[EricH]

Originally Posted by bduddy

Increased discussion where? I think one of the key things people should be taking away from this data is that discussions on CD do not reflect the larger FRC community.

That is true.

The thing is that CD tends to attract the mid-to-upper tier teams. And the vocal ones. The teams that tend to be at the forefront of testing out and thinking out new ideas.* You can bet that an awful lot of teams and team members that got the survey went "Huh?" Does that mean that discussion is not increasing? NO. On CD, discussion increased--witness the 2-3 threads besides this one on the topic. As a result of the survey, I'd be willing to bet that a lot of teams are going to be wondering "what was that about?"

If enough teams ask questions, things start happening. I don't see the discussion being fully revived until May, at this point, but I do think that HQ will be processing the results, and maybe asking better questions later on in a followup. I'd give it about 4-5 years before there's some sort of tipping point. Seems like that's how long it takes to make major changes like that.

Now starting a pool on which happens first (officially): video review, ending stop build day in some form, or moving Kickoff...


Now, this post does come with a bit of a reminder:
If the top X% of teams are able to drive a solution that works for them, without consideration of the rest of the teams--teams that maybe can barely play the game, in a good year--then I do not see that solution as being a good one. With all the discussion of "stacked events", those not-so-highly-performing teams are often overlooked pretty thoroughly. 6 powerhouses and a dozen mid-upper-tier teams don't make a regional... What about the other half to two-thirds of the teams?


*Did you know? The card system wasn't developed by HQ. IRI used it for years; FIRST HQ adopted it during 2010's soccer game. Districts were developed largely by teams in MI, at least initially--and so was bag-and-tag. Just something to ponder...