The “Should we replay Infinite Recharge” poll currently shows that 58% of respondents either want to replay the game (25%), are ok with replaying the game (19%), or are currently not sure if they want to replay the game (14%). 39% are against replay.
The pros and cons of each option have been heavily debated, and I myself am strongly in favor of replay, but I also understand the blah’s people have against it. I just set the sustainability of teams and protection of their investments and financial/human capital flexibility above all other concerns.
But I have an idea (described by one esteemed mentor colleague as “neat”) that could permit Infinite Recharge replay, get those on the fence to buy into replay, AND placate those who want a new game to chew on.
Replay Infinite Recharge in 2021 (with any tweaks the GDC might want to toss at us), but also RELEASE THE NEXT FRC GAME at 2021 Kickoff
The new game would be played in 2022. Everything returns to normal in 2023.
I will list the pros of this scenario, as I can imagine them. I will leave it to others to provide supplemental reasons to support this idea, as well as any arguments against. Again, I place anything that helps teams survive and PROTECT THEIR FINANCIAL AND HUMAN ASSETS during this ongoing period of uncertainty above all else. I also place elimination of wasted resources above most everything else. I am not alone. I listened in on a conference call between Ohio officials and teams this past weekend. Some team leaders are very concerned about the future of their programs and are looking to FIRST to make smart decisions that help them protect what they have built.
PROS
-
Absolutely GUARANTEES that FIRST will not be tossing 2 perfectly-viable FRC games into the trash as a result of COVID-19. Understand this now, folks - NO ONE KNOWS when governments en masse will permit competitive events of the scale of FRC competitions again. Professional and collegiate sports teams have NO IDEA currently when they will restart. Replaying Infinite Recharge will set up the situation where it can once again fall on the sword for all of us should the 2021 competition season be forcibly denied due to whatever may still come our way. Do not RUSH to trash a 2nd straight game and put teams in the same situation as last year. Heck - right now, we don’t even know when public schools will let teams return to meeting on school premises.
-
Permits teams (especially 2020 rookies and single-event teams who never competed and HECK - even those who DID) to re-use/improve their existing 2020 robots, protecting their investment, extracting more enjoyment, and reducing internal waste.
-
Allows re-use of all the playing field elements our 2020 event fees paid to build. We aren’t just tossing that expense in the garbage. Over 5/7 of the 2020 game season had yet to be played. Also permits use of trophies, medals, signage, and other game-specific materials that would cost even more money to replace or revise. Far less waste. [Edit - as my team never played the 2020 game, I don’t mind if the awards retain “2020” on them for events that were never played. You would have the situation where events that were played last year would have “2021” on the new awards, and the rest retain 2020. I think that’s fine. We are not so much “replaying” the season as we are extending and completing it over the course of 2 years. But being consistent with 2021 is also ok - just costs more money HQ doesn’t necessarily have to spend.]
-
Permits those looking for a fresh challenge and who are satisfied with their 2020 robots to pursue new designs. Does NOT preclude those who still have work to do on their 2020 robots from also throwing mental muscle behind the new game.
-
Provides a greater demand for new parts purchases in 2021, supporting FRC suppliers without treating all teams as merely a supply of funding to pad bottom lines. This is a compromise.
-
An extended build for the new game relaxes pressures on team personnel, many of whom may be effected for an extended period (unemployment, lack of time to mentor, loss of mentors due to illness, etc.) due to the effects of COVID-19 and government lockdowns. And we’ve already dispensed with the nanny state mandates of imposing a specific limited build schedule on all teams. Bag day is dead and buried. Teams were left to police their own build schedules last year. I’m sure they can continue to do so with such an extended, one-time-only build for the new game and pace themselves how they see fit. They can even choose to ignore the game entirely until the traditional build season if they want. Freedom of choice is lovely.
-
Volunteers are also very much at risk of being affected by COVID fallout. Game replay retains existing volunteer training and knowledge. Since this knowledge is already widely distributed, it would be easier for the group as a whole to identify and train replacements for 2021 should there be a volunteer shortage.
-
The extended lead-up to the 2022 game competition season would ALSO permit HQ to recruit volunteers/deploy training for that game at a much more leisurely pace. I am certain they are also under a lot of pressure - this game overlap can become a boon for them as well, in many areas.
-
Corporate sponsors are absolutely going to be affected. Their rate of giving is likely to drop, possibly significantly, both to events, and to teams. Wouldn’t it be WONDERFUL if both events and teams had their existing costs reduced via replay, such that it would be easier for them to react if/when they don’t receive what they are used to getting from larger sponsors? I think it would be golly gee whillickers freakin SWELL.
-
BIG IF TRUE - Replay and re-use of game materials generates a rather large cost savings to FRC - maximizes the possibility HQ may find it in the kindness of their heart to return some of the teams’ lost 2020 investment in the form of fee eliminations/reductions next year. I cannot imagine any chance of that happening with a brand new game release (gotta rush rush rush rush to build those new fields, folks, and those don’t pay for themselves!) unless somebody like Dean himself or some heroic corporate sponsor or foundation writes a giant bailout check to fund it.
Again, I leave it to others to define the Cons. I will give one - 2021 senior drive team members would have to drive their 2020 robot. Well gee, that beats out driving NO ROBOT AT ALL, eh 2020 senior drivers who never saw the field? This idea maximizes value, minimizes risk, recognizes the desire of teams to continue to have fresh challenges to pursue, and above all, provides TIME and FLEXIBILITY for stakeholders to more carefully navigate the choppy waters that will continue to toss us about for a currently-undefined period of future time.
Have fun!
Oh, and I would be remiss if I didn’t state that regardless of what HQ decides to do as a game for next season, proceeding along with the 2020 payment/refund policy in place for a 2021 season that is fraught with uncertainty would be A VERY BAD IDEA, leading to many teams making VERY INTERESTING DECISIONS to protect themselves. I really hope HQ is actively working on a way to protect teams’ financial interests next year and beyond. We’ll see!