Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

While watching Top 25 last night they brought up the point that many regional competition only offer 8 qualification plays per team. In Minnesota we have 208 teams, and a vast majority of those teams only get one event a year.

I see 2 major issues with this:
-This make the $5000 it costs to register for events pretty crazy, $625 a match isn't appealing for many of the low budget teams around FIRST.
-This also leaves the teams that do qualify for champs hugely unprepared. Most MN teams at champs will have ~20 plays, versus district teams that will have 40+ plays. EDIT: Many teams come into champs with 80+ plays

There definitely isn't a great solution to this problem, other than going to districts, but that has been addressed in the past.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

You could hold local scrimmages and practice all the way through the season.

But that would also require an entire second robot because "lol 6 weeks build".

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I have a feeling that Minnesota or the upper Midwest (MN, WI, IA, ND and/or SD) will become the next district within the next few years. We already have four regionals, two in Duluth and two in the twin cities, plus a regional in Iowa.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

This is becoming much more common, I know of at least 10 practice bots and 5+ practice fields all around the state. I can't imagine more than about 25 teams make second robots.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Amen Brother.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

40... Thats almost the min that most district teams will have. We aren't normal so coming into CMP with 100+ matches isn't common, but coming in with 60-80 is fairly easy to do in districts.

So no, it's a disadvantage to the teams coming into teams with only 14 matches (8 QM + 6 EM). It's also a stupid high cost per match.

It's also a big issue because the ranking algorithm gets more accurate the longer it can run.


In short, absolutely not.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Are most regionals only at 8 qualification matches. From what I understand most are at somewhere between 10-11.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I am under the understanding that all 4 MN events will only be 8 matches per team. Looking at other regionals I think you are correct, the 2 I checked had 9 matches per team.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I'd love to go to districts which would solve this problem. The issue is with key volunteers. Minnesota would have to do 12 events which is a lot of field setup/teardowns, and a lot more work for our key volunteers. I know our Volunteer Coordinator is crazy busy as is with 4 (5 if you count Iowa) events. We do have a great crop of college level volunteers on the way. When some of us start transferring into key volunteer positions, we'll be ready for the move to districts. Which will solve the problems.

A band-aid solution will be adding another regional which could happen within a year or two. This will allow more teams to do 2 events. The cost will still be crazy, but at least the opportunity will be there.

All we can do to help is recruit more volunteers, and get them trained into key volunteer positions!

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

It's all dependent on the number of teams registered.

Northern Lights at 60 teams could have snuck in 9 per team, but Lake Superior at 63 teams could not. We have the same problem in Minneapolis, so I would expect both events to stick to 8 again.

I also take issue with dividing the $5,000 up by the number of matches and valuing the competition on a per-match basis.

First, the $5,000 is your ticket into both your first event and the season as a whole. How much is the rest of the FRC season worth to you? Is build season worth $0? The KOP? Of course this "value" will be the same between both, but just saying that a regional costs $625/match doesn't take that into account.

A regional also comes with a lot of other differences- bigger venue, more teams, more money spent on the A/V setup, etc. How much are those things worth to you and your team?

Now if you really do just want to compare on a cost-per-match basis, I won't argue that districts are a better "deal." And yes, district teams do come into championships with more plays as well. I just don't personally believe it is quite that simple.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

The number of qualification matches is highly dependent on the number of teams at an event (fewer teams means more matches per team) and the cycle time between matches. With the defenses this year, cycle time is up compared to some other years. Last year MN events had 9 matches per team, and in 2014 (with practically no items for field reset to have to place) we got 10.

I know, I want more plays for my team... But I also know that there are challenges associated with switching to districts. Everyone involved is determined to provide the best experience for teams each year, and from what I've heard and seen, MN has some of the best events around :). After all, who else could get an Air Force Flight Simulator ride running for everyone to enjoy at their event like we had in Duluth?

And I want to give a big shout out to the crew from Bison Robotics at NDSU... 29 (i think) of them made the trek all the way across the state to volunteer in Duluth, and a similar number are signed up for the Minneapolis events in week 6 as well. Wow!

This is why the district system is great. It world fantastic here in PNW.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

So, how much of my registration fee is a flight simulator ride worth? If we didn't have it, could we have more matches?

I'm being snarky of course. But my point is, at it's core this is a ROBOTICS COMPETITION. It's cool to have other things but at the end of the day $625 a match is a tough pill to swallow.

And, look, I get you and I value different things in events but I would like to think that we could agree on the fact that 8 matches is unacceptable and I'd rather go to an event that gives me more matches than the self proclaimed "best events in FRC".

Take from that last statement what you will.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

You are totally right, I was more so looking at it as the cost per match as a second event. This obviously doesn't apply to most teams. That first $5000 is very worth it for all that it gets you, but the second $5000 is much harder to validate.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Subsequent regionals cost $4000, but that's still a lot.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I think that 8 qualification matches is too few, no question about it.

Fact is that MN should have joined the district system years ago. Every year that passes it gets far harder to implement.

I've heard the cries that you don't have enough volunteers but that will never get better unless the move is made to the district system sooner rather than later.

At this point it is still possible to make it work with 2 events per weekend. Once you cross that 240 team count then it will require 3 matches on at least one weekend and then it does almost become impossible to implement the district system.

Yes MI has more than 2 events per weekend, however they did not start out that way, they had time to build up the resources, whether we are talking about volunteers, funding or equipment.

At this rate I fear that the teams in MN will be the last to benefit from all of the advantages of the District System, and I fear it is going to take a mandate from FIRST which I don't think that will turn out all that well.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

8 matches per event really, really REALLY sucks.

At the peachtree regional in 2015, there were 66 teams, and 8 matches per team.

I did some quick calculations that year and assuming you spent $5000 on registration, and "only" $4000 on the rest of the season (Including shipping, robot parts, tools, etc) you were spending about $500 a minute for field time.

To put that in perspective: For $9000 you get less than an hour on the field. Actually, you get less than half an hour on the field.

I don't know of many things in life that cost $18000/hr, but apparently FRC is one of them.

Of course, those numbers don't count the mentors time-donations. If you value your mentors at a low number, even $15/hr...you don't want to know the price then...

I'm glad Georgia switched to districts.

Edit: Obviously this was a bit facetious. You can't say that the only thing about FRC is competing on the field. But it does show how little playtime you get, and at what cost.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Apart from a pile of disjointed small events in high school gyms and marginally more matches per team, what are "All the advantages" of moving to a district system?

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

About the only disappointing thing about the DECCer FRC event this past weekend was only 8 matches.
We were just joking about the $$/qualification match and how it was just way too expensive.

Champs in Atlanta used to be pretty bad also with 7 matches only in Quals.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Marginally more matches?

Even if you only get 8 matches per district event, you still get two district events. That's twice as many, and in reality you probably get closer to 9 or 10 matches per event.

Plus there are also district champs, which is another set of matches. Meaning if a team wins district champs and goes to the actual champs, they have 3 times the amount of field time/driver practice under their belt as a team who only went to a regional.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Every district event has 12 qualification matches. That's 24 matches over two district events, or three times as many matches for the same registration cost of one regional.

Additional advantages for the district system come from treating FRC as a sport with a competition season, rather than treating it like an annual science fair.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Marginally more matches? You mean 2-3x as many?

The opportunity to compete with different teams from around the district area? The opportunity for more of our teams to qualify for Championships and have that life-altering experience? The missing less school and work because we can run events Friday-Saturday or even Saturday-Sunday? The less stress per match because we have a guaranteed second event to iterate for? The playing in a large arena being actually meaningful instead of just expected? The opportunity to train more volunteers faster?

If you want me to go on I can. I'm sorry but implying districts wouldn't be a net positive is ridiculous and just about all available evidence points to the contrary.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

We get it, you don't like districts you'd rather have cheering and dancing because you have this ill conceived notion you run the best events in FRC and somehow having teams get more actual time hands on with their robots would ruin that.

