Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

That form 990 is crazy. The government could probably save a few trees if they let nonprofits condense that grants section.

I think we overpay for things in Frc but it comes down to me with regional presentation. For instance take sbpli regional vs the NYC regional. The NYC regional is hosted in the huge javits center. There are teams from all over the world. There are Ftc, fll, and Jr fll to tournaments going on at the same time and there are even major companies like Goldman sachs, and google there. Everyone has 10x10 pits and overall the presentation is great. Then you go to the sbpli regional. You get a homy effect being in the small University. Your lucky to get 8x8 pits and everything feels kind of dark. It's still a great regional don't get me wrong. But what I don't understand is how you pay the same for both the events.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

The disparities are crazy, especially considering how expensive I've heard the NYC Regional/tournaments are to host.

I can imagine. Im at the javits center all the time (once a month at least) one event I go to every year is the 3d printing expo. When I was in the press lounge I noticed the event coordinator. Being it was in the same room the Frc competition was hosted I asked him how much it costs to rent this for the weekend. He told me it cost them 300,000 for the 3 days during the week but if it was a weekend it would cost. 400,000! Now I imagine first does get some discount. But it still is crazy expensive. Let alone them renting bleachers, cherry pickers, light systems, and trucks to transport all their things. It most cost close to 600,000 so I see why you would pay 5k to enter it. Where as the hofstra competition probably costs like 150,000 - 200,000 at most. The difference is though sbpli is a small company compared to the companies who sponsor the NYC competition.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

Did you know that none of your registration money goes to the regional?

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

This, or similar to it, is an often cited fear. I had similar fears before I experienced districts. Let me tell you they're virtually unfounded, at least in my experience and the experiences of those I know. Districts are every bit as inspiring as regional events.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

The way that value is calculated for this discussion is naive but I get the point. Sometimes a little hyperbole helps. It does lead many questions to be asked: What value is placed on the kit of parts and support from FIRST? What is the value of the time spent traveling? What value is placed on the quality of the competitive field and competitive match play? What value is placed on seeing, interacting, and playing with people and robots that are not in your area? What value is placed on turn-around time between matches to make a fix?

Clearly, it does not cost $5000 for a kit of parts and one fractional slice of a competition. It costs way more than that, especially in more expensive markets. These fees go to support all aspects of supporting the teams and competitions. It costs $4000 to go to a second regional because a second regional is a luxury and it costs a lot to support the infrastructure of the FRC system so the $4000 (from those that can afford it) subsidies the cost of all competitions that you attend, kit of parts, and the entire infrastructure. True, the money does not go to the Regional Planning Committee to put on the events...but it does go to things like creating the field, supporting the field, transporting the field, paying the engineers and support staff at FIRST, sending that staff to run and support your regional, your local Senior Mentor, and other costs of running FRC. So, it confuses the trees for the forest when it comes to saying that the registration money doesn't go to the regional...in my opinion.

Ahh...cycle time: my understanding, as a former scorekeeper, is that the cycle time is recommended by FRC but some leeway is afforded to FTAs to pick within a range. I am sure that many things go into this type of decision but I am not going to speculate. I will say that there is a sizable risk in picking a lower cycle time just like there is sizable risk in failing to allocate slack and buffer time in a project schedule.

Many people have mentioned the trade-offs between the Regional and District models. The comments from Lij2015, bobby5150, Sunshine, PayneTrain, Lil' Lavery, Bruceb, and Alan Anderson include most of my feelings on the matter. The one additional issue I see (that is a problem in some areas with regionals and many of the districts) is that there is a lot of inbred characteristics in the robots where there is not a lot of cross-breading due to limited outside influences. Take "west coast drive" as a thought experiment. How long did that take to spread across the country...long enough that it was unique to a subset of teams from a geographic location and that it was called "west coast drive." Mix it up, get new ideas, get inspired, be challenged.

Let's talk about those judges...since that is apparently something Kevin wants to get at. I am going to talk about the Wisconsin Regional Judge corps here but this is mostly the same all around FIRST. It must be recognized that there has been a shortage of judges in many areas around the US this year. Based purely on public observations, the Wisconsin Regional apparently lost many veteran judges just a short time before the competition. This resulted in there being 2 fewer judges that in previous years.

The judge break-down by responsibility is pretty easy to see...if you can see the whole competition at once. If you have been in the Chairman's presentation room, you see that there are 3 judges in there. From the award presentation you can see that there are 2 Dean's List judges. You can also see that there is a Judges' Advisor and a Judges' Assistant. You can see that there are no judges dedicated to watching matches this year in Wisconsin. This leaves 12 judges to judge the remaining awards.

From watching the judges in the pit in the morning (especially on Friday), you can see that there are 4 sets of three judges and it can be calculated that each set must interview 15 of the 60 teams. By listening to the questions they ask, you can see that this group of three is a survey team, each with different responsibilities. These three judges that your team see survey 15 teams between 8:30am and 12:00pm and with opening ceremonies that leaves 3 hours or about 10-12 minutes per team per day. That team sees the same teams again on Saturday but for a more brief interaction. In the afternoon, you may see a second set of judges for varying lengths of time and this set will be from one to four members. You can hear that this set of judges has a very specific set of questions that they are asking. If you are very good or very lucky, you will see more than one addition set of judges. Then, after early-afternoon, judges are very scarce and then they return sporadically. I am sure that we all know what they are doing during that time.

