After watching 3132’s Chairman’s video and seeing some of the talk in their thread, some good points were made about showing actual inspiring Chairman’s videos instead of the parody vidoes that teams make. In my honest opinion, if I being someone “outside” the tent walked into Minute Maid Park yesterday and watched Einstein, I would not be motivated to join FIRST, I would see it as a cringey, childish competition. The robots are cool and inspirational, but if you want that to take effect, you need to create an environment where students feel like they won’t be made fun of by their peers, especially when robotics is a “nerdy” activity to begin with. So with that in mind, should FIRST stop showing parody songs at competition, especially actively promoting it on the big stage?
I for one would be in favor of ditching the parodies and replacing them with Chairman’s videos and reveal videos. If this is done however, I’d like FIRST to make chairman’s videos a part of the judging process so teams try a little harder on them. Many teams applying for chairman’s (mine included) do not try too hard on the video as it’s not judged and generally spending the extra time you spent on the video on stuff like an improved essay or chairman’s binder is a better idea.
I will forever maintain that FRC Rhapsody was the high point of song parodies. It’s since been all downhill.
That being said, I would like to hear an argument from the other side about why they should be continued. I’m sure that it’s fun to sing and produce a video, but as a FIRST-sanctioned thing I agree with you on every point.
This is really part of the bigger question about FIRST’s image and marketing, which they don’t seem to have a really good grasp on. I’ve always thought FIRST should be a bit more professional and no-nonsense, something which the folks in Manchester seem to disagree with me on, continuously making FIRST’s image less mainstream.
IMO, the robotics and culture change should stand on its own. No steampunk, no songs. Just engineering and inspiration.
As I said in the other thread, it’s frustrating to me that the vast majority of chairman’s teams are virtually invisible on the national level. The chairman’s finalists are a step in the right direction, but it’s still basically HoF or bust in terms of recognition.
I’ve had enough of parodies and inflated speeches telling me that teams are changing the world. We’ve got tons of great content showing how teams are changing the world, and it’s being criminally underutilized.
Also, most parodies just suck
I would want a poll option that says “play fewer of them - quality over quantity”.
I like the parodies that are REALLY well done, like FRC Rhapsody, but (sorry guys) I think I can count on one hand the number of parody videos that I would consider REALLY well done.
I like them because they show a more, “human” side to the team? That it’s not just about building robots and competing but here’s a team that is willing to have fun with each other and “dress down” a little. It shows me that the team has a positive culture that’s more than just “get to work, we have a competition to win”.
But I also agree that showing some of the amazing chairmans videos would be inspiring both to other FRC teams and also to random people walking in. That would show them that we are not just about building robots and goofing off with each other in front of a video camera, but that we are also all passionate about changing the world for the better.
Watching other teams’ chairmans videos also inspires our team - everyone has found different ideas for reaching out to their communities and impacting their world. I can’t count how many times I have said “hey that’s a great idea - we could do that too!”
I think at the very least, FIRST should stop sanctioning and showing them at competition. Teams can still make them and post them on places like Facebook and CD, but they do not need to be endorsed or promoted by FIRST. It makes the atmosphere and the organization seem much less professional.
That being said, I like the idea of showing Chairman’s videos instead. It’d be good to see all the work and promotion of STEM that teams are doing around the world, and it would encourage teams to produce higher quality videos. It would also show that FIRST is serious in their belief that the competition is more than robots.
I’d love to see some Chairman’s videos. I would be a bit afraid of them being overplayed just like parodies are now, though. A lot of Chairman’s videos seem to follow a few of the same templates (aerial shot, a few students talking, then finishing each other’s sentences, etc.), and a lot of teams’ outreach is very similar too. So I can picture them losing their value and getting old to watch quickly if FIRST plays them like they play parodies. I’m not trying to devalue anyone’s work, a lot of those videos are still phenomenal (and there’s a ton of meaningful work behind both the editing and the outreach), but you can only watch so many of the same kinds of videos before most people don’t pay attention anymore.
To be completely honest, I’d like to see a bit of both played, just in lesser frequency than parodies right now.
My offering for comment. The Criteria for any video shown at any competition should be something like…
Pick two of the following:
1: Necessity of Information
2: Entertainment Value
3: Inspirational value
This might include some song parodies, some reveal videos, some Chairman videos, some of the OTHER safety animations, or maybe some random funny video produce by some team. Some of those parodies were good ( I actually wanted to see the rest of the Hamilton parody), some were only cringeworthy. Many were in the middle.