So, here's what you'd get, you'd get more stick time, lower costs for the majority of teams[1], more competitive robots [2], more chances for more people to see events, more of a season to help build interest... The fact that it's a better experience for teams is reason enough. The fact that it helps drive STEM in your state should be even more reason. Oh, and the big win? You get to still have your huge event but this time without the doldrums of the first couple matches wherein teams don't move reliably. Instead by this point EVERY robot can compete and do something. And that, that makes for a much better event.

And no, I haven't been to an FRC event in MN yet. Maybe one of these years I'll invest in enough cold weather gear that I won't freeze to death and come up that way. [3]



[1] SOME teams may travel more due to multiple events, they still reap the benefits of more time. I don't recall the geographic distribution of MN teams so I can't tell you if laying out events would be easier.

[2] Zondag research showed a correlation between more matches played at robot effectiveness. And I think we all anecdotally know this.

[3] Not that NH is much better... god I miss Florida.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I'm not sure where you get the "disjointed small events" thing from. In the PNW district we are quite proud of the conisistency of our events and our production values. This is something that many other areas have noticed and those who are starting new districts contact us and many specifically request info on our production equipment and methods.

The list of benefits is long and if you search for posts by me or many others who have made the transition you can get a more comprehensive list as I don't have the time right now to give a comprehensive list.

ALL teams have the chance at what I call the true engineering experience of improving their performance after "real world" testing. Currently only teams that can come up with another $4000 and figure out travel expenses in most cases get that opportunity. This to me is the biggest benefit and the District System would be worth it on that alone.

24 guaranteed matches instead of 8 or 9 that many regionals offer is a huge benefit.

Higher likelihood of participating in finals and higher likelihood of winning a judged award.

Better chance of those great but not top teams earning a spot at CMP. Now this is only our 3rd year, but in the second year the non powerhouse teams that attended were generally a different group than had attended the first season we went to the District System.

Student satisfaction in the District System is greatly improved. Our first season I spent a lot of time in the pits talking to students across all levels of teams. NOT A SINGLE student wanted to go back to the Regional System. I did have mentors who were displeased because it meant more time off from work if they were going to support the team at every event for every day. That however has changed as we now have a number of Sat-Sun events which means no missing school for students and for those mentors that have the traditional 9-5/M-F job less time off of work.

I could go on for another page or two but we've still got 4 more hours of our unbag time and I've got to meet the team at the practice field hosted by 2557 SOTAbots so our programmers can work on scoring a boulder in auto instead of just getting a crossing, and to get a little more time behind the glass for our drive team.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I won't get into other things with this post, but this annoyed me especially. As far as I know, his worry rests more with the fact that he would probably have to do 6 straight weekends of competition in a row, not to mention Worlds. Minnesota already has 4 large regionals, 5 if you were to count Iowa, and Minnesota would probably need 12 districts to accommodate all the teams here. To my knowledge, there are two scorekeepers and two or three FTAs in Minnesota FIRST. I don't know for sure, but I believe that there are only two or three Head Refs in Minnesota. (Don't quote me on that last one.) I know that Daredad has already done Northern Lights and will be scorekeeping at one of the Twin cities regionals, in addition to Iowa. I assume the FTAs and other Scorekeepers are equally busy. Would you want them to have that much more work for 10 more minutes of match time per event?

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

How many JA's did NE have when it went to Districts? AT an event it's just as much work as a scorekeeper or a FTA. [1] If it meant that 40 teams would have a better experience I'd do that job every weekend for the entire season.[2]

So I'm not asking them to do anything I am not currently doing. My schedule this year: UMD - Judge and Planning Committee, Rhode Island - Competing, Boston - Judge Advisor, Pine Tree - Competing (or if they are still short on judges... filling in), DCMP - Competing (or if they are still short on judges... filling in), and CMP - Judging. And I nearly ended up flying to Arkansas this week to fill in when their JA backed out.

So, feel free to be annoyed, but I put my money where my mouth is.




[1] I've done scorekeeping, haven't done FTA, Im not trivializing the roles.

[2] Last year I judged weeks 3,7, and CMP and JA'd week 5 because I think the judging process is important.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Last I checked Iowa was its own state.

That is, unless it was swallowed up since I last visited my family there...

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Don't districts mean one fewer committed day per event for the key volunteers as well? Never having been a key volunteer (let alone in both regionals and districts in order to compare), I really don't know.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Based on what I heard during my stint on Hopper field last year, the main issue with MN going to districts is the lack of a 503c organization to oversee it. Districts require such an organization; we in Indiana found out last year that part of the reduced costs are the result off Manchester doing less and offloading more of the responsibilities on the district. It's both good and bad, I'll get to that in a bit:

It's a better experince for everybody, in general. Teams get more matches per season, as they get two district events for the price of one regional. The event costs are lower as it's done in such Gyms and often w/o a pro AV crew. It's a more efficient system.

Smaller events for some (dare I say most) teams is a plus. It's a lot more personal, as with a smaller field of competing teams you get to know other teams better. The smaller venues tend to get louder too, which really adds to the feel of the event during match play. It's a different feel that IMHO is superior to the feel of a regional.

Then there is the community aspect of it. Districts only work if the volunteer base is very strong. This is why Indiana survived last year, because of a volunteer family that works thier butts off for the sake of FIRST and the teams. No need for a pro AV crew, we have volunteers who have worked AV for offseason events for years. In fact, district events are more akin to two-day offseason events, only with offical awards. In that regard IRI was the first district event ever, in a way.

Finally, in a bizarre way, districts are better for volunteers. Yes, we have to work harder, but it's also a good thing. It builds the local FIRST family, as you get to see and work with each other more. You also get more events to build your volunteer skills. Last year was my first year scorekeeping. By the start of championship I had FOUR official events under my belt. Due to that, I was allowed to scorekeep at championship despite being a rookie. If you want to try different positions, while offseason events are good as well, districts allow one to have variety in their volunteer work if they want. As a volunteer, I've preferred districts for these reasons.

If you don't believe me, I suggest attending (or even volunteering) at a district event some time, if you can. You might just change your mind.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

There's been hope that High Tech Kids, who runs FIRST LEGO League Junior, FIRST LEGO League and FIRST Tech Challenge for Minnesota will also take on the FIRST Robotics Competition. I'm sure both MN FIRST and High Tech Kids are working diligently to figure out something that will work in the future.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

this. I did 2 years under the regionals and two years under district format, and it is so fantastic to be able to go to at least 2, usually 3 or 4 events (my team is good most years :v ), for a much lower cost than 3 events would cost if you were doing regional events. not to mention that the smaller district events are far more manageable when you account for schoolwork and missing class - Regionals take up far more time.

the district system is also far fairer IMO. in 2013, there's at least 3 teams I could list off the top of my head that absolutely deserved to go to world champs that couldn't since they didnt win anything at regionals. Due to the district points system, the team that gets second place at every event they go to earns their way to champs through that consistent quality.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Something important to remember about the volunteer issue, specifically key volunteers... If you build it they will come.

At least here in MAR, going to districts itself grew the key volunteer base. We still have a lot of work to do to lessen the burden on some, but we're making progress. It forces you to open up key volunteer positions that others have had locked down for years at the regional events. Local events over fewer days (some not even requiring vacation day usage!) helps prompt people that never would have volunteered before. For that matter, there is no obligation to volunteer every week and you shouldn't feel forced to volunteer! Sure there are crazy people like me that would be at every event if they could be in two places at once, but there are also people that volunteer at one or two of the events.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Iowa is being run by Iowa FIRST, but many of the volunteers there are from MN FIRST. (That's why I said IF you count it.)

Sorry for any confusion.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I take this as a serious question; after all, if those of us in Districts cannot elaborate to others what the advantages are, one may fairly question if there really are any.

Advantages are subjective: What I see as an advantage, others might not. But here is what I see:

1. Not having to take vacation from work. Fri/Sat/Sun events mean I can just leave an hour early on a Friday and still attend every minute of the event. Big for me as a mentor, and many parents appreciate the zero out-of-school time and thus are more supportive.

2. Less travel. Smaller events tend to be nearer. MI UP folks may disagree though.

3. The feel and production values are easily at Regional level, but of course the organizers must deliberately make it so.

4. You really get to know your 'neighbors' after a few years: smaller venues and limited teams really makes things cozy in a good way.

Other posts have elaborated on other advantages, and I agree with those as well.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I'd like to note that the smaller events and District Championship provide more opportunities for success. Instead of ~50% of teams at a ~48 team regional playing in elims, around two thirds of teams play in elims at a ~36 team district event. This creates more opportunities for success in elims, and more chances to win judged awards.

Winning our first (district) event in 2014 revitalized my team's morale. As the second pick of the second alliance, if the event were much larger, we very well may not have had this chance. That year was our first time at District Championship, and our experience iterating on our design, playing with MAR's best, and nearly qualifying for CMP motivated us to grow and push ourselves toward new success, both on and off the field.

The opportunities the District system presented have cause my team to advance leaps and bounds in the past few years. Last weekend, my team won its second competition and its first as an alliance captain. Districts help teams improve on so many levels, between the increased plays/$ and the more easily attained chances for success.

Disclaimer: I'm not saying it's all about the competition. Our success caused us to re-assess our priorities, and we went from being a team with very little outreach to a team regularly demonstrating our robot and getting people excited about STEM. Competitive success isn't everything but it sure makes a difference.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Welcome to the normal world before districts. Most teams worked their whole build season for a single Regional and 8 matches. Approximately 16 minutes of play time.

As for volunteers - it's time to force that back on the teams. The teams are the ones with the people resources, and that where you have to look to if you want to solve the problem. Announce districts well in advance of the season and explain each team is going to have to provide XX unskilled and 1 skilled individual (who will have to attend training, etc) for each event. After one rocky year, you'll end up with at least a couple dozen skilled individuals you can drag even deeper to make into skilled FTA's and the like.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Some more great points about the many advantages of the District System.

A couple points I'd like to highlight:

Build it and they will come. Before the PNW District formed we had 1 or 2 of each key volunteer position. Yes the first year was rough on some of our key volunteers. It was made easier because we made the decision to make the move and started by recruiting and training more people for those positions before making the switch. Now 3 years in we have 5 of most key volunteers so that no one person has to cover more than 2 of the events since we only have 9 events + DCMP and in fact we now do not generally allow volunteers to work in the same key volunteer position at more than 2. Many do choose to take on multiple roles and attend more events. One of the keys of this is letting people know that there is a need for people to fill those positions and that they are welcome. We have found that many of the mentors and students have the knowledge and desire to be volunteers. It is a great way to keep people "in the family". We have those mentors who are ready to move on from that role when their kids graduate, that still want to be involved in a lower impact way. We also have a number of former students who volunteer at an event, Sat-Sun events make it easier for both of those groups.

A 501c3 organization is needed, but creating one is not some impossible feat and it is not blazing a new trail. There are now 8 districts that have been down a similar path who will gladly share how they did it. It is important to note that we all took different paths and some of the newer events have taken elements from multiple existing districts to create what works for them.

I've also had time to consider my time in the Regional System and the things that are better about it. I was only able to come up with two.

#1 In some of the venues that we had used in the PNW the seats are more comfortable than in the venues we use now. It certainly is not true across the board however because a couple of our district events have taken place in the same University gyms as the Regionals that preceded them.

#2 In Regionals there is a greater likelihood of seeing teams from out of your area. In the past we have had international teams from Mexico and Turkey. We have also had teams from MT, ID, CA and HI in the past. However with the interdistrict play we have seen teams from MI and hopefully we'll see more in the future.

Finally as mentioned above not every Regional is in a major league sports arena, some are in University Gyms, Convention centers and even HS Gyms while district events are held in HS and University Gyms and the DCMPs are sometimes held in sports arenas.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

So, if MN decides to make the switch,

What needs to be done before we can make the switch?
How long would it be until we can make the switch?
Would we be ready by the 2018 or 2019 seasons? Or even 2017?

From what I've read on this thread, the pros far outweigh the cons, so why can't we work towards this?

As for location, there are a lot of places that host offseason events, so that might be a good place to start.

We could call it the Minnesota District (MN) or we could include IA, ND, SD and WI and call it the Upper Midwest District (UMW).

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

This is the biggest win for the district model. Up in the Frozen North (aka Canada) there are unfortunately not enough teams _yet_ to support the district model so we have regionals.

Given that, we have pretty much concluded that we need to (a) build two robots, and (b) attend 2 regionals in order to be able to test/iterate/improve the robot design and drive team. Which adds significantly to the costs of running a team. Attending one event, after all the work that is build season, seems like very little reward for all the work, but the second regional certainly adds a lot of cost.

Would love to be in a district model with weekend events, and robot access period instead of the craziness that the "practice" day at a regional can turn into.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

If Minnesota goes into it's own district region by itself it will already have the most teams for a first-year district. Every other region went to districts with way less teams than Minnesota already has. Including other states and bumping that number up higher would make it even harder to organize that first year.

More teams means more events, which means more fields and more volunteers. Minnesota needs to switch before they get to 240 teams, that'll let them get by with only two fields. Waiting too long or adding other states makes the switch turn from hard to nearly impossible.

Ontario absolutely has enough teams for districts right now. There are 137 teams in Ontario this year, more than MAR, CHS, IN, GA and NC.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Would we be able to start with only Minnesota and then expand to include neighboring states after a couple years?

Also, how many active teams does MN have currently?

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Minnesota has 208 teams this year.

I suppose they could expand later; PNW did add Alaska this year (although that was only one team).

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

The most important part is having the leadership in MN want to make the move to the District System. Once you have that then you can make it happen.

The leaders of what has become the PNW District were approached by FIRST in the 2012 season with the request that we move to the District System for the 2013 season. Since it was still a relatively new concept with 2 different models, FiM and MAR we decided to wait until the 2014 season and use the 2013 season to figure out how we wanted to implement it and prepare.

The most important thing in my opinion would be to train more key volunteers during the preceding season. That means having people shadow the current key volunteers and learn the ropes "on the job". So probably a little too late for the 2017 season but if the process was started now they could have everything in place for a relatively smooth transition for the 2018 season, IF, and it is a big IF, growth is held to a minimum so that the total number of teams for the first season is less than 240. Once you cross that threshold it becomes a much bigger problem as you can not do it in 12 events as FIRST has mandated that the max event size is 40 teams to ensure the ability to have the mandated 12 qualification matches of the District System.

It is easier now because you have many footsteps to follow that trace a few different paths.

For example in the PNW district the choice was made to own all the necessary equipment to produce an event with the exception of generators, and some tables or additional pipe and drape when needed for a particular event and not available from the venue. That did require a larger initial capital investment but the math said that all of that equipment would be amortized in 1-3 years vs the rental fees.

The people behind FIRST in IN actually contracted with the PNW district to bring our AV people and equipment for IRI the season before they made the switch to train their people. We also provided a list of all of our equipment which I believe they mainly duplicated at least on the AV side.

There are some differences in how the Districts are produced. From my understanding FiM uses trailers pulled by pickups to put the fields in for transport with a minimal amount of road cases. In the PNW we decided to follow FIRST's lead and put everything in road cases and use a semi trailer that we rent and hire a truck and driver to transport. We have a warehouse for offseason storage that also doubles as the office, meeting and training space, area for a practice field, and even Geek's Gala our own version of Robo Prom. MAR and CPK use Pods both for transport and off-season storage.

So there are a number of variations in the implementation models used in the District System that can be mixed and matched to create something that would work best for MN. For example I know that a number of the new areas have followed MAR's use of Pods for storage and transport but our AV set up.

If you really want to join the District System and reap the many benefits to teams you need to let MN's leadership know that you want it AND you are willing to be part of the solution by training to be a key or regular volunteer next season.

As usual the statements are my own opinion. They are based on participating back in the dark days of the Regional System and in our 3rd year of the District System. They are based on talking to many teams about their feelings on the change, students, mentors and volunteers.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

About the only thing I can think of I liked better before we went Districts, is the size of venue, for the most part, shrunk and sight-lines to the playing field aren't as great as they typically are in a traditional hockey/basketball venue.

Otherwise, paying 5000 for two events (24+ matches), the ability to pay 1000 to add 3rd+ events and then the chance at ranking well enough to compete at the district champs and Worlds without necessarily winning an event outright, I think I'll say I like districts.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Minnesota added 19 teams this year. If we grow by the same number next year we're at 227, and the year after that 246.

Becoming a district is something we will want to do very soon if we want to be under the magic number of 240 when we switch.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I wouldn't count on that kind of continued growth.

The last big jump was 2012 (153) to 2013 (180).
2013 to 2014 was only 6 teams.
2014 to 2015 brought in another 6 (to 192).
2015 to 2016 was actually 16 (we are currently at 208).

We have also hit the point at which we have a team at most schools that can support an FRC team (and some that really can't). Many of the schools looking at FRC would be much better off with an FTC team. These are schools with around 100 students total in rural areas without many local companies to leverage for money and mentors.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I was basing the 19 off of the number of rookie teams, not taking into account any teams that stopped competing at the end of last year.

Still, MN FIRST is growing fast.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I think there is a lot more growth potential. The Twin Cities and Duluth areas are overpopulated/at full capacity, but there is a massive untapped source of teams in the Central MN area, extending to the North and West to Fargo, ND. I think hitting that 240 mark is more than reasonable within 3-4 years.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I fear that this is what the actual hold-up is.

What follows is going to be part open letter, part response to this thread in general.

I can understand logistical concerns about districts here. I can understand concerns about not having enough volunteers. Heck, I can even understand the apprehension that those who are currently running our events (and, yes, are doing a fantastic job with the rather terrible position we're in of so many teams and so little time) may have of losing the control they currently have of our system. I can understand concerns about lower event quality and I can understand concerns that we might not be able to meet our own lofty standards for events.

What I really cannot understand is how districts has become a taboo topic of discussion in Minnesota, and why there doesn't seem to be any plan whatsoever, or even a vague notion that Minnesota can go to districts in the foreseeable future. I don't understand how we came to this deadlock where it's a rookie student that asks the question "So what exactly do we need to go to districts?"

Honestly, at this point I'm not sure what the deal is. It seems like everyone is acting according to what they believe to be the program's best interests at heart, but somewhere along the line the community here lost an entire set of people who could have been welcomed into helping FRC in Minnesota move forward, but have instead been pushed away from volunteering (or in some cases even being a part of the program). I know people who have been called up and told not to post here about districts in MN, or to be told that they would not be assigned to a volunteer role because of posts on social media or CD. I know that there are incredibly talented and passionate people who have just flat out given up on volunteering here in Minnesota because they no longer want to deal with the "Minnesota drama."

Maybe this post feels like I'm trying to place the blame at the feet of the nebulous and ambiguous "them"-- those who are in charge of MN FIRST. That isn't the case. I have nothing but respect for "them" and what they have done for the program here. I just find it sad and unfortunate that there are so many people who want to help make MN FIRST better, but have been pushed away or become disillusioned with the current state of affairs, and that it doesn't appear likely to change any time soon.

I'm still looking for meaningful ways to move us towards districts, but I honestly don't know what I can do other than continue volunteering and running the workshops I do with GOFIRST. That's something that I think is a major part of the problem-- there isn't a lack of desire for districts here, there's a lack of direction for what we can do to move towards it. Vague calls for "more volunteers" aren't a meaningful answer to this question-- it's very clear that there's more that needs to happen, and at least from where I'm standing it looks like there's more that we can start doing now.

We want to help.

Let us.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I totally agree. If the leadership needs help, then just ask and the community will deliver. That's one thing I've learned so far in my 5 months of being with FIRST.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I agree that requiring teams to bring a couple of volunteers each, like they did in Michigan, is a good place to start.

I can only imagine how much work it would be to start a new district. I'm not going to whine that other people aren't doing that work, but I will definitely be happy when we finally go that direction in this part of the country.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

So, should we work on this now while we have a few weeks until the next MN competitions? Or should we wait until May after championships is over before we do anything? Personally, I'd prefer sooner, but I want to know what you all think first.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I'm all for MN districts, as long as the North Dakota teams are allowed in. There's only 3 of us and we're on the eastern side of the state. It's a loooong way to a regional if not. I believe South Dakota has 2 teams but they're on the western side and go to events that way. I'm volunteering at Iowa and would be happy to talk with anyone there.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

My 2 biggest concerns about MN going to districts are putting ND teams on an island, and our partnership with the Minnesota State High School Leauge, specifically the State Championship event held after the official FRC season. I think both things could be worked out, but I don't personally see a simple solution to the State Championship issue. I'd love to hear the ideas from people in this thread for how that issue can be worked out.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I don’t view the state championship in such high regards that it should dramatically hinder FRC in MN. There would be a district champs that, at least for me, would more than make up for it. I think MN FRIST, to be somewhat competitive, has to make the change very soon. I’m planning on volunteering next year just to help with the whole “we need more volunteers" argument. If state means so much, we could have a state championship with only MN teams (assuming MN going to districts would include ND teams).

As a mentor for a team who currently does not volunteer, I can tell you that I'd be willing to take on a role in a district event, or a few of them, if I didn't have to miss more of my day job than I already do. Currently, I sit in the stands and watch my team compete at regionals. If I felt there was a need beyond working the safety glasses (which I have my students do) I'd have volunteered years ago. I make it a point to talk to and work with as many teams as possible between matches but that's slightly redundant since there are others that already do that, and my students can handle it. I've got 9 years of FRC experience as a mentor but none as a volunteer or tournament organizer.

My point is, there have to be at least a couple of dozen mentors that would step up to make this happen. We'd gladly host an event and the entire thing would save us $3,000 a year plus travel costs... I'd guess I've got at least 3 or 4 other mentors on my team that could handle key roles in district events...

If you build it, they will come!

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

The Minnesota State Championship is so much more than just another off season competition. The partnership with the MSHSL gives validation to many teams within their schools. When 4607 won State in 2013, we brought Becker High School its 3rd State Championship in its history. That's something that "non-robotics" students can look at, and relate to. The next year our team grew by more than 200%.

When we go to districts, we need to find a way to maintain the partnership with the MSHSL. In my mind, it's not an option, it has to continue. I think that sentiment is shared by those who have decision making power within MN FIRST. In my opinion every state would benefit by partnering with its version of the Minnesota State High School League.

As for districts... I'd love to see it happen. I also understand the arguments made by both sides (for the most part). Districts would undoubtedly raise the competitive level in Minnesota (there is no question about that. Those that deny this fact are ignorant to the facts). Right now, MN teams aren't as strong on average as many other regions. That's partially because we're a very young region, but it's also partially because the teams in MN get so little opportunity to improve at a 2nd event. It's very hard to get into 2 Minnesota regionals.

One thing I would really miss about the regional system is the super events hosted at Minneapolis and Duluth. There's just something about having 120+ teams in one location, not to mention teams from Hawaii, China, and Australia. It's a tradeoff going to the district system for sure, and I can absolutely see why people would want to hang on to the regional system. In my mind, the competitive, and financial improvements are worth the change.

Eventually districts are going to happen. I think the groundwork is in place that we will be ready when it happens. There is work to do, but there is always work to do. I definitely agree with the Field of Dreams approach, "If you build it, they will come".

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I didn’t really think of it from that point of view. I went to a school with many state championships to its name, and it really devalues them. I’m guessing if MN went to districts we would include other areas outside of MN, and that would still leave room for a MN state championship offseason event similar to the current model. We could also take the average points from the first two events instead of just the first event, which would be a big plus in my book.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

tl;dr

Districts are good for teams, but there's a lot of effort needed. Good thing there are active alumni who volunteer, without them it won't work.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

No Minnesota team has ever won Einstein. I looked. (2512 did make it to the Einstein finals last year)

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

In my opinion there are two clear paths forward for MSHSL in our hypothetical districts future:

1: MSHSL State Championship gets blended into the FIRST State Championship

Obviously, this only works if we don't take any other states along with us to districts. I also have no idea how amenable MSHSL would be to this, but it doesn't seem particularly complicated if nobody's feelings are going to get hurt.

2: MSHSL continues as is, but now they can count two events per team

Also a pretty simple way forward, there's just a 'small' naming issue with having two State Tournaments. This also doesn't seem particularly complicated to me. The perhaps minor change to this versus the FIRST model is that the MSHSL model would likely simply be the first two events anywhere that a team attends, as opposed to the first two events in district (which, as I understand it, is how district events are).

In the second case there's a question of whether to assess point rankings based on how MN calculates them or how FIRST calculates them. Obviously the first method is easier than the second, but there are some good fairness reasons that MN currently calculates based on the first event. That strikes me more as a discussion that needs to happen versus a major complication.

There may be other alternatives, but those are the two that come to mind.

Wow, I hope I can worry about this more soon.

If you look back further, you'll see that last year was the first time Minnesota wheels touched the Einstein carpet.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Australia is a big country, there is currently only 1 regional, which is a week three event which is located in Sydney, on the otherside of the country from teams like 5333,5663 and 4788. For those teams to come to the regional in Sydney the only option is to fly as it is a 4000km(2500 mile) journey by road. Australia is roughly the same size as the USA, so it would be like travelling from the West Coast to New York to attend a regional, and flights are quite expensive because of this. Currently the other nearest regional is Hawaii and a few Australian teams attend, this year team 3132 competed at Northern Lights, and will compete at the Australian Regional and Hawaiian Regional in the coming weeks and team 4613 is competing at the Australian Regional and then the Western Canada Regional

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

As a member of 5333, I'm more than aware and agree. Over the next few years, we are planning to start more FRC teams in Western Australia, however I stick with my point that going to more than 1 regional is quite a hefty expense. Looking at the TBA page of the Australian Regional you can see that the large majority of teams do choose to only compete in the Australian Regional. For these teams, I'm sure you'd agree that only 8 matches to play (assuming they are not picked up in alliance selections) is very few

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Peter,
Are you aware of the push to get other regionals in MN.? Are you aware of the demand on volunteers for the existing events? Did you mention the number of teams served in the double Duluth event? The Minnesota events are some of the largest in the country.
In Duluth, the volunteer picture took an entire field to hold and the photographer was required to take the picture from the balcony. And still there were not enough.
There are people working tirelessly behind the scenes to continue to improve MN. However, among other issues, many rural teams in MN do not have enough adults to supply the volunteer pool at the event they attend. I know the volunteer coordinator personally and the job of manning all of the required volunteer positions is nearly impossible. While teams may not be happy with the number of matches at a single event, there are a variety of other alternatives that a team can follow. I can assure you (and everyone reading this) that every event in MN is working hard to get volunteers. Many come from other states, without their teams, to volunteer at MN events including the State Championship. I wish Illinois had a State Championship. We have tried to influence the state for many years but thus far have failed. A lot more of our teams get only one regional event and have no state champs to look forward to.

Nick,
Do you know of any other sport in Minnesota that has two championships? The State League is not as simple as you like to think.

WildStang has been around for a long time. Our rookie year, the only regional was in Manchester and the Champs were in Disney World. Our second year, there were two regionals, Manchester and Chicago. When other regionals started later, we traveled to Ann Arbor, MI. That event was further from us than Duluth. Teams work out the issues to get to events. Minnesota teams will work out this issues too. The same for Sydney, which I expect will be a wonderful event. While there will not be as many rookies as the first Minnesota event (I was LRI at that event), there will be more than twenty and some from very small, outback schools. I pray they all will have a wonderful time. I will do my best to make that happen, see you in a few days.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Yes I completely agree, also the 8 match system means that teams who might have a problem with their robot in a few matches, or as can be a problem in Australia due to the young age of teams, teams which have capable robots can receive low rank because they have ended up in poor alliances during qualifications. For example at the 2015 Australia Regional, we encountered some issues with the Logitech game pad, and as a result we were unable to use our stacking mechanism for the entirety of the match and we were the only team on our alliance whose robot was moving.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

And a MN bot was nail bitingly close to winning Einstein last year too even though it was MN's first year on Einstein..

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Can confirm that managing volunteers is incredibly difficult. In my short experience managing around 30 Bison Robotics Volunteers, I can say it's one if the most challenging things I've done. I work very closely with the Volunteer Coordinator for Minnesota and I am blown away by how smoothly the events run, given the challenges that are overcome. Nothing but positive things to say about the leadership in Minnesota.

I'm not so sure that the "rural teams" in Minnesota don't have volunteers to contribute. Being that I'm from one of those rural teams, and I work with many more of them within our local hub, I know they have volunteers to contribute. They just have no incentive to do so right now. Now obviously there are smaller teams out there, and teams that would be incapable of providing volunteers, but there are many more teams out there with enough people to provide many volunteers. I would argue the latter outnumber the former.

I fully agree that MN FIRST is doing their best, and the leadership is doing their best. I'm very appreciative of their efforts. I just wish I could do more to help.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I recall this being quite common. 4788 was having a similar issue with their gamepad, and so we had to share our Xbox controller between two teams, which got interesting when both teams had to compete at the same time. I also recall many teams having software issues, as most of my time was spent running around getting other people's robots up and running. Hopefully we see some good alliances made this year. I pray to the FMS gods

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

As far as Minnesota is concerned:

In NO WAY can the MSHSL League be discounted. They were incredible enough to include FRC as a legitimate organization. I cannot state enough how much respect I have for MN FIRST as well as the MSHSL to make this happen. A third partner in all of this (the UofM) cannot be overlooked as they provide the space and time for the MSHSL FRC Tournament to happen. As we move forward - there must be only ONE state championship, otherwise it will be watered down.

And for those of you that discount the MN State Tourney as a mere off-season event - you are incredibly wrong. I can speak for all the teams involved as they take this event as seriously as any other FRC event. 4607's initial goal every season is the MSHSL Tournament.

In fact, Becker High School takes FRC seriously as it hangs TWO banners for our FRC team in the Gymnasium for our 2013 and 2014 state title runs. The community thinks it is important as well - when you enter Becker via US Hwy 10 you will see FRC 4607 State Champs 2013 hanging proudly on the sign.

When MN FIRST goes districts, the format must be a MSHSL tourney event.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Gonna level with you guys, there's a lot of text walls in this thread and I did not read all of them. I'm just gonna comment on my unique experience.

As a key volunteer I'm currently writing this post while laying on the floor of a Kettering University student's dorm, next to the gym I just announced a district in for the second straight week. I did 11 FRC events in total last year and plan on doing 8 more this year.

The volunteers in Michigan aren't aquaintances, we're family. That's why Zach Orr flies from Atlanta to Flint just so he can introduce teams on my shoulders, that's why FTA's Rob and Eric are superman and batman respectively, and it's why I'll always have a couch (or floor) to crash on within the borders of the mitten state.

Your key volunteers might not have the time to do 12 events, but your college students are young proffesionals who are passionate about impacting lives like their volunteers did for them. These college students have the time to do 6 weeks of events, and they understand how to keep the competition experience relevant since they understand what it's like to compete as a student.

Dave Verbrugge and Tom Nader do not do 6 events a season in Michigan as an MC/GA duo, but they're still directly responsible for showing me how to make incredible formative experiences for the students at the combined 19 events I've participated in these past two years.

Changing lives as a key volunteer is not a right reserved for the "elite" among us anymore. If you're afraid that someone's going to be "just meh" at scorekeeping more than you're afraid that some kids at an inner city Minneanapolis school won't be able to participate because of the price, then you need to reavaluate why you're even here.

Did the DJ at today's St. Joseph event play smooth jazz dinner music before the final elim match? He sure did and it kinda killed my buzz. Did it stop the students on Stryke Force from making a memory they'll always remember as they won that blue banner? No it sure didn't!

I'm not here for the vibe, I'm here to impact lives.

#BringOutYourDead

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Ryan,
I don't want to blame rural teams, I am just pointing to the issue that some have. That is one or perhaps two mentors working incredibly hard to bring FRC to their small school. I cannot ask a mentor in that situation to volunteer when they are already working harder than I am, to insure their small team has a quality program. My hat is off to those teams and their dedicated mentors.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

When I think "rural" I don't think "Becker." You guys are certainly more rural than New Brighton, but still what I would consider suburban (subrurban-lite?). I don't mean to devalue you or Becker- you guys do some awesome stuff! I just have a slightly different definition that I think will clear up the point on rural teams.

When I talk about rural teams who don't have the resources to provide volunteers, I'm talking about schools like Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig which had an enrollment of 197 in 2014 compared to Becker's ~800. Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig is is in Bena, MN, which has a population of 118 compared to Becker's 4,645.

They actually did have an FRC team from 2010 through 2013. They were one of my favorite teams back when I was an inspector because I could tell how much work they put into getting a viable robot put together and down to the Twin Cities.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I fully agree. Sorry if I implied that you were "blaming" rural teams. There are teams in Minnesota that can't do anything more than field a semi-functional robot. I have a huge respect for those mentors that make that happen from little to no resources.

I just meant to say that MN FIRST shouldn't let the limits of some teams limit the improvement of the organization as a whole. When districts happen, if there is a volunteer requirement, exceptions will have to be made in the cases of these hard-working, yet small teams.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

In terms of population you have a great point. I don't see your post as devaluing Becker at all! It's kind of cool that we're not looked at as a bunch of people from the sticks :D

I'm of the mindset that any non-twin cities/Duluth team is rural. Your definition fits the situation far better. I agree that there are rural teams that fit your definition that can't contribute volunteers. DROBA Warriors from Deer River (3036) is an example. They have a graduating class of ~30 people. As I mentioned in my post above, I don't think the number of small teams outweighs the volunteer power of the larger teams in MN. In other words, I think the larger teams can make up the volunteer deficit that the smaller teams will leave.

I'm not sure that my statement is true regionally, especially in northern Minnesota. It'd be very interesting to see some data about the size of teams in Minnesota on a map. It'd provide some nice, positive reinforcement for the "build it and they will come" statement that myself and others have put out there. It might be that there is literally nobody to come, even if the desire is there.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I'm sorry; I cannot comprehend the concept of "can't contribute volunteers".
Do you have students on your team? Yes. Good; this means you also have at least 1 parent per student. Even if you have 5 students, that's 5 parents! Look; volunteers!!! Like it or not, when the student signs up for robotics, the parent does too.

I've been on a small team (< 15) for many years and currently mentor a big team (> 45) and I have NEVER had a problem finding volunteers from my team. There are just no excuses. I get it; people work. But not everyone works. (Note: hs students can be volunteers too)

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

No.

Parents are there to support their child, but don't sign up for the role of what is essentially unpaid work. Students go to FRC to do what THEY want to do, under the guidance of their mentors (the ones who actually sign up for this), their parents shouldn't be roped into doing volunteer work. While some parents are more than happy to volunteer, for others this concept is just simply too far out of reach

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

No, I do not. It's worth noting though that the case where Minnesota goes to districts solo and MSHSL refuses to blend the state tournaments strikes me as less likely than the other two scenarios (if we go to districts with anyone else, we aren't hosting a MN State tournament, it's a district championship for an area that includes MN), unless someone as tactful as I am is handling that discussion (which I would hope wouldn't be the case).

With regards to your last point, you are (partially) correct-- the "what to do with MN State" is a thorny issue within an even thornier issue. My post did not reflect that complexity, and I can definitely see how it comes off as me having little appreciation for the effort that goes into the tournament, or a lack of understanding of the complexities involved in running it (or any event). While it may be true that I do not have the first hand experience of spending years volunteering and building a regional system from scratch, I do have an exceptional amount of respect and appreciation for the people that have made the events that changed my life as a student possible.

You cannot speak for every team involved. This is true of your team and your area, but it is not universally true. When I was on 2220, the state tournament WAS seen as a glorified offseason event by many of us involved. Heck, I've been vocal in the past about that view point. Since then I've come to appreciate it much more-- making state was HUGE for 2667 last year.

That being said, I can't say that an extra event for ~30 out of 208 teams is nearly as important in my mind as getting EVERY team a second play, and possible triple the matches (without considering extra events like Champs, District Champs, a third play, or elimination matches). Up until this year, 4607 has been in the same 1-regional club as 2667, and I know you guys have been in the same boat of having bad luck ruin your chances of qualifying for Championships. You know how bad it is to be in that position, and, since you've made it to doing two regionals, I assume you know how hard it is to find the funds to do another event.

The MN State Championship, or another regional (heck, as many regionals as you want to add here) are NOT a replacement for a district system. They are part of a system that benefit disproportionately teams that can afford the costs of another regional, or are already performing well enough that they've qualified for Champs (about half of the teams that qualified for MSHSL last year attended Champs in '14 or '15, and an even larger percentage attended two or more "actual" events). It is very difficult for teams to break a cycle of low performance and low funding (which feed into each other). It happens, but it certainly isn't the norm. Adding regionals, a state championship-- they're not solutions to the problem. They're at best band aids on a gaping chest wound of inequity, and at worst, things that can make us complacent.

Towards this end: 8 matches for regionals are only acceptable if we let them be, if we sit back and hope that the people in charge can somehow put the whole world on their shoulders. I know that the broader community can take some of that weight, but we need to actually step up and take it, and be welcomed to do so. It is not the person organizing volunteers who is doing the volunteers a favor by giving them a position-- it is a mutually beneficial relationship that doesn't work to its fullest potential unless both parties are willing to trust the other.

I am extremely proud, happy, excited about the progress robotics programs have made in MN and generally around the world, even since I started competing, but especially from the humble beginnings of FIRST in general. Yet there is so much more yet to be done. So much more we can do, and so much more that we can become. I can see this future in Michigan, I can see it from New England to the Pacific Northwest, and yes, I can see parts of it in Minnesota. But if we cannot take advantage of ALL the resources available to us-- this includes college students, alumni, and, more broadly, people that don't "fit the mold" of being key volunteers-- it is likely too difficult of a future for just a few people to build. FIRST excels at creating a community broader than just grey-haired professionals mentoring white suburban students-- we can leverage that incredible diversity of talent and passion to create a beautiful future for our communities.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

At the Kansas City Regional, they offered 10 plays for 59 teams. Admittedly, the field team had to play through lunch, and they still ended 45 minutes late on Thursday. They were late too on Friday, but not as bad.

