Future First Championship News

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by Carl C

The contracts have already been signed. If FIRST wanted to hear feedback, it would have been more helpful to have asked before the final decision was made.

Originally Posted by smurfgirl

I think with the venues already booked, they are locked in.

Originally Posted by BrennanB

Since they have contracts, we move FLL/FTC to one, and FRC to the other, which really sucks, but it's the lesser of all the evils.

It would be a foolish contract indeed, that failed to spell out ways for the parties to terminate it early.

At this stage—years in advance—it might be as simple as forfeiting a down payment. So it might be worthwhile to consider what price you'd put on some other championship arrangement. Would the world be a better place if FIRST forfeited (for example) $50 000 to a venue operator, and arranged the event(s) to your liking?

(And even if it was a foolish contract with no way out, there's always the implicit option to negotiate for an amendment.)

[AmoryG]

I get how this might benefit teams that don't often get the chance to attend the World Championship event, but how are spectators and potential future participants going to feel about this? By making these events more inclusive we're also diluting the competition, and I can't think of a bigger turnoff for spectators who expect to see the highest level of play. People are inspired by the best teams and the best players. The biggest stages draw the biggest crowds because it is the most exciting. Kids want to become sports players and achieve big things because they watched guys like Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Rodger Federer, and Michael Phelps. Making a single championship event where only the best of the best compete is in FIRST's best interests because it will draw the biggest crowds and will convert the most spectators into fans and participants.

I get why they're doing this, but it's completely misguided in my opinion. Almost no one gets to be the best, but that has never stopped any kid from trying.

[dodar]

Man, FIRST is out in full force trying to win over Michigan to go with this bad idea.

[Travis Hoffman]

Originally Posted by dodar

Man, FIRST is out in full force trying to win over Michigan to go with this bad idea.

For those not watching the webcast, care to elaborate?

[dodar]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

For those not watching the webcast, care to elaborate?

They've got Dean and Dan Bossi there from FIRST and the Governor hyping up one of the championships being in Detroit.

*I've gotta say, it feels super weird to say, "one of the championships."*

[Travis Hoffman]

Originally Posted by dodar

They've got Dean and Dan Bossi there from FIRST and the Governor hyping up one of the championships being in Detroit.

*I've gotta say, it feels super weird to say, "one of the championships."*

The eventual dual "Championships" being hosted in states with significant state government influence in FIRST affairs is certainly interesting.

[Steven Smith]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

The eventual dual "Championships" being hosted in states with significant state government influence in FIRST affairs is certainly interesting.

I'd wonder if it were the other way around? I might not have read your comment correctly, but it seems to suggest that Texas/Michigan governments are exerting undue influence over FIRST's decisions.

FIRST has successfully made ground with both state governments (Michigan more so than Texas... but growing in Texas), and perhaps they are able to secure additional state funding or preferential contracts on the the event locations. With the inability to satisfy the FIRST growth model in St. Louis*, the loss of leverage on pricing that occurs when you have an incumbent location, and the discussions around the future of the Rams... I could see a situation where financially and logistically, the move makes sense.

* - This isn't saying I agree with the model (or don't), just that the model FIRST is putting out shows growth to the 800+ FRC team mark attending championships in the next 2-3 years.

[Travis Hoffman]

Originally Posted by Steven Smith

I'd wonder if it were the other way around? I might not have read your comment correctly, but it seems to suggest that Texas/Michigan governments are exerting undue influence over FIRST's decisions.

There is no "correct" way to read my comment, as I merely noted a parallel between physical championship locations and strong governmental support of FIRST within those states.

I draw no further conclusions from this reality.

[Steven Smith]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

There is no "correct" way to read my comment, as I merely noted a parallel between physical championship locations and strong governmental support of FIRST within those states.

I draw no further conclusions from this reality.

In that case... neither do I And I also note the parallel, and I don't think it is over-reaching to say that that strong government support could have been an influencing factor in FIRST decision, and strong government support might have led to secondary benefits for FIRST in their location selections.

[Munchskull]

Originally Posted by dodar

They've got Dean and Dan Bossi there from FIRST and the Governor hyping up one of the championships being in Detroit.

*I've gotta say, it feels super weird to say, "one of the championships."*

Where is the Webcast?

[Knufire]

Originally Posted by Munchskull

Where is the Webcast?

http://www.dptv.org/programs/first-robotics/

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by dodar

They've got Dean and Dan Bossi there from FIRST and the Governor hyping up one of the championships being in Detroit.

*I've gotta say, it feels super weird to say, "one of the championships."*

Having a Championship in Detroit is the thing that makes the most sense out of all of this. Michigan has 347 teams already. Ontario has 175. Ohio has 75. Indiana has 61. That's a very sizable portion of FIRST within a few hour drive. With or without the explosion of teams in Michigan in the last couple years progressing into future years, the Great Lakes region is already incredibly dense for FRC.

[alopex_rex]

A few thoughts on this:

My team last went to Championships in 2012, my first year, and I can tell you guys: yes, it is an experience, and an amazing one at that. FIRST recognizes that, and I think teams like mine do as well. I'm inclined to think that those who object strongly to having two championships are associated with teams that are invited very frequently if not routinely, and don't appreciate how much it means to teams for whom attending the championship is an incredible achievement. I honestly don't understand why so many people are angry at letting more teams go, especially since the number of teams in the world has increased so much. If they stick to one championship, the percentage of teams that attends will get less and less every year, meaning every team that isn't a consistent powerhouse will have less and less hope of attending.

Our team of course is excited about the Detroit Championships, since Detroit is about an hour away from where we work. But given the massively disproportionate size of FiM, it makes a lot of sense. It would be interesting to see a map of North America where the sizes of states/provinces were proportional to the number of FRC teams they contained; I suspect it would make the choice of Houston and Detroit seem very reasonable.

It's a bit weird to think about having two world champion alliances, but think: right now there isn't a single world champion. There's three. In a couple years there will be six. Perhaps that could be considered diluting the honor, but as a member of a team that is happy just to attend the championships, I'm not going to respect a champion team less for being one of a group of 0.2% of teams instead of 0.1%.

I was excited when I heard the news at MSC this weekend, and honestly I was surprised to see such a backlash. I also don't expect it to have any effect; any organization that reversed massive decisions because of some angry responses online wouldn't have survived nearly as long as FIRST has.

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by alopex_rex

A few thoughts on this:
I honestly don't understand why so many people are angry at letting more teams go, especially since the number of teams in the world has increased so much.

I don't think people are unhappy that FIRST is "letting more teams go". I think most of us would love an 800 team championship event.
But can you really call it a championship event if it's splitting FRC in half?
Now the Detroit Event will be the championships of the North, and the Houston Event will be the championships of the south. I won't be able to see 254 or 148 or 118 or 971 or 1678 or 233 or any of the teams at the other championship ever again.
Most of what makes Championships inspiring is being able to see teams from all over the world you can't see otherwise.

Instead of taking away what makes championships what it is, make DCMP's and regionals more inspiring. MSC is an incredible event because it has all the best teams from all over Michigan and awesome production values.
NECMP is exciting because it has the best of New England concentrated at one place, but it could use the production value of MSC.

Work on getting everyone to districts and making their district championships awesome. Worlds is what it is because of the teams that get to go there. Worlds should be a goal to achieve, not a giveaway.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

Instead of taking away what makes championships what it is, make DCMP's and regionals more inspiring. MSC is an incredible event because it has all the best teams from all over Michigan and awesome production values.
NECMP is exciting because it has the best of New England concentrated at one place, but it could use the production value of MSC.

Work on getting everyone to districts and making their district championships awesome. Worlds is what it is because of the teams that get to go there. Worlds should be a goal to achieve, not a giveaway.

Going from a 400 team format to 800 teams brings in 2,000,000 more money in registration fees alone. Every extra team that "earns" a spot to Champs via wait list or wildcard, means more $$$ for FIRST.
I can see HQ not wanting 1 venue's constraints getting in the way of that if true.
Even if we all could make the DCMPs and regionals more inspiring, that won't be the trade off to limiting Champs.
As much as I personally agree with what you are saying about keeping Champs a much harder, more prestigious event to get into, the growth of FIRST and other factors have led to this already made decision.
Like you I am disappointed that as currently planned, we won't get to see 1/2 of the teams that we all looked forward to seeing in years past.