Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe G.
I have to disagree. If our sport wasn't exciting to watch, it wouldn't have gotten anywhere over the last 20 years. It would take good camera work to make it suitable for TV, but then, so does any sport. If you want to see what good camera work and presentation can do for FRC, watch the Michigan special from this year.
Yes, some matches are slow, due to unresponsive or ineffective robots. Yes, some years the game is easier to follow than others. But every year I've been in FIRST, matches played by top-level teams have been thrilling to watch, both for me, and non-FIRST friends. I've gotten a lot of people involved by bringing them to competitions. And they come back because its exciting.
And in response to earlier comments about nit-picking, I want to clarify that I absolutely mean this as constructive criticism. I thought the special was GREAT, and am THRILLED that FIRST has gotten this kind of exposure. I'm even more excited that this looks to be an annual thing. But we can't just play the same special each year. We need to top ourselves, and draw even more people in. And I think that further illustrating the excitement of a competition could help
|
It may be interesting (especially live with the music, lights etc.), but it doesn't begin to compare to normal sports. They are spectator friendly, with relatively few ways to score, only one center of attention at a time, and a little counter telling you what the score is. Like I said even I, a FIRSTie who knows the game, don't really enjoy webcasts.
EDIT: I'm sure better camera work would help. But in the end the camera can only improve the game so much.