Championships in 2017

[hutchMN]

Originally Posted by Liam Fay

This is something I think people need to remember. Not being able to see all of your friends on other teams is a real frustration with the two champs system, and I get that. But when it comes to not being able to see all the good teams, there will still be plenty to make it feel like champs. Can you give me any combination of four divisions from this year that, put together and separated, wouldn't feel world class?

Champs doesn't feel the same since they have gone to 8 divisions. MSC is already more competitive than Champs. The reason why I'm inspired by FIRST was watching some of the best robots at Champs in 2013 (1114 and 118). FIRST is just diluting the Champs experience. If you have 30 robot points, it's better to make 3 things 10 points than it is to make 6 things 5 points; the same thing applies to Champs.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by hutchMN

Champs doesn't feel the same since they have gone to 8 divisions. MSC is already more competitive than Champs. The reason why I'm inspired by FIRST was watching some of the best robots at Champs in 2013 (1114 and 118). FIRST is just diluting the Champs experience. If you have 30 robot points, it's better to make 3 things 10 points than it is to make 6 things 5 points; the same thing applies to Champs.

I feel like a broken record on this point, but it seems like I keep having to say it.

As a team that has been to Champs 4 out of the last 4 years, I think you might be a little biased. 14% of FRC teams went to Champs this year. If you had your way, it'd be 9.5%. I'm guessing about half of them are regulars at champs. So in a 4 year span, maybe 25% of FRC gets to 1Champs. Which means that the competitiveness and truthiness of Champs is probably fairly irrelevant to something like 75% of FRC. And it only gets more irrelevant as the program grows in the future, especially as we move to districts and the random elements of wildcards and 2nd picks are eliminated. At some point it's going to turn into a huge expensive party for pretty much the same people every year. If PayneTrain worries about sponsors shelling out $15K to send a team to an "expo", I worry about sponsors shelling out millions of dollars to reach the same people every year. At some point you'd have to wonder about switching to a 2 or 4 year schedule to save money.

Also, I remember way back when Champs admission was changed from a free-for-all to a qualifying system. I'm pretty sure the howls of outrage are louder now only because there's like 5 times as many teams.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

I feel like a broken record on this point, but it seems like I keep having to say it.

As a team that has been to Champs 4 out of the last 4 years, I think you might be a little biased. 14% of FRC teams went to Champs this year. If you had your way, it'd be 9.5%. I'm guessing about half of them are regulars at champs. So in a 4 year span, maybe 25% of FRC gets to 1Champs. Which means that the competitiveness and truthiness of Champs is probably fairly irrelevant to something like 75% of FRC. And it only gets more irrelevant as the program grows in the future, especially as we move to districts and the random elements of wildcards and 2nd picks are eliminated. At some point it's going to turn into a huge expensive party for pretty much the same people every year. If PayneTrain worries about sponsors shelling out $15K to send a team to an "expo", I worry about sponsors shelling out millions of dollars to reach the same people every year. At some point you'd have to wonder about switching to a 2 or 4 year schedule to save money.

Also, I remember way back when Champs admission was changed from a free-for-all to a qualifying system. I'm pretty sure the howls of outrage are louder now only because there's like 5 times as many teams.

I understand the need to expand to 2 events to add teams. However FIRST HQ ignored several suggestions on how to distribute teams so as to create a single championship. That's where the the real problem is.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

I understand the need to expand to 2 events to add teams. However FIRST HQ ignored several suggestions on how to distribute teams so as to create a single championship. That's where the the real problem is.

I've never been able to see how the super regional to 1Champs proposal addresses the concerns that 2Champs dilutes the field and inspiration. If 2Champs = 2 Super Regionals, then tacking 1Champs on the end of the Super Regionals seems like spending a boatload of cash, plus another week of time and school to extra super inspire an ever dwindling percentage of FRC teams. And, again, probably largely the same teams year in and out. If you're only talking about a barebones, competition only 1Champs strictly to determine who is King Of FRC for the season, then sure. Otherwise it seems like money that could be spent better elsewhere.