Championship Location Announced

[Pault]

Originally Posted by Alex2614

Very very disappointed in this decision. I will definitely be sending a letter to FIRST. Many participants and I always walk away from St. Louis in a bad mood, especially after ALL of the events on Saturday (not just the finale, even though that's a major aspect of our disappointment). Will post letter later on. Thoughts? Anybody actually like St. Louis (those that have been to championships outside of St. Lous, like Atlanta or Texas)?

Can you specify what your complaints were. I have never been to champs (yet...), but judging from what I've read in this thread, not everybody agrees that St. Louis is bad, and very few people hate it. The way you wrote your post kind of assumes that almost everybody who is reading it would agree with you, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Also, don't let the details take away from the entire experience. At an event the magnitude of championships, it is impossible to make everything perfect. And it doesn't make things any better that everybody who attends expects the event to be perfect and absolutely amazing in every way, because of how much effort they put into getting there. The reality is that championships, no matter how hard FIRST tries and how much money is put into it, will never live up to its expectations. Sure, there are things that FIRST can improve upon (like the finale), but in the end we need to be happy with what we get. The championships are supposed to be culmination of all the sweat and tears that teams put into their robots. It is up to you to enjoy it as that. You can love it for what it is, or hate it for what it isn't. The choice is yours.

[Alex2614]

Originally Posted by Pault

Can you specify what your complaints were. I have never been to champs (yet...), but judging from what I've read in this thread, not everybody agrees that St. Louis is bad, and very few people hate it. The way you wrote your post kind of assumes that almost everybody who is reading it would agree with you, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Also, don't let the details take away from the entire experience. At an event the magnitude of championships, it is impossible to make everything perfect. And it doesn't make things any better that everybody who attends expects the event to be perfect and absolutely amazing in every way, because of how much effort they put into getting there. The reality is that championships, no matter how hard FIRST tries and how much money is put into it, will never live up to its expectations. Sure, there are things that FIRST can improve upon (like the finale), but in the end we need to be happy with what we get. The championships are supposed to be culmination of all the sweat and tears that teams put into their robots. It is up to you to enjoy it as that. You can love it for what it is, or hate it for what it isn't. The choice is yours.

Keep an eye out for my letter. I will post on this thread once it is completed. It explains all of this in detail. Everybody that I personally have talked to prefers Atlanta FAR more than St. Louis. I'm not just letting little details take away from the experience. I'm letting the really big logistical aspects take away from the experience. The only people that I have talked to that prefer St. Louis are the ones that have only been to St. Louis. There are a few exceptions, obviously, but that will always happen. Also, people that have posted in favor of STL have either a) never been elsewhere for cmp or b) citing very specific aspects of STL that they like, but not saying why it would be better than other locations, like, say Atlanta or Indy. I have yet to hear a very strong argument for holding it in STL.

[IndySam]

The past layout of the dome floor is simply awful. They put it on the short end (because of the main hospitality area) and there is simply not enough seating for the opening ceremony or the finals. Smaller teams that don't have enough people to go reserve seats are just simply out of luck.

FIRST choosing a better vantage point for their VIP's over a chance for all the students to watch really sticks in my craw.

[Jim Wilks]

Originally Posted by IndySam

FIRST choosing a better vantage point for their VIP's over a chance for all the students to watch really sticks in my craw.

+1 for that

[Patrick Flynn]

Originally Posted by IndySam

The past layout of the dome floor is simply awful. They put it on the short end (because of the main hospitality area) and there is simply not enough seating for the opening ceremony or the finals.

FIRST choosing a better vantage point for their VIP's over a chance for all the students to watch really sticks in my craw.

I agree that the floor layout isn't the best. And that things could be done to improve it.
But I also feel that the VIP's that give a lot of money to back this program deserve the best seating. I maybe alone here, but I think anywhere, Football, Hockey, etc, etc, you will see the big money supporters getting preferred seating. I think that there maybe a way to compromise here and work out some better seating. But I think that if someone is giving more money that me they get the better seats.
Also i understand that you spend a lot of money to get to champs, but the VIP's spend more than that on the program I'm sure.

[Libby K]

Originally Posted by Patrick Flynn

I agree that the floor layout isn't the best. And that things could be done to improve it.
But I also feel that the VIP's that give a lot of money to back this program deserve the best seating. I maybe alone here, but I think anywhere, Football, Hockey, etc, etc, you will see the big money supporters getting preferred seating. I think that there maybe a way to compromise here and work out some better seating. But I think that if someone is giving more money that me they get the better seats.
Also i understand that you spend a lot of money to get to champs, but the VIP's spend more than that on the program I'm sure.

