![]() |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
I'm kind of disappointed there was no field for "any other ideas for making 2 venues work?". I was looking for a place to endorse the "World Champs" and "World Festival" compromise, but then the survey was over :o
|
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Quote:
|
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
I think the survey should have preceded the announcement. Folks it is a done deal contract have been signed and all they can do now is tweek any input on what to do at the two championships.
I keep hearing "First, the sport of the mind" from Dean and Woodie so set the events up like sports do. Yes it is great to involve more kids but do not dilute a championship. They should have looked at something like this: 1) District event 2) State event 3) Regional event 4) National event 5) World Event Even maybe a US national event and a International event followed by a World event. Look how Little League Baseball does the Little League World series. Can somebody explain to travel cost are going to be reduce for a team from Israel, Turkey or Australia have their travel reduced by the proposed cities? They have expanded Worlds this year by 250 teams and diluted the event in my mind as far as competition of quality robots, yes more kids involved. Is this a money issue maybe, lets see how we can get more money by adding teams more events? Kids like to win at high levels of competition in sports, debate clubs, music competitions, programming competitions, computer games and even in FRC Robotics believe it or not. First needs to understand this and if they do not the need to see reality when watching an event. This is a bad decision and bad timing for the survey. Shoot, aim, ready not ready, aim fire! They got it wrong. |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Here's a question I would have liked to see:
In the years 2017+, it will be much easier for us to select the size of championships because the district model will be much more widespread. Assuming another level of competition is not added, what percentage of FRC teams do you believe should qualify for championships in the years 2017-2020? I think that many of the problems people have with the championsplit relate back to this question. FIRST seems to believe that 25% of teams should attend championships. I personally think this is far too high, I would like it much more if it were 8-10% for 2017-2020. |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Quote:
Perhaps a comparable survey will be sent to volunteers? The results from such a survey would be fairly predictable, though: volunteers would not favor two events, meeting familiar individuals and teams is very important, external attractions are not very important and travel expenses are a significant factor. |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Quote:
As for money, the 5-tier approach you suggested adds costs too. If you assume a $5,000 fee for each level, That would mean a team hoping to go all the way would need $25,000 in registration fees alone. I'd imagine that's more than most teams would spend on an entire season. Though I will say it brings up an interesting point. Has FIRST ever taken a team budget survey? I know this can be a touchy subject, but it would likely help guide the goal of making champs more accessible and affordable. |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Quote:
$22K was the average team expense in 2013 |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Quote:
Also imagine a scenario in which nationals and the southern regional took place in Atlanta for instance. That's 3-5 state districts, 1 state championship, a regional championship, and a US championship. You want to talk about volunteer and mentor burnout? Not to mention getting out of school and work. Gas money, food money, spare parts, hotels, etc. That many tiers is not sustainable. We started the season with around 8,300 cash. How on earth would we get another ~12,000 to pay for that many competitions and still build a robot and put gas in the cars? Everyone doesn't have a +$20,000 budget. |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
I'm definitely on team "I want only one championship", but I thought the survey was very fair and quite well written. I applaud FIRST for doing this.
If I were to predict what the company line will be at the town hall meeting, here it is: 1) "The response from the survey was that the community would prefer a single championship event such that it is a true championship" 2) "Sometimes change is hard. People thought alliances were a bad idea at first, and there were a lot of people against districts at first. But now those are well accepted in FIRST. 3) "Therefore we're going to stick with the plan for now. We'll pilot the dual championships for 3 years and re-assess everyone's opinion after giving it a try." |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Can I just childishly sit here and after putting in my thoughts on the 2 championship things, it asked to put in my team number and it wouldnt let me put in all 6 of mine. I feel slighted. (Im from a team with 3 separate numbers, then I coach 3 up north)
#FIRSTworldproblems |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
I'm glad they are asking for feedback. However, surveys can be tricky things to interpret. The way the questions are asked definitely influences the manner in which they are answered.
I don't have extremely strong feelings about how season finale events ought to be structured. There are many, many, factors to consider. I want something spectacular, and I want something affordable. I want something that showcases the best of First, and I want it accessible to as many people as possible. These desires are very difficult to balance, and may even be mutually exclusive, so no solution is perfect. However, the one thing that really struck me about the survey was how it continued to focus on the Championship experience as if that experience were limited to those people who were physically present at the championships. Even the most inclusive vision of the season finale events has no more than 25% of First teams in attendance. I think the other 75% matter too. This is the 21st century. You don't have to be in the same room to be part of the same experience. Think outside the walls. |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Quote:
As far as travel cost reducing, I do remember folks complaining that flying into St. Louis is much more expensive than other US cities. I.e. the travel cost went up for PNW teams when we moved from Atlanta to St. Louis because of airfare. I'm not sure how Detroit and Dallas play into that, though. I get what you are saying, but in the current state of FIRST, that wouldn't work either. Maybe 10 or 20 years from now. It seems like either FIRST is moving towards a "super-regional" model, or this is their **temporary solution as districts expand and FRC and FTC keep vastly expanding. They needed some wiggle room while districts are in the process of becoming universal. And after that point, maybe one championship would be an option again. Diluted competition this year? You realize that the 400-team championship is actually much larger than it used to be? It has grown from just a couple hundred to 400 in the 2000s. Did that dilute the competition? Expanding the championship by 200 teams has been done before. And while I wasn't there in the 200-team championship era, I do know people that were. And they never said "gee, I wish there were much fewer teams here this year, because the competition is much more dilute than it was 15 years ago." Quote:
|
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Quote:
No where in the survey did it ask about cost, logistics, student absences. Frank, or those that wrote the survey, dropped the ball. It seems that FIRST is just fishing for results that they can use to justify their agenda. *Disappointed* |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Quote:
To each their own! |
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Please give us your feedback on FIRST Announcement of 2 Champions
Quote:
I certainly agree with the sentiment that this survey is at least a year too late, but I don't necessarily think it was written with an outright bias. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 22:53. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi