Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

[JesseK]

FTC should have more than 1 Championship, most definitely. FTC itself isn't so competitive on a national level that I don't think teams care which event they go to in order to claim "champions".

Question 1
Could FIRST split up champs with FRC/FTC and FTC/FLL? The FRC-based FTC competition would have the FTC teams which are part of larger programs and/or have older students. The FTC competition at the other event would be for FTC-only programs and/or younger students.

I think this type of split would better-serve the types of teams which would wind up at either event given the criteria above. The teams would probably more likely have more in common from a team management, funding, and goals side than is at the typical FTC championship. It also gives FLL teams something to aim for. FLL teams who have nearby FRC teams are probably inundated with demos already, so I don't think there's much inspiration lost if they attend a FLL/FTC-only Champs. It may also open the event up for even more FLL teams.

Question 2
What data is FIRST looking to gather in order to support any changes? Is FIRST looking for flow and 'feel' of a 600-team champs, are they trying to figure out what the multi-venue split will do this year, etc? Is FIRST looking to gather specific data on alumni, local politics, or other region-centric data which will help them decide geographic boundaries (etc)?

Question 3
As is the case with district implementation, there may be a few fringe cases where it doesn't make sense to do the 'new' thing since it is entirely counter-productive to how the team is managed, located or few-year forecasts the team has done. Will FIRST allow these fringe cases to be handled on a case-by-case basis, or are the boundaries going to be as strict as districts? (Note - my team is not currently and would not become one of these fringe cases)

Question 4
Be honest: is the 4-tier "super regional" still the long-term plan? (P.S. my wife doesn't yet know there are 4 potential events next year under the district system. I seriously doubt she'll get on board with 5 events unless one of them is in Vegas or somewhere tropical. Houston doesn't count, at least I don't think it does. No offense Houston )

[Siri]

Originally Posted by grstex

...If you were in their shoes, and invested time, money, and political and business connections attract such a big event, and got something very different than what was promised, would you not be upset? (Honestly, in typing this, I realize this is likely what many commenters feel has happened to them with this announcement.) To be blunt, reshaping this agreement and awarding only one city the championship that both cities were promised will leave the other city snubbed.* That will ruin the reputation of FIRST, and make it that much harder to negotiate with other cities in the future (if you don't think this type of thing would be spread by mayors, tourism chiefs, etc., you're wrong)...

Yes, and it's worse than that. As has been discussed elsewhere, it's quite possible/likely that the contracts specified FRC, or at perhaps specified requirements that can only be met via FRC. That's one of the (many) reasons we've asked Frank to explain exactly what's going on. Hopefully he can clarify what parts of the press released information is set in stone and what isn't.

And, Re: "Honestly, in typing this, I realize this is likely what many commenters feel has happened to them with this announcement." — hear, hear.

Originally Posted by grstex

I really think allowing qualifying teams to opt in to a "swap lottery" has a lot of potential. It allows for cross pollination, gives qualifying teams a special privilege that they earned, and would protect against stacking one Championship at the expense of the other.

Emphasis mine. I like the swap idea too (not to claim that it does much for the big picture), but I wouldn't count on it preventing stacking one event or the other. In fact, it could well do the opposite. If one event ends up being considered perennially "stronger" pre-swap (which it will*), it's likely that few powerhouses will want to leave it and many will want to come in. (At least if the discussion here and the existence of IRI are any indication.) Assuming there are still some teams at the "stronger" event that want to travel elsewhere, you'll see a net inflow of strength rather than outflow. How large the change would be is unclear. However, one might expect that the more unequal they are and the more they're opened to swapping, the more one of them will attract strong teams and thus the fewer strong teams already there will want to leave.

*This isn't necessarily a comment on team geography, just the statistical likelihood of two quantities like this being equal. However, you can examine the historical geography of Worlds Division finals.

[grstex]

Originally Posted by Siri

Emphasis mine. I like the swap idea too (not to claim that it does much for the big picture), but I wouldn't count on it preventing stacking one event or the other. In fact, it could well do the opposite. If one event ends up being considered perennially "stronger" pre-swap (which it will*), it's likely that few powerhouses will want to leave it and many will want to come in. (At least if the discussion here and the existence of IRI are any indication.) Assuming there are still some teams at the "stronger" event that want to travel elsewhere, you'll see a net inflow of strength rather than outflow. How large the change would be is unclear. However, one might expect that the more unequal they are and the more they're opened to swapping, the more one of them will attract strong teams and thus the fewer strong teams already there will want to leave.

That's why I think it should be a swap (qualifying team for qualifying team) lottery (random). Those trying to reach the "stronger" championship will have to rely on qualifying teams from the other region also entering the lottery. even then, it would be a random switch. Heck, the lottery algorithim could even stipulate that it's an "even swap" (winning alliance captain for wining alliance captain, etc.). Even so, There will at least be some opportunistic teams aiming to swap to the "weaker" championship to increase their chances of winning. It opens up all sorts of interesting choices with risks and tradeoffs! THAT is cool!

Originally Posted by Siri

Yes, and it's worse than that. As has been discussed elsewhere, it's quite possible/likely that the contracts specified FRC, or at perhaps specified requirements that can only be met via FRC. That's one of the (many) reasons we've asked Frank to explain exactly what's going on. Hopefully he can clarify what parts of the press released information is set in stone and what isn't.

In that case I'd recommend requesting a Q&A session be a major agenda item at the town hall. I think FIRST's goals with split championships were pretty clear based on the press release and blog post, but anything that will help teams better understand this decision and the motivation behind it will ease the tension (as long as things are kept civil).

Originally Posted by Siri

And, Re: "Honestly, in typing this, I realize this is likely what many commenters feel has happened to them with this announcement." — hear, hear.

With all due respect, I acknowledged and understood the sentiment, I didn't agree with it. As a FIRST alumni and active volunteer, I've been... "disappointed" by some of the comments on other threads.

Having said that, I look forward to seeing an enlightening and constructive town hall that embodies the values of FIRST. Lets aim toward that goal.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by grstex

That's why I think it should be a swap (qualifying team for qualifying team) lottery (random). Those trying to reach the "stronger" championship will have to rely on qualifying teams from the other region also entering the lottery. even then, it would be a random switch. Heck, the lottery algorithim could even stipulate that it's an "even swap" (winning alliance captain for wining alliance captain, etc.). Even so, There will at least be some opportunistic teams aiming to swap to the "weaker" championship to increase their chances of winning. It opens up all sorts of interesting choices with risks and tradeoffs! THAT is cool!

I understand that you see this working, but I still haven't figured out how making it a lottery would address the phenomenon of more powerhouse teams signing up to leave one event than the other. Unless HQ develops a way to deliberately control powerhouse swaps, making the selection random doesn't compensate for the bias within the lottery pools themselves. A winning alliance captain is not the same thing in all cases. This isn't meant an insult to any specific team, simply an acknowledgement that different performances are different. It would take concerted and arguably inappropriately specific effort on the part of HQ to even ostensibly enforce equality, with or without a swap program.

I also feel the need to strenuously challenge the term "cool" for engaging in the practice you refer to as opportunistic (personally I'd call it exploitative). This is already possible at a regional level, and I have never seen nor had the desire to apply the word "cool" to it. I usually hear it called exactly (exactly) the opposite. Particularly because most teams do not have the luxury to move even should they wish to do so.

Originally Posted by grstex

In that case I'd recommend requesting a Q&A session be a major agenda item at the town hall. I think FIRST's goals with split championships were pretty clear based on the press release and blog post, but anything that will help teams better understand this decision and the motivation behind it will ease the tension (as long as things are kept civil).

I would expect that the Q&A will be, but would personally find HQ waiting until Worlds to publicize these details rather untoward. It's very difficult to prepare proposals without knowing what's legally locked and what's not. I've made a blog comment request for more information already.

Originally Posted by grstex

With all due respect, I acknowledged and understood the sentiment, I didn't agree with it. As a FIRST alumni and active volunteer, I've been... "disappointed" by some of the comments on other threads.

Sorry, I hadn't meant to imply that you agreed, merely that the comparison was insightful and rhetorically impressive.

[PAR_WIG1350]

Originally Posted by grstex

I know this is a popular compromise being discussed, but but please consider how this will be perceived by the host cities. They (along with the FIRST sponsors based in those cities) likely spent lots of time and money bidding to an FRC Championship. I suspected that all cities bidding to host championships also knew there would two championship events. Suddenly changing course and giving one city the FRC Championship and the other and FTC/FLL championship with an FRC invitational is not what these cities bid for.

If you were in their shoes, and invested time, money, and political and business connections attract such a big event, and got something very different than what was promised, would you not be upset? (Honestly, in typing this, I realize this is likely what many commenters feel has happened to them with this announcement.) To be blunt, reshaping this agreement and awarding only one city the championship that both cities were promised will leave the other city snubbed.* That will ruin the reputation of FIRST, and make it that much harder to negotiate with other cities in the future (if you don't think this type of thing would be spread by mayors, tourism chiefs, etc., you're wrong).

This is even more reason why FIRST should have consulted the community BEFORE it agreed to anything. Now FIRST will have to choose to spite either the host cities or the teams. On one hand, pulling the bait-and-switch on the the host cities may be damaging to FIRST's negotiating power. On the other hand, the teams are the customers to whom FIRST is providing a service. There is a limit to how much your customers will put up with before they decide that the service is not worth it.

Furthermore, if people's opinions regarding the value of the FIRST experience is diminished, such as it would be by the isolation of teams by geographical boundaries***, then teams would be less enthusiastic about bringing others into the program. FIRST seems to have dug itself a nice, deep hole, in between a rock and a hard place.

I really think allowing qualifying teams to opt in to a "swap lottery" has a lot of potential. It allows for cross pollination, gives qualifying teams a special privilege that they earned, and would protect against stacking one Championship at the expense of the other. The host cities involved would also likely welcome a more diverse pool of teams traveling to their cities.


*To be clear, calling an FTC/FLL championship a "snub" is NOT meant to disparage these programs. It's just obviously not what either host city signed up for.

This is definitely a possible solution, but it still loses to the single FRC championship option. Although time travel is still the best by far.

It might be worth noting that by moving the FTC championship to a single venue (without an FRC championship) would allow it be greatly expanded to the point where it could be nearly as large as the FRC championship. It might be possible to reduce the backlash from the host cities if FIRST promises, and delivers a greatly enlarged FTC championship in addition to a smaller FRC competition. It might take a lot of effort to effect change of this magnitude, but I think it is possible.
Additionally, FIRST could alternate which City hosts the FRC championship and which gets the FTC championship.

***The idea of FIRST causing geographical segregation is quite unpleasant, to say the least.

[grstex]

Originally Posted by PAR_WIG1350

This is even more reason why FIRST should have consulted the community BEFORE it agreed to anything. Now FIRST will have to choose to spite either the host cities or the teams. On one hand, pulling the bait-and-switch on the the host cities may be damaging to FIRST's negotiating power. On the other hand, the teams are the customers to whom FIRST is providing a service. There is a limit to how much your customers will put up with before they decide that the service is not worth it.

Furthermore, if people's opinions regarding the value of the FIRST experience is diminished, such as it would be by the isolation of teams by geographical boundaries***, then teams would be less enthusiastic about bringing others into the program. FIRST seems to have dug itself a nice, deep hole, in between a rock and a hard place.



This is definitely a possible solution, but it still loses to the single FRC championship option. Although time travel is still the best by far.

It might be worth noting that by moving the FTC championship to a single venue (without an FRC championship) would allow it be greatly expanded to the point where it could be nearly as large as the FRC championship. It might be possible to reduce the backlash from the host cities if FIRST promises, and delivers a greatly enlarged FTC championship in addition to a smaller FRC competition. It might take a lot of effort to effect change of this magnitude, but I think it is possible.
Additionally, FIRST could alternate which City hosts the FRC championship and which gets the FTC championship.

***The idea of FIRST causing geographical segregation is quite unpleasant, to say the least.

Its a classic planning exercise. Determine the space needs for the 800+ FRC teams FIRST hopes to have at championships in the future. Then, make a list of venues that can accommodate those needs. Then look at hotel space within reasonable distance, travel arrangements for domestic and international teams, amenities, etc. Build a list of venues, then ask which location is the best for everyone. It's like planning a wedding. Do you hold it near the bride's family? The groom's? Do you do a destination wedding? How do these choices effect who you invite and if they'll come? 3-course meal or buffet? Go through the exercise of getting an 800-team FRC championship under one roof, find that one best location, and ask why it was not considered.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by grstex

Go through the exercise of getting an 800-team FRC championship under one roof, find that one best location, and ask why it was not considered.

I'll give some help with that...

Fields: 800 teams might be doable with the current 8 fields. Barely. Let's use that as a baseline for size on the playing field. Incidentally, that means we'll need a football field, covered, or similarly-sized venue, just for the fields.

Pits... at 10x10 for each team, that's 80K square feet without any aisles (which will obviously add quite a bit of space--call it 120K with the aisles as a conservative number). Plus 4 basketball courts for the practice fields, plus about 400 square feet for Pit Admin. Say a good-sized convention center.

"Add-ons" like Spare Parts, HoF, Scholarship Row, Supplier Showcase, and the Conference will also need space. Plus space will be needed for the volunteer lounge, judging rooms, and VIP areas.

Seating: Many a team brings a skeleton crew. But more bring full teams. If we figure 50 people/team, that means the minimum seating is 40K seats. Not counting VIPs and judges and all, of course (they'll need a hundred or so, at best guess).

Now, any one or two of those conditions isn't all that hard to meet. Football stadiums, any college or NFL town will have at least one, and they'll probably all be able to handle 40K seats if the college is at a high enough level. (Or a baseball stadium, though you'd need to make sure that the home team was on the road that week. Soccer might be even better; the field is a smidge larger than a football field as I recall.) Convention centers, even more places have those that could probably handle the entirety of the pits and other similar space, maybe even fields (though seating could be problematic for fields). If tents are allowed, even more areas could be in the running.

But... you also have to deal with travel and lodging. Many a team will use a bus, but more will need to fly. This means an airport that can handle international flights (connections at another airport are OK too, but ). And don't forget about 15K hotel rooms for those 40K team members and the volunteers. A lot of major cities can deal with that; most can handle the traffic.

Now, the really tricky parts: The whole thing has to be covered throughout the event, and the field area and the pit area have to be pretty close together. And transport to the airport and hotels needs to be manageable.

And that's just for FRC.

Atlanta did a pretty good job--if FIRST were still there, I'm pretty sure they'd be able to pull off an 800-team event under those conditions. But the Georgia Dome might not be available much longer. (GWCC might still be an option.) St. Louis is rather cramped. I'm not aware of anything of that nature out here on the West Coast--maybe Seattle has something but I doubt it. I've heard rumors of Anaheim but that might be stretching it quite a bit. (We've got good weather out here, so very few stadiums even have a roof--you'd be getting a convention center.) I've heard Indianapolis floated a few times as a possible site, but I haven't been anywhere near the proposed venue so I don't know anything.

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by EricH

Atlanta did a pretty good job--if FIRST were still there, I'm pretty sure they'd be able to pull off an 800-team event under those conditions.

I know we keep focusing on 800 teams, but it stands to reason that FIRST has the goal of getting >25% of teams to a championship event. While one location might be good for 800 teams, what happens when FRC grows beyond 3200 to 4000 or more teams?

While any solution focusing on 2017 and 2018 would assume 2 locations at some 800 team split, I'd look at it from FIRST's perspective. If the solution isn't scalable to years in the future, it probably is a non-starter with FIRST.



Thinking outside of the box, I think it would be neat to wrap up the previous season at the next year's kickoff. Having both winners play then solves the problem of no clearly defined champion, low visibility and perhaps "unofficial-ness" at any event other than a championship, fast turnaround travel times for the winning alliance at the early event, and possibly mentor burn-out / limited vacation times, etc.

This introduces more problems for the teams that win, including what to do with their robots in the off season and seniors graduating, but I think that could be worked around.

[grstex]

Originally Posted by efoote868

I know we keep focusing on 800 teams, but it stands to reason that FIRST has the goal of getting >25% of teams to a championship event. While one location might be good for 800 teams, what happens when FRC grows beyond 3200 to 4000 or more teams?

While any solution focusing on 2017 and 2018 would assume 2 locations at some 800 team split, I'd look at it from FIRST's perspective. If the solution isn't scalable to years in the future, it probably is a non-starter with FIRST.



Thinking outside of the box, I think it would be neat to wrap up the previous season at the next year's kickoff. Having both winners play then solves the problem of no clearly defined champion, low visibility and perhaps "unofficial-ness" at any event other than a championship, fast turnaround travel times for the winning alliance at the early event, and possibly mentor burn-out / limited vacation times, etc.

This introduces more problems for the teams that win, including what to do with their robots in the off season and seniors graduating, but I think that could be worked around.

One of my favorite ideas! What a way to kick off the next season! Sure, it has its shortcomings (I'd also add that the "cliffhanger" aspect as a shortcoming, but hey, it works for TV shows), but seeing the previous champions face off would certainly spark imaginations just before the new game reveal!

And, scalability is very likely a factor in championship format.

[cglrcng]

Originally Posted by efoote868

I know we keep focusing on 800 teams, but it stands to reason that FIRST has the goal of getting >25% of teams to a championship event. While one location might be good for 800 teams, what happens when FRC grows beyond 3200 to 4000 or more teams?

While any solution focusing on 2017 and 2018 would assume 2 locations at some 800 team split, I'd look at it from FIRST's perspective. If the solution isn't scalable to years in the future, it probably is a non-starter with FIRST.



Thinking outside of the box, I think it would be neat to wrap up the previous season at the next year's kickoff. Having both winners play then solves the problem of no clearly defined champion, low visibility and perhaps "unofficial-ness" at any event other than a championship, fast turnaround travel times for the winning alliance at the early event, and possibly mentor burn-out / limited vacation times, etc.

This introduces more problems for the teams that win, including what to do with their robots in the off season and seniors graduating, but I think that could be worked around.

Wow....There is a different solution that could work. Graduating seniors could go out as Co-World Champs...And, The incoming, continuing team members could start off with a bang also.

That would certainly be interesting, Have the Championship Matches followed by a release of the new game and unveiling of the New Field Setup. Giving kickoff a new meaning, and new relative importance.

[MrRoboSteve]

Rachel, here are some notes based on my experience with double regionals in Minnesota that might be useful in thinking about your super-district proposal. Our local committee presents two double regionals, each with 124 teams participating.

The regionals in Duluth are held in the DECC arena (curtain between the two events), with the pits in the attached two convention center spaces. We use the arena and the two convention spaces in the lower right hand part of that map. One of the two regionals is space constrained, based on the square footage available in the City Side facility, which limits us to 60 teams in that regional.

The regionals in Minneapolis are held in adjacent facilities. 10000 Lakes is held in Williams Arena, which has an attached Sports Pavilion that can accommodate 64 pits. Across the street, North Star is held in Mariucci Arena on the arena floor. That regional accommodates 60 teams and is very tight space-wise.

The football stadium is probably the only facility that could accommodate a 200 team event. It's possible that it could be held in the convention center, with a scaffolding grandstand for the field.

Regardless, at 200 teams it would probably be a four field event. It would be about twice the size of event that we currently staff with volunteers, so you'd need some transition strategy to build up the volunteer base for the event. I'm not aware of any local committee (run almost entirely on volunteers) presenting competition events larger than 124 teams. IIRC the next largest local event is FiM, with 102 teams this year.

[cglrcng]

I snipped this from a post of mine in the "We are Listening" thread (and added a bit more)...Just some thoughts, suggestions, conversation.
_________________________________________________

If you build it they will come. And come they (we) are, as we all spread FIRST far & wide with outreach (we / FIRST reward(s) that outreach, inspiration, and growth with the very highest awards FIRST has to offer...HofF, CM, EI, WFA, and much more), and along the way, that growth will have extreme costs (and HUGE Planetary HUMAN REWARDS),....So change is inevitable, we grow it, we must change with it.

FIRST will never be able to please ALL THE PEOPLE ALL OF THE TIME, they know it, and we know it....Now, lets work together to solve the problems caused by our metoric growth and expansion of The FIRST Mission & Ideals...Which we should be celebrating, instead of cringing (or being angered), from/by its results.

FIRST is listening, and we as a group (a huge community), are some of the largest problem solvers I have ever witnessed in my 58 year lifetime. If you can design a system to snatch 2~4 of those RC's off the shelf in .02 seconds, this problem should be a snap to come up w/ a reasonable solution to determine a world champion in 2017, and far beyond.
___________________________________
This year 600 Robots in 8 divisions in one place, 20% of all participating teams represented, next year the same (hopefully, but may drop again to 17% w/ more growth), and the following year (2017), 800 Robots in 8 divisions in 2 different places, 25% of all teams represented again.

(FIRST may need to actually back off that "Geographical Assignment or Placement," add in a single lottery the first year to determine whether each team is N/S, w/ 400 evenly & randomly going to each location in 2017, and after that add an odd/even last digit Team # switch of location every 3rd. year (odd the 3rd year switch/even the 6th year switch, or even 1/2 teams switch each year by lottery at season beginning), to mix up what teams play where each year so that all teams qualified & attending will have exposure to all other attending teams throughout a 4 year run). Someone else could run the math to get fair & equal exposure to all, exceptions could be made for financial hardship cases only, & on an even trade request basis only.

