Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

What is your definition of major? We have not lost any sponsors because of a switch to districts -- our largest sponsors continue their enthusiastic support, but our largest individual sponsor is on the order of the registration fee.

I get that something is lost when you switch from a real venue to a high school gym. BUT, the robots get so much better! Particularly at the second event, what was an alliance captain performance at event #1 becomes a middle of the pack performance at event #2.

At least 12 matches per event, and 24 total is huge -- it at least TRIPLES the amount of driver experience the average team got when I was in high school, and it shows.

In my experience, the energy from the fact that robots are so much better at scoring points more than makes up for the fact you are in a high school gym. And in the PNW, the PNW video crew does a better job than the pros used to do back in the day!

In my opinion, the value proposition is definitely in favor of Districts. I wouldn't want my money paying for a fancy arena*, I would want my money paying for world class employees I can hire in the future. And in the District model, students get more out of the FIRST experience. They get to go to two events. They get a chance to fix their robot, and watch their fixes work! In the regional model, a small obscure issue could sideline you for 4 matches, 50% of the event, and totally eliminate you from alliance selection. In the district model, even if that issue takes an event to troubleshoot, you still have 12 matches to shine, be selected, and end on a high note. The events are smaller, so they are more likely to feel the thrill of alliance selection, winning, and the pangs of defeat. It is so much easier to get your students inspired for the next year when they have those experiences, and you can watch it work!

And the real kicker -- you've still got the District Championship which is the class of the traditional Regional and the world-class robots of the District in one place to really knock their socks off!

*I know that none of the registration fee typically pays for the event, but most people don't.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

I'm not sure why you are singling out Kevin when many other people agree with him.

Not speaking for Kevin or anyone else, but I don't think its about the extra match, but more about consistency.

The Virginia Regional and the Orlando regional both had 64 teams. Doing some basic number crunching, the average team number (and median) of Orlando was higher (and significantly at that) than the average/median team age of Virginia:

Orlando had 6 rookies, and Virginia had 4. If anything, one could argue Virginia had more experienced teams and should expect their regional to run smoother/faster because everyone there has been doing it longer. But instead, despite being the same size and older, Virginia had less matches.

Compared, the Wisconsin regional had four less teams, 90 matches (Orlando had 107), and had comparable average/median team numbers to Orlando (ave/med: 2790(7 years old)/2856(7 years old)), and only 3 rookies, so its hard to find reason as to why there are less matches.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

Look at Skunkworks. They have Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Alaska Airlines, they are pretty big sponsors.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

You must understand a regional event in one place is not a regional event in another...We just competed in a Regional event we compete in every year...Yes Hamilton High School in Chandler AZ (AZ East Regional). Stadium Gym bleacher seating.

And this Week 5 event is the NV Regionals in Las Vegas, NV...While it is a Stadium location, we are in an internal large event hall, again bleacher seating large open air high ceilinged event hall...The experience is virtually the same, except the pits have much higher ceilings.

Las Vegas Regionals used to be held 5~6 yrs. ago at the UNLV events center (lots more money to rent), and that had actual Basketball Stadium event seating (not bleachers type).

It depends on location across the country...But, many Regionals today have bleacher type seating, and many are held in High Scool Gyms too (not just District events), is what I was attempting to convey.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

What made me first notice the item at all (because in both regionals I listed above), and that we attend every year because they are closest and we have agreements mainly for lower cost hosted team housing....Is because we always have about 10 Q matches.

This year that jumped without explanation to 12...I wondered why, and then I was on the FIRST Stats site and started looking at many different Regionals...Found from 10~12 matches each Regional was norm, then I brought up Virginia 8, then Waterloo 13....Fewer Teams/Robots more Q Matches.....More Teams/Robots fewer Q Matches, then started looking at the data and QPA's and saw the implicit differences in the data the high teams and the lower teams (call that the Inflation/Deflation factor), have on the QPA Data, and the differences in each event.

If you shine huge, w/ this years format change, you inflate and affect everyones QPA scores, likewise if you stub your toe often, you will tend to deflate the QPA's (though on a lesser scale if the High shiners are on your alliance)...Not much matter at Virgina (only 8 chances to do either, but Waterloo...13 chances to do so). That's huge.