A lot of the problem was with the Radio this year. Seems to be worse than last year. Field Reset was only a problem for one or two matches (removing a stuck defense, or repairing the Sally Port), but not a long delay like some Radio delays.

Any thoughts on having Load-in and Pits open on Wednesday around Noon? Practice Rounds could start at 9 am on Thursday, with Qualification Rounds starting at 1:00 pm. RI's and Practice Field would be needed a day early on Wednesday. Everyone else would need to be ready at 9am on Thursday, rather than Noon.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

There's a lot of good discussion in this thread, but this comment by Nick is concerning. If the leadership of an organization is threatening volunteers for posting on CD about districts, I think that organization has larger problems than trying to make a switch to districts. Hopefully what Nick is referring to is a small number of isolated incidents as opposed to a concerted effort by a region to stifle open discussion.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

No you cannot speak for all teams involved. When I was a student the MN State Championship just another off season for me, compared to the real prize of going to and trying to win at worlds, or even going to IRI. I would much rather go to my first event sit dead on the field during every match and not go to states, if it meant having all issues worked out for our next event and doing well and going to worlds. I have spoken to a number of students who share this same opinion. Perhaps part of the reason I feel this way is that I dont agree with how teams advance to the state championship (I feel it should be your best event or the average of all your events), this comes from my idea of what the goal of the state championship should be which doesn't necessarily align with MN FIRST.

This is extremely troubling and very disappointing that this is something that happens in Minnesota, though from the way I've heard certain people in MN FIRST talk about districts it is not entirely surprising. During my time in Minnesota I talked to many people mentors and students from large teams, small teams, teams with large budgets, teams with small budgets, ect. and the vast majority of people I talked to were in favor of districts (and 100% of the students were in favor of them, once I explained what they were).

Also the MN-ND-WI-IA region is basically at capacity for how many play spots there are vs how many are desired, if not for the addition of the Iowa regional there would have been a fair number of teams not able to get a second play, which is very discouraging for teams that work hard to fundraise enough for that second play only to find out there isn't a spot for them.

To add on as someone who competed in MN throughout highschool and now attends school in Michigan I can attest to one of the biggest arguments for regionals vs districts arguments.

Venues: While competing at Mariucci or the DECC is awesome and I would argue some of the best venues in FRC they lose some of their charm when your in a giant stadium and there are four dead/broken bots on the field. After volunteering at the Kettering district the I didn't really noticed the smaller and more personal size of the space but it did not detract from the event.

I may post some of my other thoughts on having now experienced a district event after doing for years of regionals if I get some time with all the studying for finals

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

You are correct Nick - I should not have spoken for all teams in Minnesota. It is just that my team has our sights on the State Tourney every season. This is our main objective. And in the two seasons that we were fortunate enough to qualify - the other teams were all in to win it. A regional win (and it's qualification to the World Champs) is one thing, but to most school-attached teams, a State Tournament berth means much more to the local community.

As for my logic - if the team qualifies for the State Tourney, more than likely the team qualified for the Champs (or had been honored with great awards and finished high in the quals). So I always gear my kids up for a State Berth. Last year was a disappointment as our robot could not connect to FMS for 6 of the matches and browned out in 2. This year was different as we carried our alliance partners in the first day and then had to show our defensive prowess the last day.

I am optimistic that MN can get to Districts soon - and in doing so there should be a way that the 'District Championships' can also double as the MSHSL State Tournament. If this is a non-starter for either organization, then I feel that we will remain as a Regional area for some time - and that is a severe concern for the students and schools involved. At this point, there is little we can do about the problem.

I have been a MSHSL coach in multiple sports for over 10 years - and I know that sometimes the powers that be in that organization can be difficult. However, I am optimistic that with the strong growth of FRC in MN can help to sway some of the officials at the MSHSL office. A great concern for me is that there is no FRC/Robotics representation in the MSHSL office or in the MSHSCA ranks. I am also aware that they (MSHSL) do not want to set a precedent (as they have been sued a few times in the last number of years). This is a warranted concern.

For my part, I have been a coach for most of my adult life - and as much as I would like to think that all adults would look out for the betterment of student achievement, this is not always the case. But in the case of MN FIRST - and all of my dealings with them - they are truly looking out for the betterment of the students and the brand of MN FIRST.

I will end with this - FRC (and the CD Community) is amazing. Here we are debating what is best for the students and the teams. We are not arguing over trivial aspects - we are discussing (passionately) the potential growth problems of an organization that we all love. Where else do you find this type of discussion?

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

All teams in MN have different goals. Speaking to the captains on 2502 tonight, they would much rather win a regional than win the state championship. Our goal for this season is to make it to Einstein after our fairly good 2015 season (so we would much rather qualify for worlds than play in a offseason event). I also don’t believe the state championship point system is fair. The ranking system in qualification is broken in MN events due to the lack of qualification matches making parts of the state championship’s ranking system broken in return. I do believe 2502 is a good example of this, they had the highest goal points per match average in FRC for week 1 and showed how dominate they were in eliminations (second highest alliance average for weeks 0.5 and 1 with the help of our great alliance partners 2883 and 5232), but they ended up seeding 31st at the event during qualifications (5172 is another great example of how broken the ranking system was at northern lights due to the lack of qualification matches). I know there is at least some teams in the state that view the state championship as just another offseason event. Not saying either side is right, but I don’t think it’s as cut and dry as you’re making it out to be. You also don’t speak for all the teams in MN.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

All teams do have different goals. Trying to qualify for State is very important to us. Our school isn't a perennial powerhouse in sports, so bringing home a MSHSL championship gets us noticed. Any recognition we can get from our school to legitimize robotics and put us on a more level playing field with other activities like football is a win to me. We've been fortunate enough to qualify for State every year and we'll continue to try to do that.

I agree the ranking system isn't great, but don't they use a similar structure to the districts? As far as I know your seed doesn't factor into how many points you get to qualify for State. Even your W/L is weighted pretty low compared to how early you get picked and how you perform in eliminations.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Duly noted. Second time in fact.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Additionally, the 10 points that teams can get just for submitting for Chairman's is overvalued and misguided. By and large, this just incentivizes rushed and sloppy Chairman's submissions.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

The ranking system is essentially the same the district ranking system to my knowledge. The biggest differences are that Chairman's Award winning teams qualify automatically, and only your first event counts.

I'm not sure how I feel about CA winners automatically qualifying... I like that we're rewarding the teams that win the most prestigious award in FIRST, but it doesn't necessarily bring the best teams to the competition. Although if your team is winning CA, you probably have a competitive team anyways, at least that's what I gather by checking out past winners.

I definitely know how I feel about a teams second event not counting. If the goal of the state championship is to have all the best teams in the state competing to figure out the best of the best then you have to count a second regional. You can do an average of the results of the first and second regionals to maintain some parity, but the teams that go to 2 events will get better at their second event.

If the goal of the state championship is anything other than figuring out the best of the best... then don't call it a state championship.

I know this thread is about 8 regional plays being fair or not, but let's be honest, it has evolved into an open discussion about FIRST in Minnesota. A discussion that is important, and should happen.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Just a few details on the MN State Ranking system. It is based on the district system, with a couple of modifications. To encourage teams to pursue chairman's, points are awarded for that submission. And since most teams in MN only do one event, we just recognize the team's first event for points. This is the same for districts - every team there does two events, so they recognize the first two, even if the team competes every weekend. Details on the system can be found here. Current standings can be found here.

Those details give a maximum number of points in each category:
Qual ranking: 22 points
alliance selection: 16 points
elims performance: 30 points
awards: 5/8 points per award

As for the two teams mentioned... 2502 may have been ranked 31, and there is an issue with good teams occasionally being ranked low, and vice versa. However, in the state rankings, they came out with the third highest total points for the weekend. 5172 was ranked 16th, and came out with the 5th highest total points for the state rankings. So from that perspective, the state rankings seem to be doing what they're supposed to be doing - both of those teams should have no problem getting into States, despite having event rankings lower than they should have been (based on comments here, I really have no idea how high any team should have been at either event).