Add 1 final place in 2017 and beyond, mid-June (maybe FIRST HQ), where those 8 championship competing teams are rewarded w/ an all expenses paid (see the $50.00-$100.00 setaside from all 800 Championship Team entries idea below to finance that program), face off to determine a FIRST FRC World Campionship Title, in a Nationally televised best of 7, or best of 9 match event to see who the real World Champions really are. (I would go 1 further...allow after the 2 N/S event Winners~Just the last 8 Teams Standing, an unbag period of 3 weeks before the mid-June event, allow both Alliances to effect repairs, practice new drivers if graduating seniors cannot possibly move on, strategize, & cheesecake all they wanted).

Or, if that isn't agreeable, just ship all 8 of the robots to NH immediately from the N/S events bagged in the crates untouched from last match/no holdout allowance. 1 or 2 Truck(s)/ 2 weekends (Houston to Detroit, then...Off to NH w/ all 8 crated bots & 8 Sets of Team Tool Crates, etc)...Teams will see them in NH in 3 weeks or so. (Hey, I know where FIRST could find a whole lot of Grey/Yellow Totes to pack those tools in after this years Champs! They now own them). Now that...is true Recycling!
______________________
There are other ways beyond the existing signed contracts years (I had discussed something like this w/ my wife last Fall)...1 Event site 4 Days 400 Robots/Teams. Then out w/ the 1st bunch...In w/ the 2nd. Bunch next 400 Robots/Teams...You (FIRST) stores the robots and pit gear for the winners only of days 1~4, they fly home/then back in for the finals on the last Friday PM/Saturday AM. Just the drive team and essential personell paid for say 12 of each (Each of the 4 teams can/may send the rest of the team on their own dime if they wish). The venue goes dark 1~2 days (Sunday~Monday), for cleaning & admin. to breathe. Back at it again big on Wednesday ~Saturday (Championship Matches Saturday Night like usual).

That way, the same venue/hotels/fields, etc. can be used, and it is still a true single location FRC World Championships. You move that around between 4~5 geographical locations N/S/C/E/W. (You are only inconveniencing 4 total teams...4 teams w/ a 50/50 shot at a WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP!) How many would actually turn that down? How many of us wouldn't help them if they really couldn't afford it? Not many! (FIRST could set aside $50.00~$100.00 of all 800 teams entry fee to Champs to create a fund for the returning 4 teams=$40~&80K=10K per team in financial help to return to battle 1 week later for the World Championship Title).

12 Team Members Ea. X 4 Teams X $600.00 Flight Avg. per person=$28,800.00/1 night hotel 48 X$100.=$4,800.00=$33,600.00 Total (gas money to get home or food Bal., or addl. airfare $6,400.00) =Very Doable! (Of course as FIRST, I'd be hitting up a Major set of Airlines or Other Major Corporations wanting top billing exposure, to Sponsor the returning teams playing for the Championships myself for both the home & back round trip flights! And building the returning teams 1 room night into the actual event contract.) </;-)~ (TV Rights could add to the revenue & 4~8 returning team help stream, if billed & sold properly).

(There would be no strategy that would help any team, as nobody would know who plays the week 1 winners, until they were even back in town and ready to play again on Einstein). Just attempt to strategize when you have no clue of who you will actually play. If a later date is chosen like mid-June, both alliances would know immediately following the 2nd. event...Strategize to your hearts content. Then meet on the Competition Field and playoff for the Wins & the Title. But, if there is additional travel involved for those 8 teams, make it a big battle, make it the SuperBowl Championships of FIRST FRC!

OK, there would have to be a televised production of the Championships, so the rest of those playing week 1 and back home would have viewing access as usual to the following Saturday Championship Matches. Invited Teams are rotated based on when they last played as far as week 1 or 2 at Champs (or by simple luck of the lottery draw each year).