And I realized after looking at the published OPR's today (and comparing multiple events), that issue is not corrected for in the figuring of those OPR's any more than the QPA's. (I don't know how you can compare some that played 1/3 more matches, to someone playing 1/3 less matches)....Or, correct for a 1/3 difference.

The data is not reliable...But, many will rely on it and still do the comparisons all year long. Kevin's Team Value in $$$$'s is also very viable on the subject for the same reasons.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

I rise in opposition to this idea. I honestly could care less about the AV equipment, what type of seating is in the stands, etc. For me, robots are the thing. And IRI has robot, great ones and in higher densities than any place (even more than the FiM Distict Championships - which is saying something).

Speaking of the FiM District Championships, I honestly think that is where the money for AV, stadiums, etc. is worth the expense. Move the Districts down in cost even if it means giving up a bit of the Show Business aspect of things while moving the District Championships up that same scale. I think this is the best of both worlds. It makes FIRST more affordable and more accessible to teams (by having low cost, local venues to compete in) while it makes getting the The District Championships something teams strive for and worth remembering once they reach that goal.

I know I am sounding like a District Model Fanboy, but honestly, I don't care because I believe that the District Model is the way FIRST gets us where we want to go: FIRST Robotics = Something Every High School Just Does.

Dr. Joe J.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

Indiana just moved to the district model and the only differences that I noticed this year were different lighting, no big black curtain and a smaller screen for video. In my opinion this was a very smart financial move and in NO WAY impacted the professionalism or the prestige of the event.

I must also admit that Indiana has some of the largest HS gyms in the country so the venue size is not an issue.

If sponsor donates based upon a venue they are missing out on the purpose of FIRST. Our sponsors donate because of the impact upon the students.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

Katie,
Was not singling out Kevin. The two of us have a good working relationship I believe. He started the thread and I had specific questions about his experience. Mentioning his name directly doesn't mean I'm singling him out or I'm attempting to degrade him or your team. That is not my attempt. UPS has a very strong history, we all know that. Kevin has great insight because of his experiences. I value the input so we can all digest the input from the discussion.

Many on this thread have experience with district events and they are in favor of the change. I'm just trying to figure out the reasoning behind their views. If it is strictly financial I don't buy into it. IMHO a big part (being redundant now) in the overall experience for kids is getting out and raising $$. At least that is our model and I believe that is why they offer an entrepreneur award.

Still digesting the notion that kids get a better experience from more matches while attending district events. That seems to be the main qualifier as to why most feel it's better. We attend two regionals for this very reason. We think kids deserve more completion time after all the hard work. But it's not just the "on the field" experience we strive for. It's the extended pit experience; the interaction with judges and their peers; even the traveling experience. It's all good. I want to hear more! Our kids get to present twice for chairman's. Do you get this with district? I don't know. The list goes on.........

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

For everyone comparing VA to Orlando, there is an external factor here. We have a new head of VA FIRST, and this was his first time running an event on this scale (AFAIK). I wouldn't worry about burdening him with telematics until he's had a chance to digest what it takes to run a successful FRC event. From the webcast, I think he did very well as there weren't any discernible issues.

I've seen several sides to how Regionals are run, including from a corporate sponsor's perspective. Sponsoring of venues for the DC or VCU events brings up the question of relative value every single year. This is especially highlighted by the fact that 1000's of kids over 8 years in local VRC and FTC events got just as much out of their competition events as FRC. Yet FRC itself is a premium program with its specific merits, so they continue to sponsor it.

I don't understand how the tradeoffs to districts in VA are any different from any other area of the country, especially those areas which have overcome the same problems inherent with transitioning to the district system that VA has. I seem to remember a survey about districts a couple of years ago, but I don't remember if the actual results were ever posted from that survey.\

For teams who usually attend 2 Regionals and have a reserve for World Champs, the amount of fundraising will be the roughly same as a team who attends 2 district events, District Champs and has a reserve for World Champs. Thus I think the fundraising argument is somewhat weak.