Among the thousands of teams and their mentors, there must be the possibility of a panel that could put together an hour or two of watchable videos, without feeling the need to include anything and everything of one type of video in a long string.
I like the parodies. They are fun, and it’s obvious the people putting them together enjoyed it. First is about inclusion, inspiration, and fun. I’m tired of words like cringe being applied to things that folks have worked hard on. Should we also prevent robots that aren’t up to some certain level from playing in the events? Maybe third picks no longer get recognized as well?
Parodies are a fad. They’ll die out and be replaced with something else on their own. In the mean time, congratulations to the teams who entertained us with them.
How about a 3-minute limit? It’s no so hard to sit through if you know the end isn’t too far away.
IMO, only a few parody videos should be shown. Show the best of the best in that area, to show the fun aspect, and show the best of the best of chairman’s as well to show that aspect. Search chairman’s on YouTube and select a few really good ones, even if the team didn’t make it too far. I would like to see both, but less of the one and more of the other.
The 610 one was pretty good though.
I love the music videos. (Are they all parodies? Am I just too old to recognize all of those songs?) I think they demonstrate the passion and intensity that a lot of teams bring to this competition.
That being said, there are issues with timing, pacing, selection, and length of what gets played. Last night, as a spectator from the web, I thought it went on a little long. They make good “filler” for breaks, but shouldn’t be something that has to be fit in before moving on to the main show.
One more thought, from this thread and some others. Don’t confuse “professional” and “stodgy”.
The 610 one was original, and that made it unique. I liked that one, as well as some of the other original songs from the recent years.
I’d be really for robot reveal videos. Especially during eliminations. Instead of parodies during 6 minute time-outs, you could show the reveals of some of the robots that are about to play. That’d let everyone see what exactly went into each robot, and it makes it that much more interesting to watch the actual match.
The issue with judging Chairman’s videos would be that it can be very difficult and expensive to create a high quality video. If we want the award to be as accessible as possible, it would be unfair to judge it.
However, I do understand what you’re saying. Well put together and inspirational videos such as 27’s 2014 and 3132’s 2017 do so much for the FIRST community, but it also goes to add that they are excellent demonstrations of impactful FIRST teams.
Just because somebody put a lot of work into something doesn’t necessarily make it any less cringeworthy. For example, my Heat and Mass test from last week… I put a ton of effort into studying for that exam but when I got the test back I still cringed 
I also don’t think anybody is making the point that sub par robots shouldn’t be recognized or that 3rd picks shouldn’t get recognized.
Based on the results of the poll so far, I would say that most people find most parody videos cringey. There have also been a lot of good suggestions for a possible substitute to the parody videos. My favorite suggestions include robot reveal videos*, and previous years’ winning Chairman’s Award videos. Hopefully FIRST will recognize that these videos will do more to ‘MAKE IT LOUD’ than hard to watch parody videos.
*Tell me somebody outside FIRST wouldn’t be inspired by watching this video, or this one.
More robot reveal videos would be fantastic. Many teams do a really professional job producing them and for my team they really capture the side of FRC we really enjoy.
More in depth technical interviews about the robots currently competing would be really interesting to me too. I’m not trying to suggest that a jargon filled 5 minute lecture from a programmer is what they should show, but basic robot mechanisms are pretty comprehensible to the general public and would help change people’s perception of the robots from “those blobs on the field” to “intricate and meticulously constructed machines”.
Ideally you wouldn’t play the same Chairman’s videos from worlds, but rather those from teams that are competing at that regional/district. I think it would encourage teams in the same district or general area to learn more about each other beyond being another FRC team to compete against, and teams would become more interested in working with each other outside of competition as well.
It would do way more in humanizing other teams and promoting GP then watching the same parody video from a robotics team in a different region.
Yes, that’s why we have district championships and world championships. It’s a competition - if you’re not competing at a certain level of play you don’t move on. Teams pursue excellence and those that achieve it have a chance at competing at the higher level events. If such an expectation is (rightfully) placed on the teams, then why shouldn’t the same quality expectation be placed on the media FIRST plays at their highest level events?