My experience is that this break-down of splitting the field and surveying first is fairly common. If you see a different set of judges...they are likely there about a specific award or set of awards. The Wisconsin Regional is quite large, as regional competitions go, so there is simply no way that every judge can see every team. My experience as a judge has been that it was extremely fast paced, we were always very busy, and we were under a lot of time pressure. I personally interviewed 36 separate teams of the 60 present and visiting 20 of those teams many times. This is more than most judges at this competition get around to seeing. As far as the insurmountable task of doing going through 41 Chairman's Award presentations and written submissions, I have no idea how they do that. They have the submissions ahead of time...so I suppose that helps...but still. Wow.

In the end, I think that the Wisconsin Regional is a fairly well run event that handles an insane number of teams and has been at max capacity for a while. Yet, I don't think Wisconsin is ready for a district model as the team density is simply not high enough and the travel times would be crazy for a lot of teams. The district progression in the upper-midwest mirrors that of the recognition of statehood in the region. Michigan and Illinois are taking away teams from the Wisconsin pool as they go district just like they took away territory from Wisconsin as they applied for statehood. Hyperbole...sure. False comparison...maybe. South-east Wisconsin, north-east Illinois, and north-west Indiana would be a great district. Just have to figure out how to get some good Michigan teams in there too. Lake Michigan District? Or...Lake Michigan Region?

I don't ever see there being an FRC where there is only the district model without some major changes. The logistics just don't bare it out and I think that would result in dead-zones devoid of teams where there was not critical mass. Clearly there are growing pains and we have all felt them. We need to work together to improve the opportunity and experience for students in all systems and models.

Let's make all the regional, district, and state competitions the best they can be!

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

My usual proposal when this comes up is that the "outliers" (as you so rightly termed them) should be given an opportunity to join--or rather, be included in--the district that their "home" regional will be in. For you guys, I believe NYC is the typical option; Chile and Colombia tend to show up in Los Angeles. IIRC, Idaho was asked about this when the PNW district formed.

I suspect that as time goes on, district events will become the "standard" event, and it'll be less of an issue that "such-and-such group of teams can/can't play in this area".

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

Agreed. I was worried about the same thing when New England went to districts, and there has been nothing to worry about. District events have that "in your face feel" many sports teams love about their arena because it's packed to the rafters. You can really feed off the crowd.

It's definitely a different experience than regionals, but nonetheless inspiring. I think the fact there's virtually all positive feedback from teams who have moved to districts (I can't think of one person who has said "I hate it, give me back regionals") says enough.

Seriously. Then what are we paying for. The kop and first choice are half donated and the gdc can only have so many paid employees.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

Fields. Did you know that each field has to be refitted for each and every game, every year? Did you know that each field travels in a semitruck, for 6 weeks, plus a championship run for some of them? (District fields excluded from the HQ fields assessment here--some of this comes out of the district, I think.) And did you know that the field's road cases have to be refitted, too? Not counting the whole "repair" sort of thing. They've only got what, well over a dozen fields on the road, including the spare?

Training. HQ brings in the key volunteer positions, every year, and helps pay for their travel. Plus makes training materials for everybody else. I suspect travel for key employees to events takes some change as well.

Overhead. Gotta keep the lights on at HQ, along with the A/C, FIRST Place and its summer programs, and other stuff that needs to be taken care of.

Salaries. I think there are more people than you think working at HQ.

Promotion. All them videos and brochures gotta come from somewhere.


There's a lot of stuff that you don't necessarily see, year-to-year--you only see the effects. And all that stuff costs money. I suspect I only touched on a few of the items...

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

There are a lot of other expenses about running a regional that HQ takes care of.

Just think about the field, for example. There are 16 trucks, minimum (11 in the US, Canada, Australia, Hawaii, Israel, and at least one spare on standby). This doesn't even include the district fields (which aren't owned by FIRST, but that's another 10). Each field consists of ~20 road cases that have to get shipped (in a truck) to each event. Most of the US fields do 5 or 6 events, then go to St. Louis, and the others are crossing international boarders. Then the carpet has to be shipped separately to each events. Multiply that by the >60 regionals, and that adds up to a lot of money. Then add in the costs for all the field elements and game pieces - a portion of the field needs to get redone every year x20, parts go bad and need to be replaced (and some of the field hardware is not cheap), and game pieces (each event is budged 100 noodles this year, and each truck has at least a full extra set of totes. Then add in all the trophies, medals, banners, 100,000+ volunteer shirts, small mountain of gaff tape, and all the other disposables an event goes through.

These things add up - all that money is not sitting being used as a swimming pool somewhere in Manchester.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

The issue with that is every season we'd have to attend two events separated by at least five days, and a successful season would include up to four trips to the US (or three with the first being quite long).

I understand that a whole system should not be compromised for the exceptional cases, but there probably exists at least a temporary solution. For example, keeping a few strategically located regionals would mimic the current hybrid solution and work for the "short-term".

The best answer would be our local event, but the reality is even if "local" was Europe (which can be very not local), we are a still far from a European regional let alone a European district. I don't know if Australia or Mexico have the teams to make a district work either, if they don't, regionals seem like they'd have to persist.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

I for one love the district model, the kids get two competitions and get to go into the second feeling confident. I do have issues with the Director of the organization we are a part of, for the past two years she tells me that she misses Manchester and that the district events just don't have the same feel. She used to attend the regional event but comes for like one day to a district. When I explained this year after doing OK at our two district events that the Regional Championship was a possibility her first response was "No" she was not willing to spend the additional $4000 for us to go, eventually letting us fundraise with a solid "NO" if we qualify for Worlds. We already have a Zero budget, so every year its a fight.

Re: (Lack of) Value in the Regional Model
 

Schools can be such a pain sometimes.