Also, the kids will get 2 chances to present Chairman's by default at the District events. They'll get another opportunity at District Champs, if they got CA at a District Event.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

FIRST HQ makes the teams do their fundraising for them. We raise something like $20 million each year in the form of registration fees to pay for the cost of running FIRST HQ and whatever else it pays for.

FIRST doesn't tell us where this money goes. Their annual report has one line that says "XY million: FRC expenses," and that's all we get to see.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

125 - UTC, BAE, Textron, PTC, Northeastern University and National Grid... I view it as far easier to get sponsors in district system. More chances to showcase the bot = more chances to get sponsors.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

IMO this is a good system. It promotes partnerships between schools (or other pre-college student groups) and industry sponsors, and it provides an entry-level for sponsoring the mission of FIRST: sponsor a team. Other kinds of sponsorship should begin there, because a sponsor needs to see FIRST from a team's perspective to understand how this thing of ours works.

I expect this to change as Frank and his HQ team continuously improve transparency. Their track record since Frank took over the FRC is great and getting better all the time. The CD community can help by keeping our concern about transparency where FIRST can see it. Frank can't do this all by himself.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

I will preface this post by reminding you, the viewer, that these are my personal opinions, nothing less, nothing more.

Having spent 7 years on the regional system, the most recent 3 as a volunteer, and this year on the district system, I have noticed some pro's and con's to both systems. Here's my personal take on switching to districts:

Pro's:

-Lower cost to Teams. Registration gets 2 events, not 1, out of the box, with a third only $1000 more (not $4000).
-More matches per team: as the Scorekeeper at all IN events this year, We have been (IIRC as per FIRST mandate) giving teams 12 Qual Matches per event.
-Reduced Travel costs: Fewer days and shorter travel distances (for most teams, minus border teams).
-More local events: In my case, as opposed to only being able to do 2 local events as a volunteer, now I can do 4. While many do not have schedules that this benifits, for those that do and love to volunteer, it is indeed a plus and also builds the "family" within the State's volunteers.

Con's:

-Higher up front costs to the state's organization: The state has to provide all the AV equipment, volunteer radios (minus the referees), Field perimeter (yay AndyMark for a lower cost field), and as we found out, the medals rack for the awards ceremony.
-Fewer "consumables"; We were shorted on name Badges and T-shirts... while the latter is not much of an issue as there is a lot of overlap between even crews, the Name badges are cheap enough that it feels, honestly, skimpy. Hence why my Badge has now two (soon, three) crossed out event names on it.
-(perceived) lower priority with support from HQ. There have been a few things that I am not going to mention publicly on CD (PM me if you REALLY want to know) that, at least from the sound of things, would we have been a regional event, would have been immediately fixed, but instead, as a district, are "less of an issue" and have been left in limbo. Obviously, the show must go on either way, and thanks to our determination we've pushed through the setbacks so much that most attendees wouldn't have noticed anything.
-Higher cost of Teams going to Championships. For a Non-HOF and Non-Legacy team (or a team not pre-qualified), they must effectively pay $4000 extra if they want to go to Worlds. Why? Their only two routes to get there are either thorough a regional as a 3rd event or making and attending State Champs, both of which are a $4000 check to HQ away. Sure, you get another event out of the deal, but if you want to play, you (or sponsors) gotta pay.

Non-issues:
-Size: the size and "flash" don't seem to be as big of a thing as one would have thought beforehand. While the audio and lighting isn't as good, the volunteer AV crew has done a great job (being scorekeeper, I have to work with them a lot).


Final thoughts:

Districts are the way of the future, like it or not. There have been and will be some growing pains as more places adopt the system. Once more areas are on it, I imagine that a lot of the con's on my list will no longer apply or be much reduced. However, the one issue that could be troublesome is championship fee issue, which to me, conflicts with the idea of having a bigger championship. There is only so much money in circulation, and to me, making championships should be a matter of merit, not of wealth. Sure, there has to be some cost somewhere, but this IMHO isn't the way to go. Overall, however, the system can be made to work well, better than the regional system, especially if the local FIRST family has enough determination and supports one another.

(again, there are my personal thoughts, no the thoughts of anybody else but me).

