View Single Post
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-08-2001, 01:25
Mike Soukup's Avatar
Mike Soukup Mike Soukup is offline
Software guy
FRC #0111 (Wildstang)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Schaumburg, IL
Posts: 797
Mike Soukup has a reputation beyond reputeMike Soukup has a reputation beyond reputeMike Soukup has a reputation beyond reputeMike Soukup has a reputation beyond reputeMike Soukup has a reputation beyond reputeMike Soukup has a reputation beyond reputeMike Soukup has a reputation beyond reputeMike Soukup has a reputation beyond reputeMike Soukup has a reputation beyond reputeMike Soukup has a reputation beyond reputeMike Soukup has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally posted by colleen-t190
As for everyone else losing interest.. it's basically being said that teams lose interest in FIRST after Nats.. which is totally untrue.. look how much talk went on about all the comps.. even the A&E special that aired. Imagine if the National Finals held on the lawn of the Whitehouse were being broadcast on TV.. you can't tell me these forums wouldn't be hopping w/ comments from all you close-to-1000 posters!
Then why don't people show up and watch the finals when they're already at the competition? A lot of people here say that FIRST team members would keep their interest if 2 alliances (or maybe more if there were a small elimination bracket) faced off in DC or NH. I can't help but think back to 2001 nationals. Where was the big crowd for the finals? It didn't exist, period.

I don't remember anyone sitting in the stands, and only a few people were in the floor seats. A lot of people were in the pit in front of the stage, but most of those people were on the teams competing. I'd say 1000-2000 max were watching the finals (a pitiful 5-10% of the people). If people can't keep their interest through lunch, why would they keep their interst for a few weeks? I'd love to be proven wrong, but I don't see that happening.

So what's the solution? I've actually spent a lot of time thinking about this. I always return to my experiences in 96 as a student. Back then nationals was at a small outside ampitheater and there were only ~80 teams. It seemed more like a current regional. People were excited and people actually watched the matches, including finals. Even though 111 got second this year, and we were rookies in 96 and lucky that we could pick up and score balls, I had more fun in 96.

Unless FIRST comes up with a way to return the excitement and interest in nationals, I think we need to return to a smaller national competition based somehow on qualification.

Many people made points that limiting who goes to nationals "isn't what FIRST is about." Who from FIRST said this or where was it written by FIRST? Are people mistakingly taking their own opinions on the direction and ideals of FIRST and saying that's what FIRST stands for? (I may do the same in the next paragraph, but I'm trying my best not to)

Straight off the FIRST web site: "FIRST is here to inspire and recognize excellence in science & technology." The inspiration for students comes mainly from working closely with the engineers for the 6 week build period. Students learn the most by actually coming up with the strategy & design, and by building the robot. As far as inspiration, the competitions are icing on the cake. It's a good time to experience engineering under extreme pressure. Most of the design changes and fixes come during the first regionals. So when it comes to inspiration, which is the main goal of FIRST, nationals don't offer much more.

So what's the point of nationals? Simply put, it's to have fun, to see everyone else's bots, and to try to win the competition. I said earlier that having fun at nationals (same with regionals) is extremely important. Many students and adults wouldn't come back if the competitions were as exciting as a chess match. But the fun and excitement is available at all the regionals, and personally, I think they're much more fun than nationals.

I've heard from my sources that FIRST will begin stressing regionals more. A couple different people told me that soon (if not this year) FIRST will limit attendance at nationals to teams that compete at a regional. I don't know if these changes are because of space at Disney or if FIRST is driving the changes. (this next part isn't from any sources, but is my opinion) I can see FIRST easily making the switch from "teams that attend a regional" to "teams that meet this performance threshold" get to go to nationals. The threshold could be based on a combination of: final standing at a regional (all members of top 2 alliances), qualification standings (top 8 teams), top 50 overall qualification averages, and previous year's performance (top 4 in the nation).

So I think the solution is to emphasize regionals and use them as a way to qualify for nationals. As a result, nationals would get smaller, and I believe more exciting. FIRST needs to bring the excitement of a regional (and ~96 nationals) to current Nats.

This would also increase the level of competition; try to imagine all of the reginal winners & finalists vying for a top 8 seed during qualifying rounds, and imagine getting to pick any alliance partner without divisional restrictions. From a pure spectator standpoint (which would be good for the coveted TV exposure) this is a great format. It's like having playoffs. Just like I'd rather watch playoff football instead of regular season, I'd rather watch the best teams battle it out in a smaller competition format.

I'm sure other people have differing opinions, I'd love to hear them and continue the good discussion that we've already had in the thread.

Mike

Last edited by Mike Soukup : 16-08-2001 at 01:30.
Reply With Quote