With 8 divisions this year, you may visit other teams pits, but you won't really have much true exposure to many outside your actual Division. And in 3~4 days, can you really visit 599 other teams? (Working fieldside this year, I may even catch a glimpse of my own team occasionally...maybe! But I will get a good look at 1/8th of the teams present, about 10 minutes at a time. In retrospect, if it were 2017, that would be 1/4 of the teams present).
_______________
Just throwing out some other future ideas here. (They promised those venues and cities 2 FIRST Championships in those contracts no doubt...Don't expect that suggested often FLL/FTC~FRC split to fly....Big chances it cannot now, no matter what! Nor, I think, would USFIRST ever want it to).

1 more thing...FIRST has never to my knowledge said it was a FRC WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP (except "The 2015 FTC World Championships" this year I just noticed on the main FIRST page logos...LOL) (The community did that all on their own), they bill it as "The 2015 FIRST FRC Championship!" Do the banners this year actually say "2015 World Champion / 2015 World Finalists?"

I know what participants say...But, what does FIRST bill it as? They are the Creators, they are MANAGEMENT. (We are Customers, The Community, Volunteers, Invested Owners, Participants).

We are growing, growing, GROWING! BIG Change is HERE! (So, get used to it!) Be the problem...Or.....Be the solution. Rant over. Ideas put forth...Take them, leave them, toss them all.

There's my $0.32 cents after reading 815...ummm, NO, now over 950 postings in 1 single sitting.

[JaneYoung]

Although I am not attending the Championship Event and will not be able to attend the Town Hall Meeting (sadly), I am hoping that it goes well and that concerns are expressed clearly and information shared readily.

This would be my personal check list for participation preparation. It may sound like an elementary school lesson but, it helps.

1. Rest and food before the meeting. Make sure you are not hungry. Rest at the Championships is very difficult but, it can help. Send someone in your stead if you are already ready to snap.

2. Buddy system. Bring a buddy. That second set of ears is very helpful when going over the notes taken during the meeting. Also, an elbow in the ribs can be quite helpful at times such as, right before the snap.

3. Writing materials for taking notes. My preference is pen and paper; it allows me to doodle while I listen.

4. Listening ears. We are all guilty of wanting to say what we want to say and not actively listening. Here again, a buddy system can work wonders.

5. Draft and fine-tune a list of questions and concerns/comments that you would like to ask/express. This keeps you on task and helps control emotions during the meeting. Have 5 to 10 questions/comments prepared.

#5 is for this group. Use this thread, or a new one, to draft your collective questions and concerns. Keep them concise, allowing time for needed responses from the Senior Leadership. This was a similar approach that was used for the Transparency letter that was drafted/sent a few years back. Again, this will help keep everyone on the same page and will allow opportunity for keeping random wastes of time and emotions in check during the meeting. It also shows unity.

6. Keep the FIRST community spirit of Gracious Professionalism alive and well. Woodie's Grandmother is watching, I'm sure.

By preparing for the meeting, you have prepared yourself for any other opportunities that arise for discussions/conversations/interactions.

Jane

[PAR_WIG1350]

Originally Posted by cglrcng

There are other ways beyond the existing signed contracts years (I had discussed something like this w/ my wife last Fall)...1 Event site 4 Days 400 Robots/Teams. Then out w/ the 1st bunch...In w/ the 2nd. Bunch next 400 Robots/Teams...You (FIRST) stores the robots and pit gear for the winners only of days 1~4, they fly home/then back in for the finals on the last Friday PM/Saturday AM. Just the drive team and essential personell paid for say 12 of each (Each of the 4 teams can/may send the rest of the team on their own dime if they wish). The venue goes dark 1~2 days (Sunday~Monday), for cleaning & admin. to breathe. Back at it again big on Wednesday ~Saturday (Championship Matches Saturday Night like usual).

That way, the same venue/hotels/fields, etc. can be used, and it is still a true single location FRC World Championships. You move that around between 4~5 geographical locations N/S/C/E/W. (You are only inconveniencing 4 total teams...4 teams w/ a 50/50 shot at a WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP!) How many would actually turn that down? How many of us wouldn't help them if they really couldn't afford it? Not many! (FIRST could set aside $50.00~$100.00 of all 800 teams entry fee to Champs to create a fund for the returning 4 teams=$40~&80K=10K per team in financial help to return to battle 1 week later for the World Championship Title).

