donated or otherwise paid for. (Did you know? At one time, every robot had to be shipped to every event--and FedEx donated the shipping. Now the FedEx donation no longer covers that, so it's just to Champs, maybe one or two special cases.) That's probably 2-3 semis for those robot crates. Think about that--that's not exactly cheap.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Oh, yeah, I thought of shipping the robots, then forgot about it again. (And yes, I do remember when they shifted to "bag & tag" - that was when we started having to get shipping exemptions every year, and I'm the one who handles that! And this year, since we went to two regionals, we had to pay to ship our 'bot home from Oahu, even with the 2-free-legs covered by the exemption.)

What DOES it cost to ship a robot crate overland in the U.S.? (I figure ours is more expensive because it has to fly.) You're right, that is something that I would think FIRST would have to cover.

I was thinking more like about 80-90 double-ticket teams; they could make it a lottery from among those who qualify and want to go (if enough want to go). Then the next year any qualifying team that didn't go the prior year would get preference, and so on.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Actually, we qualified 4 ways this season giving 3 wild cards. You don't have to be an alliance captain to give a wild card as long as you win the event.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Hi, Glenn. I was talking about qualifying for a ticket to both championships under my "double ticket" system. It's kind of a complicated scheme I came up with for solving some of the problems cited on CD with the new "2 championship" arrangement. In my plan, only the alliance captains of the winning and finalist alliances would qualify, so the one where you were a first pick would not have gotten you a "double ticket" (only the two where you were alliance captain + HoF status.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

OK, I understand now.
I'm not sure I would implement such a system to give out wild cards only as an alliance captain.
We have been fortunate to have been an alliance captain often in recent years. Those that are familiar with the role, understand that the 2 driving forces to selecting partners is optimizing your alliance while limiting the extent in which the other alliance is better than yours. Giving out a wildcard should not be influenced by me choosing to be an alliance captain vs. accepting a higher seeds selection.
In the case of the Week 1 IE regional, we weighed our options on whether to accept or decline and create our own alliance. Because the #1 seeded team had planned to do what I described above, it would have been scorched Earth if we had declined.
Ultimately, we felt our best chance was to accept and the wildcard was given based on our HOF status to a very good finalist alliance, specifically Team 3250 who is worthy of participating at Champs.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

How? So many teams are deserving of HOF currently, and yet only one can be added at a time.

Two things have been happening annually in FRC:
1. More teams are added every year.
2. Earning CA at any level gets more difficult.

I've already been called out once by stating this, but I stick with its truth: some current HOF teams would not earn the contemporary Regional/District CA, much less HOF status.

Acknowledging two HOF teams per year (as long as they continue to receive the same benefits) will increase the communities awareness of things that contemporary HOF teams accomplish, and provide more teams with the chance to be inspired by them and potentially earn their level of respectability.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Bull. Ask if any of the teams from Michigan, MAR, New England, or PNW feel their Chairman's Awards have been devalued by giving out multiple at their championship events. The answer is a resounding no.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Connor
Thank you for the clarification. And I do understand your points. I will add this; this is not a surprise decision on the part of FIRST. It is a surprise announcement to us. While it may be semantics to some it really isn't. I think FIRST HQ has more planning involved in this than anyone is really realizing in the heat of the moment. I am not sure we are all privy to the 'big picture' yet. Someone else pointed out that there was a time when the game wasn't played as a 3-man alliance and coaches and mentors quit over that. That was before my time but I personally believe that it has been a great thing. It has given my team the opportunity to play against and with several of the elite powerhouse teams. Forgive my asking but were you involved in FIRST when that particular switch was made? Did you see it as a good change or a negative one? If you were around, you survived it and can survive this too. If you weren't around, I guess the question is can or do you want to survive this change to continue to inspire your students through this vehicle we call FIRST?