^ This. There's no easy-way of saying this, but let's be real. Sponsors who give thousands (and in some cases millions) of dollars to FIRST - in direct sponsorship, mentorship, whatever the case may be - are going to get a focus when it comes to designing some portions of the Championship experience.

That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be some big improvements in the team experience (the biggest example being the wrap-party this year, but that's already been addressed in statements from FIRST)... It's just worth mentioning that yes, VIPs are going to get some things tailored to them. This should not be news to anyone with a realistic mindset about things.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by Libby K

^ This. There's no easy-way of saying this, but let's be real. Sponsors who give thousands (and in some cases millions) of dollars to FIRST - in direct sponsorship, mentorship, whatever the case may be - are going to get a focus when it comes to designing some portions of the Championship experience.

That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be some big improvements in the team experience (the biggest example being the wrap-party this year, but that's already been addressed in statements from FIRST)... It's just worth mentioning that yes, VIPs are going to get some things tailored to them. This should not be news to anyone with a realistic mindset about things.

This is all easy to say when you have your reserve seat on the floor to watch all of the ceremonies but tell this to the team that goes home early because there's no place for them to sit to watch the finals.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by IndySam

This is all easy to say when you have your reserve seat on the floor to watch all of the ceremonies but tell this to the team that goes home early because there's no place for them to sit to watch the finals.

Ya, I am sorry to say that I have seen this happen a few times; the teams leaving early part. I guess the question has to be, which should be preferred: allowing participating teams to get to reap the rewards of their hard work over the year or keep the 6-figure/7-figure sponsor happy. I kinda dont see the reasoning behind keeping a sponsor happy but then putting out teams.

[Steven Donow]

Originally Posted by dodar

Ya, I am sorry to say that I have seen this happen a few times; the teams leaving early part. I guess the question has to be, which should be preferred: allowing participating teams to get to reap the rewards of their hard work over the year or keep the 6-figure/7-figure sponsor happy. I kinda dont see the reasoning behind keeping a sponsor happy but then putting out teams.

I'm not gonna take sides in this argument, but the reasoning of keeping a sponsor happy is that without sponsors, there would be no championship/season/FIRST in the first place.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by IndySam

This is all easy to say when you have your reserve seat on the floor to watch all of the ceremonies but tell this to the team that goes home early because there's no place for them to sit to watch the finals.

Originally Posted by dodar

Ya, I am sorry to say that I have seen this happen a few times; the teams leaving early part. I guess the question has to be, which should be preferred: allowing participating teams to get to reap the rewards of their hard work over the year or keep the 6-figure/7-figure sponsor happy. I kinda dont see the reasoning behind keeping a sponsor happy but then putting out teams.

Originally Posted by DevenStonow

I'm not gonna take sides in this argument, but the reasoning of keeping a sponsor happy is that without sponsors, there would be no championship/season/FIRST in the first place.

Let's leave aside names here (and besides, Libby is a bad example to use since she's usually presenting the Imagery Award). The number of VIPs that get the primo seats is not so large in number that moving them out would help much--you might get one more team on the ground, but which team gets that rub? (Chairman's is already spoken for, and the 12 Einstein teams won't fit.)

When I watched Einstein 2012 from the tornado seats, there was plenty of room for more teams to get in. (Not that you wanted to be that high up that day, but that's different.) For the fiery hoops you'd have to jump through to give those seats to students, I'd just rather show some appreciation for those that make FIRST able to do what it does at the price that it does.

[Libby K]

Originally Posted by Billfred

Let's leave aside names here (and besides, Libby is a bad example to use since she's usually presenting the Imagery Award). The number of VIPs that get the primo seats is not so large in number that moving them out would help much--you might get one more team on the ground, but which team gets that rub? (Chairman's is already spoken for, and the 12 Einstein teams won't fit.)

When I watched Einstein 2012 from the tornado seats, there was plenty of room for more teams to get in. (Not that you wanted to be that high up that day, but that's different.) For the fiery hoops you'd have to jump through to give those seats to students, I'd just rather show some appreciation for those that make FIRST able to do what it does at the price that it does.

IndySam's point is that the Einstein field faces the VIP boxes up top - in Atlanta, they were on the 'long side' of the arena rather than the 'short side' in STL.

I'm not trying to say that this layout is ideal - I'm just echoing Pat's point that FIRST is going to arrange the field so that VIPs have the opportunity to see the finals and major award ceremonies that are held on that stage. It is a fact of life that without their support, we would not be able to have FIRST events on the scale that we do currently. If VIPs and sponsors don't enjoy the show, they might not support us next year. And then where would we be?!

I wasn't saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying it's realistic.

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by Libby K

I wasn't saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying it's realistic.

