Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

Per a facebook post on the FIRST In Canada Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/FIRSTRoboti...38714159526973

I'm a little confused, it initially says they're limiting the number of rookies, but then the rest of the post (and the application) seem to imply that they're just limiting the number of grants given out (presumably) from FIRST In Canada. Anyone wanna shed some light?

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

I'm gonna hope this means they're just limiting the grant money available. Hopefully someone from Canada can confirm.

IMO, would be plain-old-wrong to cap the number of teams... If someone wants to play & can get the $ together, why stop them?

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

I hope/think you're right, but the post is very confusing. It doesn't make sense to limit the number of rookie teams.

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

There may not be enough spots for them to play?


Edit: I honestly don't know...just suggesting, could it be a possibility that there don't have enough room.

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

There are a bunch of Canadian Regionals, especially with the addition of two new ones this year at North Bay and Windsor (maybe more for 2015 too?) so I don't think space is really an issue. Also rumours of districts, but who knows :P

I'm hoping it's a limit on grants as I'd like to start up a team when I leave SWAT at the end of this year but would like to stay in FRC. That would be unhelpful to work against a clock when there's already a lot to manage. Save time crunches for build season!

-T

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

it says that FIRST Canada will be restricting the number of rookie teams this year. Rookie teams will now have to fill out an application form to be reviewed and approved if you wish to start a team.
This is due to lack of funding for FIRST Canada- they don't have enough money to support the growth that Canada has.
As Canada is moving to the district system in a few years, this will really limit the number of Canadian teams able to go to World Champs. Needless to say, I am very disappointed with the news.
FIRST World Champs heavily pushed starting new teams, and then they do this. There is already some bias against Canadian teams, as many of us Canadian's have found over the years, so this plus the districts feels like they are really pushing us aside.
I hope that this is not needed in 2016.

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

Source?

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

I'm sorry. I should have said "I believe that..."
That is the only reason I can think of for why you would need to fill out an application grant. I know from my team's dealings with FIRST Canada that they do not like giving out funds, as they don't have very many.

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

Isn't it impossible to limit the number of teams? They can limit grant money, but if a team finds a way to fund themselves I'm almost positive there is no rule saying they can deny teams entry. I'm pretty sure they cannot limit who attends the regionals as well, just how many teams total the event can accept. If they actually do try to attempt actually limiting the number of teams I can see that getting politically bad really fast, and we all know we don't want that.

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

How is funding helped by limiting the number of teams permitted to register? What am I missing?

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

My guess is that they can't fund more Regionals to support the team growth.

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

I've always heard it stressed that FIRST doesn't pay the costs to put on a regional competition, and that it's up to the committee running the regional to obtain funding via sponsorships and grants and the like. Does FIRST Canada do things differently?

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

Didn't FIRST Canada just receive a pretty large multi year donation from Bruce Power?

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

They're not pushing you aside, they're growing the sport.

So FIRST headquarters pushes creating/mentoring new teams. Many new teams show up, and this overloads the regional system, which makes the district model necessary. For the number of active teams out there, that's the way things need to go.

No more win one, go to the world championship. FIRST has outgrown the Curie/Archimedes/Newton/Galileo level of playoffs; there need to be another level. Michigan has been living with a high density district system for a while, and it looks like it works. The best Michigan teams get to Einstein with regularity. Canada seems to be fairly dense in S Ontario, districts there are appropriate and necessary.

With districts out here in the wild wild west, I've got a problem raising travel money. In another thread, someone proposed as SW US district, AZ, NM, TX OK. The teams in Yuma would have a 1500 mile trip to district championships in Omaha. That's not going to work. Most of AZ (Yuma to CA), NM, S Nevada, Utah, S CO might work. State borders will need to be ignored.

Re: Limiting Rookies in Canada next year?
 

I'm a little bit curious about this line of thought. I know historically there has been a large amount of flak directed at Canadian teams travelling to other regionals (like 1114 at Pittsburgh in 2011, ugh), but I'm not sure how FIRST pushing for Canadian/Ontario districts can be taken as "pushing Canadian teams aside." Could you elaborate? My understanding of the District model is that regions are given a number of slots based on the amount of teams they have relative to the total amount of FIRST teams/the amount of teams attending Champs. Isn't the model just bringing the amount of Canadian teams attending Champs into proportion? I remember an analysis last year that Ontario was the most overrepresented region at Champs*. I get that frankly Ontario is one of, if not the most competitive, region in the world, but proportionally it does end up soaking up a lot of spots at Champs. I haven't seen any data from this year though, so I can't comment on whether it was the same in 2014.

*Full disclosure, Minnesota was the most underrepresented if I remember correctly