I’d like to start a wide-open discussion. Topic: Get IRI covered, with commentators, live on Television. Why IRI specifically? IRI has a staggeringly higher-quality entertainment value than Champs, plain and simple.
But I’ll get some selfish reasons out of the way pretty quick.
I wasn’t able to follow IRI due to work
The videos are hard to piece together from YouTube
I don’t like most live stream sites since they force random commercials at (sometimes) the worst possible times
Then there’s also a ToS for the live stream sites that states you can’t rip the live streams to save off for later
I remember seeing, somewhere, there used to be live ESPN 2 coverage of the FRC World Championships way back when it was in Orlando. Perhaps I saw old coverage of 67 HoT back before the 3v3 format; I don’t remember exactly. How hard would it be for the IRI organizers to arrange <insert major broadcaster> support for next year? Qualification matches where a sub-100 score is out of the norm? Sign me up!
Well, then I could at least DVR IRI (ha!).
We [the collective of FIRST] could also work on the ‘make it loud’ part when there’s actually time to do so - during the offseason. It also seems to me that there’s a lull in live sports action during late July?
However:
Who are all of the stakeholders involved in this type of thing? FIRST HQ, The Group Which Makes IRI Happen, The Venue, The Volunteers, The Teams … anyone else?
Are there licensing issues that FIRST HQ would bring up?
A broadcaster, at the end of the day, speaks in the language of dollars. How can we address this with research and our own proposals?
What were the previous issues with ESPN 2 coverage of Championships, and could any sports or broadcast networks overcome them?
If this has been discussed before, is anything different (with respect to barriers or benefits) when considering IRI?
I think it’s a big step to go from no TV coverage(ie. public access-type channels) to full coverage on a major national channel…
And while I don’t believe there are any major sporting events during IRI-time, it’s a lot to ask to have a huge network devote an ENTIRE day to covering something new that markets to such a niche community(speaking realistically; obviously a goal is for FIRST to not be a niche community). Also advertisers probably would not have much confidence in putting money towards advertising during a HS robotics competition.
Also, I believe/assume that the reason there was ESPN2 coverage was because it was when championship took place at Disney; owned by the same conglomerate ESPN is apart of.
I think the first step towards getting coverage of an event like this would be something similar to MSC, broadcast by a local network, streamed online, and the ability to play it back. IMO until FIRST reaches the huge level of full day, live broadcasts on cable TV channels, MSC-type coverage was perfect.
For the next year or two, I think the most coverage of an event would be similar to the i.am.FIRST special on ABC two years ago…
A lot of things have to fall into place correctly for that to work. Aside from just getting a network to even entertain the idea, you would still have to get people that know what they’re doing to do things like camera work, commentary, and sound mixing. Not to mention there would be a lot of cooperation from the teams required, such as sending in various sized team logos, and CGI-laden graphics of the robots for use when going to commercial or team introductions.
A few examples of media coverage of regional events as sports broadcasts provided for reference.
I think online is the best place for FIRST coverage to live right now. It’s easily share-able, it’s accessible at any time to anyone with internet access, and it would not rely on advertising to keep it available.
The niche market that FIRST broadcasts would appeal too is not ideal for television but niche markets are what YouTube channels thrive on (just look at the success of channels like ‘Geek and Sundry’ and ‘Nerdist’).
While I agree that online is best for live coverage, I think there is a real opportunity for an MSC style “Special”. I also like the Roboshow that Orlando has going.
If done as a special, I think it would make for a nice trio of shows. I would show final QFs in the first episode with highlights of the previous 1-2 matches, thus showing 4 full matches/intro with highlights
During a boradcast, there is frequently 2 minute “lulls” between end of match and score anouncements. What would the community like to see in that timeframe?
Some options would be:
Instant replays
Commentary
Human/Robot interest stories
Chairman’s Award-Videos
People dancing…
As a scouter/fan, I personally think I would like to watch teh matches wide angle, full screen. Then immediately re-watch the match with wide angle or dual screen for auto, followed by close-ups. This to me would feel like getting an instant replay, without the expense/hassle of having instant replay/slowmo/rewind on the fly.
There’s some great stuff here already, so let’s focus the discussion a little. That MSC Local coverage is pretty nice. The ESPN coverage is what I had in mind. Unless FIRST begins a campaign to spread FRC to people who weren’t already looking for it, online coverage may have a great level of success yet I doubt it will ever push FRC to the scale of impact we all claim to desire.