Qbot2640
FIRST is about inclusion not exclusion. (sarcasm alert) If we are going to reduce the number of teams then 2900 (or so) of us should just quit right now and let the same 100 or so elite battle it out every year for the number one spot (end sarcasm). Goodness knows my team is not one of the top 100 elite and may never be yet slightly more than 50% of my team alumni are majoring in STEM fields (and no, these are not the ones who just knew they were going to be engineers before they became part of my program). I kind of thought that was the whole point though, to inspire students who might not otherwise investigate/pursue STEM careers to reconsider their choices.

AGPapa
In the hope that I am reading this incorrectly I am going to ask for clarification. What exactly are you trying to say? I agree that it would be inspiring to meet some of these greats but we can be equally inspiring within our regionals and districts. I have personally seen it happen.

Also, as a side note. For all those still decrying the Houston choice, I would say come and join us at Lone Star to see how things have changed since 2003. I wasn't there and understand that it was...less than ideal...but that's been 11 years ago and much has changed since then. Come on down in 2016 and see how much.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I'm saying that champs is inspiring because of these people. If we remove half of these people champs will be less inspiring. Creating a second event isn't more inspiring because there will be less of these great people.

Basically, a lot of people in this thread are saying, "Champs is so inspiring! We should invite more teams!" without explaining what makes champs inspiring and if those qualities will still exist if the community is split.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Will there be less inspiring people?

Or will there be more people inspiring there, who we haven't collectively discovered?

Perhaps there will be more opportunity for upcoming inspiring people to step out of the shadows of others.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Most sports with a "Hall of Fame" do not have hard rules that exactly N players be enshrined each year. Instead, they try to maintain an objective bar, and the precise number of new Hall of Famers varies from year to year (within some min/max guidelines).

Re: Future First Championship News
 

AGPapa,

I understand what you are saying but I think I am more in agreement with Carolyn_Grace. As stated previously my team has had the opportunity to compete with some of the elites. Some were incredibly inspiring...others not so much.

As an example of Carolyn’s reference to people coming out of the shadows: Four years ago I had two team members that were best friends. They played robots with me for three of their high school years (we founded our team the year they were sophomores). Even though they worked hand-in-hand and side-by-side it seemed that student A always outshone student B. Much of that was due to their personalities. After graduation A went to one major university while B went to another. And low and behold, once B was out of A's shadow he just...flew. All the things that were overlooked in him were now plainly visible just because he had the opportunity to shine in his own right. Now here we are four years later, A is currently working as an engineer and B finished his BS in Physics in 3 years and is now pursuing a BS in Mech Eng. Both are successful in their own right. Isn't it possible that there are teams who are equally as inspiring as the elites but are overshadowed by them?

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I think at this point it's important to look back and understand what exactly caused some (many) people to be very upset with this news, while others are either less certain on their side or like it. This is my interpretation, when I tried my best to step back from everything I dislike about it and see it from farther back.

It starts with FIRST's vision: "To transform our culture by creating a world where science and technology are celebrated and where young people dream of becoming science and technology leaders."
And their mission statement: "Our mission is to inspire young people to be science and technology leaders, by engaging them in exciting mentor-based programs that build science, engineering and technology skills, that inspire innovation, and that foster well-rounded life capabilities including self-confidence, communication, and leadership."

At it's most basic, FIRST aims to inspire students to go into STEM fields. There are obviously many ways to do this. One way is through engineering challenges.

But FRC wasn't created to be an engineering challenge. It's in it's name, FIRST Robotics Competition. It's in the way FIRST describes it, sport of the mind. That was the issue with Recycle Rush: it was more of a challenge than a sport. That is the issue with the split champs: it is more suitable for a challenge than a sport. That is the issue with having more than one champs and more than one winners: it's no longer a competition.

A challenge pushes teams to do the best that they think they can do. A competition pushes teams to do better than the best that they think other teams can do. Often, a competition is necessary to complete a challenge. Consider the space race--would we have landed on the moon nearly as soon if the Cold War hadn't been raging? On the other hand, Curiosity landed on Mars without the need of a war (or the threat of one).

