Quote:
Originally Posted by Squillo
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? |
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.