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

A lot of what I wanted to say has been pointed out already. I am a staunch supporter of districts, but I also believe that a lot of Kevin's gripes can be addressed outside of the district system. Just as I was back in 2009. People forget what a radical change districts were when they first appeared, and how much of that has transitioned into the regional experience. Instead of crating and shipping our robots to our local events, we bag and tag them. While the amount of matches per event is still a concern, 7-8 per team used to be the norm regardless of event size. Running 12 matches was unheard of, even at small events.

The regional experience can be further improved independent of which areas become districts. FIRST HQ can make outlines to regional planning committees, regional directors, and FTAs more clear on the quantities of matches to be run. FIRST HQ can make outlines to the judges advisors about how to distribute judges. If anything, this sounds like a great place for input by the FRC team advocate*.

*I have no idea what the FRC team advocate does on a day-to-day basis or if they would actually have any say on this matter, but it at least fits the job title :rolleyes:

I'd also like to point out that there are district events held in venues other than high school gyms. When affordable, college stadiums/athletic facilities are still venues at the district level. I know of events at UMASS-Dartmouth, Northeastern, WPI, Rutgers, NJIT, and Purdue off the top of my head. I'm sure there have been some in Michigan and PNW as well.

While a supporter of districts, I do want to point out that the production/AV losses can be more significant than some are letting on, at least initially. MAR has improved significantly in the AV department over the years, but the first season had projectors without suitable power, audio equipment that wasn't audible in portions of venues, poor quality webcasts, and the lack of production value at the MAR Championship event has lagged behind that of regionals ever since Show Ready stopped providing it. This is to be expected, and things have improved dramatically as MAR learned what needed to be fixed and people gained experience in how to fix it. Hopefully the lessons learned from each existing district can help smooth the learning curve even more for future districts.

The entrepeneurship award can still exist even if the fundraising goal is changed. Some arbitrary value on the amount that needs to be raised in funds doesn't remove that experience from the equation.

Yes, you still can present Chairman's at each event you attend (unless you win your first one).

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

Joe said:
This is what I want. Yes FIRST is expensive. But it is not really outrageously expensive compared to operating sports teams. (For the record, I am firm supporter of sports teams, and have read the article cited earlier in this thread about sports teams vs. math students and as a trained statistician have a few quibbles with it.) Most schools could probably afford $10000 a year to support a FIRST team as long as the team had a decent number of students. And if schools contribute more it should be easier to get sponsors to help when teams qualify to the district or world championships. Think about the cost of a field perimeter. Fairly expensive for one school. Not as great a cost for a group of schools. Think of your school's athletic league purchasing one for its teams to use. Furthermore, when this becomes something that schools just do, then travel costs for the first level of competition drop dramatically.

Yes, I will miss seeing some of the teams from far away (and maybe with inter-district play some of this could come back) but I will also be highly gratified to see kids from the local schools that don't have teams get a chance to play. And it will be fun to play some of our local rivals. I also coach track and field and cross country. These are two sports in which the opponents are often friends as well as rivals. I believe the quality of play will improve as we get more scrimmages and there is more local support for teams.

Yes the district model is more expensive than a regional model if you are a team that plans on one regional and the championship. But how many teams is that really? And most of those are probably infrequent qualifiers to the championship. The district model gives you a chance to more easily earn advancement to another level of competition. For some teams this could be a really a big deal. As I said in an earlier thread, we have been lucky enough to qualify for the world championships fairly often. Many other local teams have not. For teams that routinely attend at least two competitions before the Championships the district model offers a more economical model. For us, it would make attending two competitions an every year thing instead of a twice in thirteen years thing.

As for venues, I agree that all other things being equal, the big venues have more wow factor. But that is all other things being equal. Anyone who has ever been to a high school basketball game in Indiana can attest to the fact that even a small gym can be absolutely rocking with excitement. A good sized high school gym with a full crowd can be every bit as exciting as a half full college arena. It can certainly be louder. I think a lot of how such an event comes off depends on how the adults approach it. Any coach can tell you that the mental state of a team depends a lot on how the coach prepares them. I find it hard to believe, for example, that team 379 attends will not be a loud, exciting affair.