Ike definitely nailed it - it’s the downtime filler which keeps the audience drawn in. If we consider 6 minute match cycles, 2 minutes would be commercials, ~2 minutes live non-field coverage (and Ike’s list), 2:15 of match footage. The time appropriation is very similar to typical TV (you’re being sold to for 1/3 of the time), and also happens to match the Football format - 60 minutes of football plays take ~3 hours to watch.
Perhaps we should focus on IRI specifically and show how it may be able to overcome problems that may have more to do with the typical FRC regional’s format rather than the quality of matches. IRI itself isn’t constrained by the FRC Regional time constraints. It also brings together the best brains & minds from FRC in the world with the main purpose of being competitive, so I feel confident there would be plenty of story to tell. MSC is very localized (though the entertainment value of the competitiveness is definitely just as high) so it may not ever work for a national stage.
Coverage wouldn’t be constrained to several days in a row of the same robots - that may be a bad idea for Television. What if a crew spent the last day of IRI coming up with the filler in the morning, then used it during Elims? Would FIRST be willing to advertise (or solicit for advertising) for that? Would we? This year’s IRI had 16 matches in Elims, which (roughly) translates into 2 hours of on-air time. For a pilot year, perhaps that’s ideal - but what could we do to extend that to 3 hours while upping the ante entertainment-wise?
At the Brownsburg Precision Robotics Competition last year, Team 3176 used school video equipment to do interviews with teams after matches, before matches and in the pit area. The footage was pretty raw, but for a first year event, it was really cool! I believe the plan is to do the same thing this year.
The entire footage of the event (matches and all interviews) were put on repeat in the school Media Center FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR. At any time, you could walk into the Media Center and see students sitting in chairs, studying or reading, or just hanging out, with Rebound Rumble on a television next to the local news, and school updates. It was pretty neat.
(The event this year is on November 9th…the last weekend of off-season competition. Email [email protected] if you’re interested.)
At offseason events, how critical are team introductions? I realize sometimes they’re good to fill the time while waiting for the Green Light, but do we really need to spend 1-2 minutes each round for this? We can all see the bumper numbers, and a good game announcer can provide team information during the match. Perhaps we can tighten the dead-time between matches as well as fill the time.
If the broadcast just included eliminations (which I think is the best plan) then while you might be able to get some time back during quarter finals. During semi’s and finals the match reset time is also necessary for robots to get reset.
I feel that this is an unfair example. Combat Juggling has a novelty appeal to it, which justifies its television exposure. It brings people in because they have never heard of anything like it and want to see it for giggles. FRC unfortunately lacks both the novelty appeal and the “crazy ape” factor. People think that they have seen robots on TV (battlebots anyone?) and high level play is only really “crazy” to those who understand the game.
Maybe we should take a page out of the book of the MLG. Hire a small group of dedicated, knowledgeable, and trained commentators to be the hosts of a central live stream online that covers the elimination matches of regionals, worlds and IRI. It would create a preview for local networks that is very professional in appearance. Statistical analysis of viewership (and yes, advertising effectiveness) garnered from the live stream events would be the proof that you need to give that showing FRC events is a viable way to make money.
If you guys have TWC in your area, I encourage you to contact them! TWC’s KC Metro Sportsnet did a FANTASTIC job at the KC regional this year broadcasting elims! Here’s a bit of it they posted on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irgFdDRT0R8)! Now if every regional could have something going like this for them, it would be FANTASTIC! They broadcasted the game as their “Game of the Week” several times the week after the regional, and they also sell a DVD, which I bought
The indirect effects of being on ESPN would be huge I imagine.
I watched the 98 champs as a kid, and had no idea what it was, but I knew at that moment I would do that someday. Also, being a 9 year old kid I said that I would be GREAT at it (what 9 year old wouldn’t?).
My mom loved repeating that story after our 2011 season.
Specifically? The “market” already “supported” FRC on ESPN for as long as ESPN was interested.
More broadly, FRC is not well suited for live broadcast for a number of reasons, many of which have been covered in this thread. A non-live, condensed broadcast is more doable, but still heavily limited and not likely for a nationwide broadcast on a major network.
Even broader still. This is a competition based on technology and ingenuity. Let’s be forward thinking about how to present and broadcast the content. Internet streaming and video-on-demand are increasingly taking bites out of live television broadcasts. Embrace it, don’t fight it.