And while I didn't really see much at Northern Lights, I have to ask - was 2502's ranking caused by bad alliance matchups, or because their strategy (going for high goals) wasn't as effective in earning ranking points as other strategies (such as getting breaches)? How often did they get breaches compared to others, versus capturing the tower? From what i've seen, the dominant strategy during quals is to breach while scoring a few balls, with very few matches resulting in a capture. That extra RP for a breach really helps with the rankings!

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

So you want to move to districts? I do too.

There are a lot of logistical items that have to be done to make that happen, such as a non-profit to run FIRST in MN, volunteer trainings, equipment purchase lists and much more. In fact, I think Nick Aarestad did a good job summarizing a few of the items in this thread from last year. I love seeing all of the offerings for help in this thread with the transition but how do we actually move forward? Contact the people that authorize the change, the Regional Directors for the area. I've listed their contact information below. Every year at Championships, the Regional Directors meet with the FIRST Board to determine goals for the upcoming years. They may set deadlines, team growth goals and other items. Something you could do before championships is let them know you want to help and that you want to transition to districts. It wouldn't hurt to include FRCTeams@FIRSTInspires.org on an email about it as well. I think a good first step would be to request to have an open discussion about Districts and Regionals, whether it be at the Minneapolis events or maybe later in the season at an off-season event.

Regional Director
Susan Lawrence
sklsumgrad@comcast.net

Assistant Regional Director
Ken Rosen
kr71@aol.com

I know there have been discussions going on between High Tech Kids and MN FIRST about combining organizations to have one organization that runs all of the FIRST programs in Minnesota. I would encourage you to offer your support to High Tech Kids as well, as they very well could be running FRC in the future.

I agree, I've heard concerns about this as well. I'm always one that advocates for open-door discussion, so I hope everyone in MN feels safe posting their opinions about districts on ChiefDelphi.

As a student on a PNW team, I personally love the district model. Not only does it allow more play time, but also, allows more teams to compete at worlds. In 2014, we wouldn't have qualified without the district model. Overall, there seems to be less stress put on district events making them 100*more fun. All in all, I'm glad we have the district model and I would encourage the rest of FIRST to be part of it.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I am going to talk with my team on Wednesday to see what they say about leading this transition. I think they will be willing to help lead everyone in the transition (at least I am). If they are, we can contact the directors and see what they say and what they may need from us as a community.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I agree, although there are a number of things one gets told not to post on CD. There are several, as a young key volunteer, I've been told "you say nothing on chief" about without even mentioning chief. Obviously I won't say what they are, and the reasons why are sound.

My point here is that organizations labeling certain topics as "don't say on chief" isn't anything new, although I absolutely agree that MN Districts shouldn't be one of those topics, as long as it's discussed fairly and respectfully.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

First. Eight matches is not enough to show the quality of a team's robot. Plain and simple. I get that for many teams, one regional is the only 8 matches that they can play all season and I respect the hell out of those teams. State is set up is that a robot can have communications issues that they can't control for the first 7 of the 8 matches they play and not move, and on the 8th match give a show and properly represent their robot. They then can go on and get overlooked and not make it to state even though they could be one of the best robots at the tournament.

Second. People have no opportunity to improve or learn from their mistakes. Last year there were a ton of teams that I saw improve between their first and second regionals. Now this is great for qualifying for worlds. But it isn't helpful at all when it comes to state. I get that everyone is not on the same level and I respect that. But you can't go from 2 totes on the field to 3 stacks of 6 in 8 matches.

Third. We did have some flaws in our strategy when it came down to what our robot did. But I don't think blaming the game is the way to properly approach this. I like this game. If we played the game to score more than the other alliance and overlooked placement, then that's on us even if we didn't catch it.

Al,
Do you know of any other sport in the World that has two championships?

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Al,

Please do try and keep things gracious and professional. Now I may be misinterpreting, but please do not be so quick to insult Peter's knowledge. Peter is one of the most knowledgeable people about Minnesota FIRST that I am familiar with, and is more than aware of the concerns listed. Which is likely why he stated that "There definitely isn't a great solution to this problem, other than going to districts, but that has been addressed in the past." These have all been concerns that have been discussed in the past.

I am concerned that comments like yours may be a part of the reason that cadandcookies feels that "people who have been called up and told not to post here about districts in MN." Now I am sure that there are many issues here, but I am sure that we are more than capable of holding a reasonable discussion.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

That’s true, but going for high goals gave us a higher points per match average with leaving easy points for our alliance partners on the table. If we went for the breach every match we would have probably lost 4 matches so the extra ranking points probably would have been a net gain of zero.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Let's all remember we are in the same game, on the same team just with different opinions on how to "win". We all want to be inspired and to inspire others to be STEM heroes in our world. We're all very passionate people who only want the best.

Of course there is always drama, of course there are always politics, which does indeed cause people to become afraid and makes it difficult to post. I've posted a lot of controversial statements in the past about districts. I've been asked (via phone call) to stop posting before and that I shouldn't be posting that sort of information in public. I sincerely hope that, that has not happened to anyone else. I still post here because I believe in what I say and I believe in healthy discussion.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

Yeah, FRC in 2017 ;)

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

[quote=ratdude747;1556840]I agree, although there are a number of things one gets told not to post on CD. There are several, as a young key volunteer, I've been told "you say nothing on chief" about without even mentioning chief. Obviously I won't say what they are, and the reasons why are sound./QUOTE]

I have been volunteering with First for several years now. I have never been told not to comment on CD. I know quite a few senior volunteers and judges that post regularly on CD. Obviously there are subjects where they hold confidential information that they do not comment on. Other areas that would be inappropriate for them to comment on. They also have to be careful that their views are not interpreted to be First official positions. That is far from a general ban.

While this might not be total the other Frank's doing... I have noticed that First has been noticeably more responsive to the Fist communities comments and concerns during his directorship.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

John,
I was far from ungracious. I merely asked if Peter had knowledge of the things I listed. They are important in this discussion and I do have some knowledge of Minnesota events and their future. I do know that FIRST people in Minnesota are working very hard. Their work shows all over the state. Minnesota has more robotics teams than Boys Hockey. In a state that is hockey oriented that is a big whopping win.

Re: Are 8 play regional reasonable?
 

I'm sorry. I really am. I had no intentions on entering this, but this has been bothering me for a while. I love FIRST. I made a large mistake joining in my sophomore year, and my parents agree. They are extremely proud of me, its easy to tell. But just because they are my parents and proud doesn't mean that they help. Now don't get me wrong. They really want to. They have made our build team dinner once and gone to the Northern Lights regional to cheer us on, but that's only for only about an hour. They simply don't have time. Mom works and is pregnant with twins, expecting at any time, and Dad is stay-at-home. Soon he has to watch three little kids running around as mom goes to work. I understand that this is not the case for everyone, but in today's age, it is a very real thing to be busy with everyday life.

I'm sorry if I come off as rude. I mean this in a polite way, but I am garbage at conveying my words to not sound irritated or offensive. I merely mean that not everyone will have time to volunteer for a FIRST event .

I must chime in briefly: as the lead mentor for 2502 I must address the message and tone of one of our alumni:

Jon, (and everyone else) Team 2502 absolutely values the MSHSL State tournament and I understand 100% why the system is set up the way it is. Some teams can't afford to attend 2 events... It's completely unfair to give those teams with larger budgets an advantage. I believe that districts would help this problem and make teams better. But I can tell you we were upset when we were "on the bubble" last year and didn't make it to State.