Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95059)

Racer26 06-05-2011 10:45

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
Just ran the full numbers for FRC in case someone cares:

Total FRC attendance: 2394 regionals, 356 MI Districts, 64 MSC, 352 CMP
Total FRC teams: 2065 (1894 + 171 MI)[~420 rookies in 2011]

Which means:

First Regional: 1894 x $5000 = $9,470,000
2nd/3rd Regionals: 500 x $4000 = $2,000,000
Championship: 352 x $5000 = $1,760,000
MI 1st/2nd District: 171 x $5000 = $855,000
MI 3rd District: 14 x $500 = $7,000
MI State Championship: 64 x $4000 = $256,000
Rookie Kit extra cost: 420 x $1500 = $630,000

Total FRC revenue: $14,978,000.

JesseK 06-05-2011 11:19

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
This doesn't really address Bill's Blog, but perhaps it adds some objectiveness to the discussion.

I love the idea of a 'qualifier'-'regional'-'championship' model; it solves more than the FRC overcrowding issues (more engineering iterations for the money). Yet it's just not sustainable in many areas of the country simply because large quantities of FRC teams aren't sustainable in many areas of the country. If we really wanted less FTC at the championships and more FRC of higher quality at the championships, we'd figure out how to drive the costs down so we could have that model in more areas of the country. Yet so long as FIRST is hung up on having their Regional events at $250,000 venues, we shouldn't hold our breath expecting lower registration fees to ever happen.

---

I don't understand how anyone can think, from a black-and-white perspective, that FTC is better than VRC, or vice-versa. Yes, VEX parts and avenues for innovation steamroll those of TETRIX. Yes, the value for VEX is higher, part for part, event for event. Yet experience-for-experience is just about the same from a student perspective. At least regionally, I've asked the many VRC kids I mentored and their responses are just about the same as the FTC kids I've mentored that never did FRC. The only real differentiator for mentors is value, which isn't a student issue.

Yet, from what I've witnessed, the unstated dichotomy of FRC mentors who argue about "value" between VRC and FTC is that we throw "value" out the door when we talk about FRC (see the 1st paragraph). Simply put, the overall FRC program is THE BEST QUALITY for its age group. That is why we don't care much about its dollar value. FIRST seems to understand that part very well, which is why they don't have a goal to lower the entry costs of FRC.

Thus, I think we should focus the discussion more on FRC and how FIRST is going to impact FRC with decisions made about FTC rather than make the discussion about the coolness of either FTC/VRC. Since that sentence is hard to read in one breath:

We should guide the discussion based upon how we are impacted in FRC rather than based upon how much we can squash FTC.

pathew100 06-05-2011 11:21

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 1075guy (Post 1059644)
I think people aren't wrong in saying that if there were a competing product to FRC (because thats what it is, its a product), there would be teams jumping ship left right and center. I almost think HQ has lost some of the vision that FIRST was built on.

Dave stated on CD that he left the GDC for personal reasons relating to GDC decisions he couldn't get behind. Maybe HQ needs a wakeup call.

I suspect this might have something do with FIRST trying to compete with the other robotics competitions out there. (Which, as Dave has stated, is a BAD idea).

I got the same feeling at kickoff when Dean's homework was "You aren't a robotics team, you're a "FIRST" robotics team!"

And then came the minibots which were intended to be built out of an FTC kit. And the vision was FRC teams were supposed to reach out and find FTC teams to work with. Or FTC teams would show up with minibots at FRC events. (All of which flopped as we all know).

Further, some of the criteria (although not specfically stated as such) for winning some of the highest awards is how many other FIRST teams you can spawn. Can you point to a CA or EI winner that hasn't created FRC,FTC,FLL teams? Possibly, but probably not. (What if you created dozens of Vex/BEST/??? teams? Would that matter? It's still promoting science and technology in your school/community after all.)

It seems that things like this are an attempt to get teams involved in FIRST to "close ranks" around the FIRST programs...

E. Wood 06-05-2011 11:51

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pathew100 (Post 1059670)
Further, some of the criteria (although not specfically stated as such) for winning some of the highest awards is how many other FIRST teams you can spawn. Can you point to a CA or EI winner that hasn't created FRC,FTC,FLL teams? Possibly, but probably not. (What if you created dozens of Vex/BEST/??? teams? Would that matter? It's still promoting science and technology in your school/community after all.)

It seems that things like this are an attempt to get teams involved in FIRST to "close ranks" around the FIRST programs...

To answer your question, yes creating VEX teams count. Our team has helped to start three local competitions including one vex and over 50 other smaller (FLL, FTC and VEX) teams. The vast majority of these teams were VEX based. When we won the RCA this year the judges did not say we helped create 19 FIRST teams and over 30 vex teams. They simply gave the total numbers. As for the whole VEX versus FIRST idea, I think it痴 rather silly. We all need to remember that the robot is just a tool to inspire the students. Who cares what parts it痴 made of? Wishing one fails is not in the best interest of anyone let alone the students involved in that particular program.