What is my point, then? Challenges and competitions can both push people to do their best. They can both lead to incredible results. They can both inspire students. But they're very different. They attract different people. They inspire differently.

When they said "change is coming," looking back on it, it could be interpreted to say FRC is turning away from being a sport to becoming a challenge. This is the decision FIRST has to make, and the one that we're divided on. Should FIRST continue to try and change our culture by making FRC more like a sport, or by turning it into an engineering challenge? Should the "C" in FRC stand for competition or challenge?

Re: Future First Championship News
 

To add to that even more, try competing on a yearly basis for more than a decade against teams like 27, 33, 503, 548 etc for Chairman's. You are pretty much in a holding pattern year after year waiting for them to win worlds to get out of your local region because they are so well established and have done incredible things for so long. Because of the district system, you need to beat all of them to get out of your region.

I'm happy they're so incredible, but I stand with the other person who said there are a lot of deserving teams out there and 2 Chairman's per year would be a nice remedy.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I mostly agree with your analysis between the differences between challenges and competitions, but what I don't agree with is how splitting champs into two events automatically places FRC into the challenge category, completely taking away the competition.

It's STILL a competition. FIRST/FRC has never said that they are about ONE winner. In fact, every year we have THREE winners. If we truly wanted the best of the best of the best to win, then perhaps we shouldn't call the second and third robots on Einstein winners...

Re: Future First Championship News
 

After considering this for a significant period of time, I'm come to the conclusion that, in my opinion, FRC still stands for competition. Follow me through the end:

District competitions still crown one set of champions. So do district championships and regional competitions. These are still competitive events, and make up the majority of the events in FRC. Are they the goal of the FRC super-elite? Not necessarily, but they are still an integral part of the FIRST Robotics experience, and I would easily call these competitions.

Does not having a single, world champion alliance make that big a difference? To some, for sure, but I still think having six or eight champions is nearly no different from four. Think about the Einstein finalist from the last season: sure they didn't beat the eventual champions, but I could easily imagine a world where that alliance squeaked out a F3 win. So two champion alliances doesn't bother me from that perspective: it still is a competition.

I agree with the idea that FIRST is moving toward a challenge-based game series rather than sports. Whether this is good or not is entirely up to the individual. But I still believe it is a competition. We still have two alliances competing, even if only loosely this year. We still name winners. We still aim to score the highest, instead of just achieving a time or a number. If the GDC ever makes the game end at a certain score, or stop the match at a certain time once the goal is achieved, then maybe we will have to consider FRC a challenge instead of a competition. But for now there still is an element(s) of competition, and I treat it as such.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Perhaps poorly thought out/worded. It's not that there aren't tons of deserving teams out there. It just feels inconclusive, what if one region becomes/is stronger than the other? Maybe this won't happen, i'm not sure.

There is a big difference here... Districts isn't the final stage here. It's also not what I was saying. My gut reaction was that previous winners accomplishments would be losing value due to more awards being given yearly, not that teams winning would feel like their win is cheap.

Then again as we know winning becomes harder and harder each year, maybe after a few of the double award years winning the award at the event will have been harder than championships now.

After some further thought multiple HOF teams is probably not an issue.

This is also separate from chairman. All three teams have to work together to get the win. Still hasn't been a year where one team can 100% solo carry.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Jared,
love this post!!

Why not have N no. of teams each year receive the CCA if they deserve it based on a criteria set forth by FIRST?

Re: Future First Championship News
 

This isn't a bad idea though I think they would have to stop having CCA's get auto bids into champs each year. As the number of teams with auto bids would potentially increase at too large a rate to keep that privilege.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Eric, I see your concern.
With the direction that FIRST is going increasing the venue capacity and/or having more than 1 venue, I could see it not being a problem, at least for now.

Karthik did some no. crunching on behalf of the HOF teams earlier this school year, where the majority of the HOF teams have qualified anyways without the status in recent years.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

This defeats the whole purpose of the World Championship...How good would one feel if they were to win one of the two championships?

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I think this becomes more manageable as a larger percentage of teams competes under the district system. Give each CCA team a 4 year window of auto-qualification, afterwards they receive some number of district points as a recurring bonus to compensate for their ineligibility* to receive the large culture changing awards.

(* officially, there is no policy that disqualifies CCA teams from District/Regional Chairman's/EI consideration in later years, and indeed, some have received EI since their Chairman's win. Unofficially, there is often some sentiment among the judges that it is time for someone else to win these awards.)

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I'd feel pretty good.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I've had enough time to think about this from many angles now. My current position is this:

From the point of view of a student who never knew a time before the championshplit, I think winning (for example) the "FRC North Conference" championship would feel pretty good. So what if the South Conference teams aren't there? It's still going to be bigger than the entirety of FRC was in 2000. Those of us living through the transition will feel the pain, but after it's done it's likely that the positives will outweigh the negatives for the majority of teams.

Having it be a net positive is very likely if we focus on the ways it can be so.



I would probably have been happier to keep a single FIRST Championship, even if it has to be smaller, if a lot of what makes it especially inspiring could be infused into the District championships. Unfortunately, trying to fill two Championships to the level of the existing one is going to make it more difficult to pump up the District events.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

All these people complaining about playing in a convention center were the same people who were perfectly happy to play in a Disney parking lot and are eager to go back to do the same again. I really wish FIRST stuck with the superegional plan but I'm down with helping them get their idea off the ground. What can I say, I'm a total yes man. I'm gonna do the best I can to get FIRST where they want to be.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

The 2015 World Championship will have 8 subdivisions. Of those 8 subdivisions, a total of 64 alliances will compete for the title of "World Champions".

Being the college basketball enthusiast I am, I'm absolutely ecstatic that the playoff format of the World Championship is similar in size to the NCAA's March Madness. With so many alliances competing in one big tournament, almost anything can happen and that just sounds super exciting to me.

Hearing that 2017 will feature 2 championship events sounds like such a huge step down from what FIRST is doing this year. It just doesn't seem like a fitting end to an FRC season when there are 2 championship alliances.

I understand that FIRST wants more kids to experience championship events, but it also just seems odd to me to have 2 events located near the center of the States.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I keep thinking about the anecdote, often attributed, probably wrongly, to Abraham Lincoln. The short version is

"If I call a tail a leg, how many legs does my dog have?"
The person he was talking to answered, "Five."
Lincoln responded, "No. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg."

I can think of all sorts of reasons why this two event model might be a good idea, but calling them championships doesn't make them championships.

ETA: And I suppose they could still be "northern division" championships or some such, but they can't be two world championships. They can't be two of the same thing that they replace.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I'd be on cloud 9...

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I'd love to see a world championship event return in coming years, but I'm willing to take at least a sip of the two Championship Kool-Aid before I spit it out in disgust.

FIRST is in a difficult position here. Some of it is their own making, but a large part of it is just being the victims of their own success. Volunteer infrastructure simply isn't where it needs to be in a lot of places to allow FIRST to run the program exactly how they want to (which is likely quite similar to that 2011 proposal). A lot can happen in five short years, and while I'm still not sure about the path HQ is leading us down, I must admit a certain amount of excitement to see what comes out on the other side.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

And that might be it - that they'd love to do something like the 2011 / Super Regional model, but it was a huge enough growing pain for FTC, and they're not convinced they can make the same huge leap in FRC. Splitting to two CMP events also gives the FTC Super Regional model a bit of space to grow, by doubling their slots, too. Maybe in 2020, they add two or three more CMP-level events that qualify teams to a late May World Championship event, adding an extra tier for FRC, at the level of existing Super Regionals for FTC, and acting as another World Festival for FLL. If this is a growth towards that old plan, it's really not a terrible solution for a difficult problem.

Having two CMP events is also a great way to get more CMP key volunteers, especially some of the roles that have been filled by a relatively small number of people for a while. Growing that pool is a valuable sustainability measure for FIRST, whether or not they're expanding towards a Super Regional-like model. The field expansion this year works towards that same goal.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

_______________________

Or will "more be inspired" by the inclusion annually of another 400 teams gaining the Championships experience in 2017, over the 2014 Championships? (Yes, they added 200 this year and possibly next, but was that to gradually prepare and slide into the even higher inclusion and get set for 2017?)

Which is the already stated goal by FIRST and The Committee that was no real secret (3 Doc's were listed in the other thread, some repeatedly). There was a roadmap and tea leaves (only the final result was an actual secret), and they have already said they are listening and wish to work with the community to help cure the biggest ills of a completion of an annual Championship that many do seek as inspiration they put forth for their teams as a mission ...My take...The Community missed the hints and street signs along the way (I think in hindsight and looking back over all that was said and laid out over the last 3 or so years), mainly because the community as a whole, or here on CD at least, simply don't want the current conditions to be modified or change.

But continued existensial growth is requiring it do so (change), or we add another expensive & time consuming layer taxing all teams. Mix em up often(as most teams really won't save that much money anyway given the locations), and send the winners only from South to North to finish off Einstein, set aside $50.00 from each of the 800 Teams entries, and give each of the 4 Teams 10K addl'. expense money to fly home & back (shipping their Robots and equipment from Houston to Detroit), only 4 teams get that inconvenience...The 4 teams w/ a 50/50 shot at a Championship after Championship #1 each year.

Or, Set aside $100.00 from each of the 800 Teams and bring all 8 Teams back mid-June for a Televised Superbowl Of FIRST FRC World Champs Playoffs (Best of 5, or 7, or even a Best of 9 matches), giving each team 10K for expenses, and ship all 8 teams Bots & Tools to that location as soon as their Co-Champs matches are completed. A showcase event both Alliances would certainly deserve...The Full Red Carpet Treatment! (Then send them to The Whitehouse, or maybe Disneyworld!)

Hey, hold that Championship Playoffs it at either place.

Re: Future First Championship News
 

I'd be on one of two Cloud 4.5's.
:P

Re: Future First Championship News
 

Well played sir....Well played. :)

Re: Future First Championship News
 

__________________

Pass that over I want a sip also! LOL.

BTW...Last year there were 4 Champions, and 4 Finalists! Did anyone cry when 6 became 8? (And they are listening to thoughts on getting the North/South Champions together for a reasonable playoff scenario). They did not say...THE END. They said Town Hall in St. Louis in a week and a half, let's hear some reasonable input from the community.

I never mind splitting a very large poker pot amongst willing players.....But, you best believe that we are going to leave a sizeable chunk in there and play that game out to the last bitter card. I want to know who the real champ is!
________________________

Added:

While we may only be in 1 single place this year, and you can wave & talk to and converse with anyone from 600+ Teams that you like...You will still only play in 1 Division w/ 74 Other Teams, then in Sub-Divisions w/ 63 other teams if you advance to the Einstein Championship Finals. Your total competitive contact 137 maximum teams total....AMIRITE? (But yes, it will be a true Championship). Now...Put 300 of those teams (4 Divisions), down the street in another building, let everyone play out on 2 ladders, and bring the final winners together, and let them playoff...You still have a World Championship. Now just move those 2 buildings a couple million blocks away from each other. Do the same thing.

*My Request...Not my Teams.....***FIRST, Please inconvenience me and ask me to come play an extra play date, next week or 3 weeks or a month later, with an FRC WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP TITLE on the line. (I'll race ya there, if I have to crawl on my bare hands & kneecaps!) Now: If you throw in a 10K sweetener to help cover some of my expenses...I'll be kissing you too when I arrive all bloody & skinned up. (Now televise it and make it big, a full blown 8 team production!)

That's just $50.00 Ea. =$80K Set aside / $5,000 for 800 teams. (Figured on 4 Team Alliances). Yes, International (Alaska/Hawaii), teams it would be much tougher on. No doubt there. Ask how many would balk though.