Role of Sponsors at Competition

[Oblarg]

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

As important as that match was for the alliance, at the end of the day, the team's budget and sustainability is more important (in my opinion). However, these things should be relayed to and/or discussed with the alliance partners beforehand. Sponsors want to see their investment in action, so it is not really an uncalled-for request.

I wonder what sort of sponsor sees the FRC robot (rather than the team) as an investment.

Performing well in your qualification matches is as much a part of FRC as showcasing your robot.

It's a poor lesson to teach students to compromise their alliance's performance in order to superficially look more impressive. In a real engineering environment, if your product doesn't work, you don't try to demo it.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Oblarg

I wonder what sort of sponsor sees the FRC robot (rather than the team) as an investment.

The robot is a tangible short term way for them to see a return on investment.

If a $10,000 sponsor asks you to demonstrate your autonomous, you can explain it doesn't work, but still ask your partners if it is okay to demonstrate it on the field. It is up to the team to teach the sponsor why they are/are not running it.

In my opinion, not a huge deal. If it was someone on my alliance, I would understand their rationale for wanting to try out auton in front of a sponsor.

Edit: in this particular incident, since the other partners aren't confident they can make the balls in quickly after a missed auton shot, it obviously isn't the smartest choice. But if the partners are confident, it isn't a big deal.

[lpickett]

As a mentor/sponsor, I feel it is not my right to tell the drive team what to do in a match. They are suppose to know the capabilities of the alliance members and make whatever decision needs to be made in every match. The variables are different each match and unless I have done scouting on every team, I can not make an informed choice on what needs to be done. I am only here to guide the students and give them monetary support to enable them to build what they consider a good robot.

[FrankJ]

I suspect, by using my internet X-Ray vision, that there is more to this story. I cannot see a sponsor asking for an particular action on the field. Or maybe the drive team was confusing "sponsor" with "mentor". For instance we have mentors on the team who work for & represent some our sponsors. But that is one person wearing two different hats.

Our sponsors are important. Without them, we wouldn't be where we are. If they make a request we will generally bend over backwards to meet it. But when we cannot we will explain the reasons. Good communications are key in all things.

[DavisC]

Just to give my personal opinion on the matter clearly, i believe that based on the circumstances, the actions were wrong. And on another note, i was quite annoyed at the matter...

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

In my opinion, not a huge deal. If it was someone on my alliance, I would understand their rationale for wanting to try out auton in front of a sponsor.

I agree with you on this, the problem i had with this scenario is the drivers on that team didn't feel that they should do an autonomous ball; while the sponsors were telling them that they have to.

[Dancin103]

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

It is up to the team to teach the sponsor why they are/are not running it.

It is up to the STUDENTS to determine what is best for the match, and determine what is going to not only make their team look good but their partners. It's about working together, so wouldn't you want to show that.

Additionally there are a few things here - It is one thing if the drive coach / mentor of the team is an employee of the teams largest sponsor, but it is another for a sponsor, or anyone but that strategy teams and drive teams involved on an alliance to dictate how the game is played. And really the sponsor should be concerned about investing into the future of the students and community, the rest will fall into place.

My two cents.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by Dancin103

It is up to the STUDENTS to determine what is best for the match, and determine what is going to not only make their team look good but their partners. It's about working together, so wouldn't you want to show that.

Certainly. It's also up to the team to retain their sponsors, which--for whatever reason--would seem to include explaining how their autonomous (doesn't) works and what bearing this has on game play. (I think that's what Akash is saying.) Of course the students chose, but it's also important to teach them that justifying their decisions, particularly to those who cut checks, is also an important part of life.

[coalhot]

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

In my opinion, not a huge deal. If it was someone on my alliance, I would understand their rationale for wanting to try out auton in front of a sponsor.

Wouldn't winning a match and ranking higher be more of a positive outcome at the end of the event then demonstrating that an autonomous mode functions?

Originally Posted by DavisC

The ball of course missed and we loss the match by only a few points...

From my experiences, sponsors love to be able to make the claim of "the robot we sponsored ranked 15'th out of 40" and not "the robot we sponsored has a autonomous that shot the ball; but because it wasn't accurate, the robot ranked near the bottom"

Just my $0.02