EricH 06-05-2011 12:09

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
VEX vs. FIRST may be rather silly.

But FIRST HQ seems to be stuck on "You're FIRST or you're no good" mindset. At least, that's the impression I get from various anecdotes related on CD over the last couple of years--the concerns over VRC teams started not counting for anything in terms of EI/RCA; the judge who told another that Hexbugs were a VEX thing, don't count those for much; FIRST's statement of supporting FTC, FLL, and their kits in a Team Update--all of those trend towards FIRST HQ seeing it as FIRST vs VEX.

It's those of us in the trenches that either don't give a darn, or went with VEX when the big split happened, or tried to to both VRC and FTC and gave up one, so now we do FRC and VRC.

Yes, there was a plea for more transparency a few years ago. It did not fall on deaf ears; FIRST HQ has opened up a little bit. The problem now is communication and an "us vs them" mentality that seems to be infecting HQ, or at least some key members of the volunteer corps. Lack of communication is a big problem; lack of timely communication is at least as bad.

If the reason for the field move had been announced before the concert was, I think there would have been discussion and some concern--but the timing implied that the concert was the reason and all later statements to the contrary were implied to be false. I think that FTC was part of the reason; maybe not the whole reason, but at least part. But what concerns me is: What's the rest of the reason? Don't give me BS about being closer; if you put the same bunch of people in a tiny space for days on end, either they'll bond really well or tensions will flame up way too much and something bad's going to happen. Often there'll be minor friction, but anything major can really cause trouble.

Racer26 06-05-2011 12:32

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
@Eric: I agree FIRST HQ seems to be very stuck on the FIRST vs. <other robot competition> bit, ESPECIALLY FTC vs VRC.

Numerous well respected members of the various programs have made the correct assertion that because the COMBINED effect of all of these programs reaches a very small percentage of students, any competition between the programs is both foolish, and flies in the face of the programs' stated goals of changing the culture, and inspiring recognition of STEM fields in students.

The part of the whole ongoing political battle between FIRST and IFI (and by extension VEX) that gets me, is that IFI has maintained the moral high-ground by continuing support for FRC, even in the face of what appears to be direct jabs at them and the viability of their business (No prepunched aluminum parts on minibots that arent FTC parts [straight-up attack on VEX components on minibots, IMO]).

IFI supports FRC a lot (via team IFI [111, 217, 254, 1114], donating VEXpro Victors, donating SPIKEs, etc). Were IFI to decide they'd had enough of FIRST HQ stabbing at them, and stop supporting FRC altogether, the program would surely suffer for it.

pathew100 06-05-2011 12:34

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by E. Wood (Post 1059681)
To answer your question, yes creating VEX teams count. Our team has helped to start three local competitions including one vex and over 50 other smaller (FLL, FTC and VEX) teams. The vast majority of these teams were VEX based. When we won the RCA this year the judges did not say we helped create 19 FIRST teams and over 30 vex teams. They simply gave the total numbers.

That is good to hear. Hopefully this is consistent from event to event.

Quote:

Originally Posted by E. Wood (Post 1059681)
As for the whole VEX versus FIRST idea, I think it痴 rather silly. We all need to remember that the robot is just a tool to inspire the students. Who cares what parts it痴 made of? Wishing one fails is not in the best interest of anyone let alone the students involved in that particular program.

Honestly, I don't blame FIRST. But they should just come out and say, "Yes, at a "corporate non-profit" level we are "competing" with other robotics based competitions.

Why else would they base the minibots on FTC kits? And force FRC teams to buy FTC parts? It's an overt attempt to grow their newest brand and the one with the most growth potential. They've never been shy about growth being the primary goal of the program.

I do think they see huge growth of VEX in the same space as FTC and right now the FIRST brand is a distant second.

Logomotion, the minibots and Dean's speech ("you're a FIRST team") are all ways for them to strengthen the brand and grow the organization.

And I don't think anyone wants FTC or VEX to fail, at either organization. But they do "compete" against each other to some extent.

Racer26 06-05-2011 12:41

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
and remember everyone: VRC only exists, because FVC got turned into FTC. FVC was quite popular in its first 2 seasons, and then FIRST HQ made the excessively foolish decision to jump ship on the kit and go to something more expensive, and with almost no pre-installed user base. (My opinion: this happened because a big FRC or FIRST-wide LEGO sponsorship hinged on FTC using TETRIX.)

IFI responded by creating VRC (no doubt using knowledge they'd learned from years of working with FIRST), to give a home to all the teams that now had useless VEX kits.

JesseK 06-05-2011 13:27

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1059687)
VEX vs. FIRST may be rather silly.

But FIRST HQ seems to be stuck on "You're FIRST or you're no good" mindset.

Aye, this is the impression I get too.