12 Team Members Ea. X 4 Teams X $600.00 Flight Avg. per person=$28,800.00/1 night hotel 48 X$100.=$4,800.00=$33,600.00 Total (gas money to get home or food Bal., or addl. airfare $6,400.00) =Very Doable! (Of course as FIRST, I'd be hitting up a Major set of Airlines or Other Major Corporations wanting top billing exposure, to Sponsor the returning teams playing for the Championships myself for both the home & back round trip flights! And building the returning teams 1 room night into the actual event contract.) </;-)~ (TV Rights could add to the revenue & 4~8 returning team help stream, if billed & sold properly).

Many people have proposed similar situations, and the following applies to all of them. Such proposals might be feasible for a national competition, however, FRC is international. The logistics of arranging for international travel in such a short timeframe are, at best, problematic.

[grstex]

Originally Posted by EricH

I'll give some help with that...

Fields: 800 teams might be doable with the current 8 fields. Barely. Let's use that as a baseline for size on the playing field. Incidentally, that means we'll need a football field, covered, or similarly-sized venue, just for the fields.

Pits... at 10x10 for each team, that's 80K square feet without any aisles (which will obviously add quite a bit of space--call it 120K with the aisles as a conservative number). Plus 4 basketball courts for the practice fields, plus about 400 square feet for Pit Admin. Say a good-sized convention center.

"Add-ons" like Spare Parts, HoF, Scholarship Row, Supplier Showcase, and the Conference will also need space. Plus space will be needed for the volunteer lounge, judging rooms, and VIP areas.

Seating: Many a team brings a skeleton crew. But more bring full teams. If we figure 50 people/team, that means the minimum seating is 40K seats. Not counting VIPs and judges and all, of course (they'll need a hundred or so, at best guess).

Now, any one or two of those conditions isn't all that hard to meet. Football stadiums, any college or NFL town will have at least one, and they'll probably all be able to handle 40K seats if the college is at a high enough level. (Or a baseball stadium, though you'd need to make sure that the home team was on the road that week. Soccer might be even better; the field is a smidge larger than a football field as I recall.) Convention centers, even more places have those that could probably handle the entirety of the pits and other similar space, maybe even fields (though seating could be problematic for fields). If tents are allowed, even more areas could be in the running.

But... you also have to deal with travel and lodging. Many a team will use a bus, but more will need to fly. This means an airport that can handle international flights (connections at another airport are OK too, but ). And don't forget about 15K hotel rooms for those 40K team members and the volunteers. A lot of major cities can deal with that; most can handle the traffic.

Now, the really tricky parts: The whole thing has to be covered throughout the event, and the field area and the pit area have to be pretty close together. And transport to the airport and hotels needs to be manageable.

And that's just for FRC.

Atlanta did a pretty good job--if FIRST were still there, I'm pretty sure they'd be able to pull off an 800-team event under those conditions. But the Georgia Dome might not be available much longer. (GWCC might still be an option.) St. Louis is rather cramped. I'm not aware of anything of that nature out here on the West Coast--maybe Seattle has something but I doubt it. I've heard rumors of Anaheim but that might be stretching it quite a bit. (We've got good weather out here, so very few stadiums even have a roof--you'd be getting a convention center.) I've heard Indianapolis floated a few times as a possible site, but I haven't been anywhere near the proposed venue so I don't know anything.

Thanks Eric! Good start. For a baseline, check the Championship website for this year. You'll see FTC has already been moved to a completely separate venue, so I think it's safe to assume you need greater than the maximum exhibit space at the America's Center/EJD, which is over 500,000 square feet.

Anything on either coast is out for a single FRC event, as it's more travel for teams on the opposite coast. That leaves the central US (that was the reasoning behind St. Louis, IIRC). At 566,000 SQFT, The Indiana Convention Center isn't much larger than St. Louis, which we already acknowledged is cramped. Tents are a good idea, but I was around for old school FRC at Epcot Center, which was nothing but tents and portable A/C. I imagine several 100,000 SQFT of tents would be expensive. The GWCC might have still been an option. And then there's Detroit and Houston.

Now ask FIRST why a single FRC-only championship wasn't considered at one of these facilities (or any others that meet criteria). And, ask why subdividing Championships was preferred over breaking up the established precedent of having all four programs at one event. This is the path to many of the answers as to why this decision was made. What are the goals and constraints of a FIRST Championship event? Define the scope, and look at your viable options for meeting your short and long term goals. That's what FIRST had to do, and we can find answers to our "why" questions if we attempt it ourselves. BUT, you can also ask FIRST their reasoning, too. That why they're holding the town hall.