I will say it's completely the right call. I work for Boeing and we have executives that come out to the Championship every year. I want them to have the best experience possible, including viewing matches and speeches, because their support means Boeing team mentors can receive grant funding and help keep many teams running financially. The people that get to make the call on whether FIRST teams will receive millions of dollars in funding over a period of years should get the royal treatment. It's no secret that many companies are having to cut back, the least we can do is show our thanks to those that are still supporting FIRST on a much different level than most of us do.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by Karthik

I'm quite certain she would feel the same way if she was sitting in the stands.

Sure there are ways to optimize layouts to get more desirable seating for teams, but claiming that a VIP doesn't understand/care because they already have a good seat is pretty disingenuous.

Totally missed my point big guy.

Originally Posted by Libby K

IndySam's point is that the Einstein field faces the VIP boxes up top - in Atlanta, they were on the 'long side' of the arena rather than the 'short side' in STL.

I'm not trying to say that this layout is ideal - I'm just echoing Pat's point that FIRST is going to arrange the field so that VIPs have the opportunity to see the finals and major award ceremonies that are held on that stage. It is a fact of life that without their support, we would not be able to have FIRST events on the scale that we do currently. If VIPs and sponsors don't enjoy the show, they might not support us next year. And then where would we be?!

I wasn't saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying it's realistic.

Libby, Thanks for explaining my point.

I probably should have worded that better. I would never begrudge Libby her seat on the floor. If you have seen her at the champs she is non stop work.

My point is that it could be arranged much better. The hospitality area is looking at the Lego championship 90% of the competition and you can't see anything that's happening from up there. It would be better served if it was facing an FRC field.

VIP's could be given floor seats or a reserved area in the stands down low during opening ceremonies and the finals, most are down there anyway. I know that during the opening ceremonious most of the people in those hospitality area seats are regular FIRTSers like me who are lucky enough to have the connections to get a VIP pass.

[Cory]

If this argument is centered on VIP seats there are 360* of suites that can be used. No reason the boxes can't be moved to the sidelines, unless FIRST is using one of the special much larger box/club areas in the end zones, which I'm unsure of.

[Racer26]

I was asked why I think CMP needs to be bigger than 400 teams by several people above.

Lets look at a comparison of the last few years.

2013: 2524 Total Teams, 400 Teams at CMP, 15.8%
2012: 2339 Total Teams, 400 Teams at CMP, 17.1%
2011: 2065 Total Teams, 352 Teams at CMP, 17.0%
2010: 1808 Total Teams, 344 Teams at CMP, 19.0%
2009: 1677 Total Teams, 348 Teams at CMP, 20.7%
2008: 1501 Total Teams, 340 Teams at CMP, 22.6%
2007: 1301 Total Teams, 344 Teams at CMP, 26.4%
2006: 1133 Total Teams, 344 Teams at CMP, 30.4%
2005: 988 Total Teams, 340 Teams at CMP, 34.4%
2004: 927 Total Teams, 292 Teams at CMP, 31.4%
2003: 787 Total Teams, 291 Teams at CMP, 36.9%

As you can see. Teams attending championship as a percentage of all FRC teams has been in steady decline.

2014: 54 Regionals, MICMP awards 27+, MARCMP awards 14+, PNWCMP awards 14+?, NECMP awards 14+?, at least 393 in-season merit based CMP seats, 98.3%+ of all CMP (assuming 400 seat cap)
2013: 58 Regionals, MICMP awards 27, MARCMP awards 14, 389 in-season merit based CMP seats, 97.2% of all CMP
2012: 52 Regionals, MICMP awards 18, MARCMP awards 12, 342 in-season merit based CMP seats, 85.5% of all CMP
2011: 48 Regionals, MICMP awards 18, 306 in-season merit based CMP seats, 86.9% of all CMP
2010: 43 Regionals, MICMP awards 18, 276 in-season merit based CMP seats, 80.2% of all CMP
2009: 40 Regionals, MICMP awards 18, 258 in-season merit based CMP seats, 74.1% of all CMP
2008: 41 Regionals, 246 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 72.3% of all CMP
2007: 37 Regionals, 222 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 64.5% of all CMP
2006: 33 Regionals, 198 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 57.5% of all CMP
2005: 31 Regionals, 186 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 54.7% of all CMP
2004: 26 Regionals, 156 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 53.4% of all CMP
2003: 23 Regionals, 138 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 47.4% of all CMP

CMP has already reached nearly 100% saturation of merit-based teams. Additionally, this doesn't account for the other merit-based qualifiers (Sustaining, HOF, and reigning champions, reigning EI winner)

At this point, you either have to start qualifying fewer teams, which is difficult to do fairly, or make CMP bigger.