SeaPerch & ZERO robotics are also on that list of "we don't want to hear about it". 2 years ago we were "not allowed" to bring a SeaPerch bot into our pit for display. In addition the judges cut the kids off when they talked about it. We brought it anyways, we talked about it anyways. We did win EI that year, yet we won EI twice this year because of our 4 FTC teams & 30 FLL teams (according to the announcer during the award ceremony).

On the same token, we (well, 1 teacher on our team, 1 on another; mentors support them where we can) have worked our tail off in getting STEM into the curriculum. Actually, it goes much further than that, but I can't say much until more things about it solidify. We even have an end goal that's quite unique and parallels (but doesn't compete with) FIRST and its mission. The goal even uses FIRST's programs (and VEX for that matter...). Yet the teacher was told, unofficially I think, that curriculum is NOT in any of FIRST's goals. I believe it because curriculum isn't mentioned in any of FIRST's statements, anywhere. I can only conjecture that they think the sports model falls apart because of it.

As a sort of counter point to my own argument, 2 years ago in Florida when we briefly met with Paul Godonis, he said he didn't want school board support behind FIRST. Actually in hind sight, IMO that part is for the best -- for reasons best said elsewhere. Yet because of those reasons I've come to realize one major thing: while FIRST doesn't deserve the "sunshine and kittens" deification that sometimes happens on CD, they DO have a plan that isn't totally diabolical and was created by some pretty competent people.

Basically, if you want awards, tie what you're doing into some perspective that works for FIRST. Toss that perspective into some silly story (we had fairies and wizards in ours ... I was the knight) to help the judges read it easier, and voila!
(Thank God I didn't have to wear the knight costume the kids suggested...)

GaryVoshol 06-05-2011 15:04

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by KelliV (Post 1059650)
To give an example to include my 25 FLL kids in this year's season I need two teams ...

Err, three teams? Max of 10 per team.

Frenchie461 06-05-2011 16:12

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
Has anyone considered the possibility of simply getting rid of FTC. If FIRST could get FRC affordable so teams could do more with less. Get rid of the official FIRST lighting and sound people. For example, at the BMR, college students would have done just as good of a job on lighting and sound for a whole lot less. With several changes like that, a regional could be down to 1500 or so per team, making it a lot more accessible to schools that are only able to afford FTC. If a FRC team was only twice an FTC team (I'm assuming FTC is like Vex where schools have multiple teams), schools would choose FRC.

tl;dr make first cheap, get rid of FTC

J93Wagner 06-05-2011 17:06

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Frenchie461 (Post 1059775)
tl;dr make first cheap, get rid of FTC

I would dispute your assertion that replacing paid personnel (IF that's how they do it at regionals, and I doubt that) with volunteer students would help as the real cost is really in the venue. Change the process of Qualifying into CMP with a District/Regional/CMP model and overall costs to teams will go down.

Also, I wouldn't say, "Get rid of FTC," because FTC does have things to offer. If schools decide that FRC (or VRC for that matter) is better than FTC and FTC slowly dies, so be it. But deciding to kill FTC when it is still growing like it is now doesn't make any sense to me.

PayneTrain 06-05-2011 17:35

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Frenchie461 (Post 1059775)
tl;dr make first cheap, get rid of FTC

When will the people of and in FIRST understand that it is not all about the money? It's about the commitment. No matter how CHEAP you make FRC, you will not change the amount of commitment teams need to remain viable at the FRC level.

I know of many teams, who are native to my state and locality, that have folded due to a lack of commitment. The money was there, but their hearts just weren't in it, so they went to the D-League of FIRST, FTC.

I don't mean to sound too cut-and-dry, but you won't "get" how to manage an FRC team until you realize it's not about the money. I've seen frugal teams reach finals and loaded teams miss elims. You can't pour money into the human element.

Mark Sheridan 06-05-2011 17:46

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
FTC is not the problem. I think most people here see very obvious solutions to the problems and can't understand why FIRST see these solutions.

I am tired of FIRST's excuse after excuse. They thought they had a good idea that did not turn out well in the end. You would think FIRST would be excited about design iteration. Hopeful the rotating GDC member will give new perspectives not only in game design but how teams look at FIRST.

I think we all know that FIRST is full of well intentioned people. We just have high standards of excellence for them. If you think the politics of FIRST is bad, you have no idea how bad high school sport politics can get. I think we are lucky, but that won't stop me from complaining when I see a problem.

waialua359 06-05-2011 17:56

Re: Bills Blog- Yes, I知 already counting down to kickoff 2012
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JaneYoung (Post 1059454)
Taken from the list of bullets in the blog:

- The highest combined match score was 131-122, on Newton
- Highest individual alliance score was 146, also on Newton

For information's sake, it would be nice to include the teams' names and FRC numbers that achieved these scores if they are going to be noted in the blog and commented on.

Jane

We had a chance to beat that with 1114 and two hawaii teams 359 and 1056.
Our team had a broken pvc tab on our minibot which went up and then fell.:(
We had the second fastest minibot on the field of 4 that attempted. With only one going up from 1114, we still had 127.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 19:02.

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