Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

Our pit crew really enjoyed just having to check chains and do simple systems checks during short turnaround times at a district event and they really enjoyed their two industrial design awards, but to each their own!

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

She's a programmer on the team. There's always something for programming to work on :)

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

This is bizarrely passive aggressive and not at all helpful.

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

Other Regional Events are in the works. I can speak to 2 different regional proposals in Minnesota. I have no idea how the timeline will work out, but some people are pushing for another event next year. I'd say the odds of it happening are low. 2-3 years and there will be another event or 2 in Minnesota.

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

But this is kind of the point I am trying to make. To have another event is more money, more volunteers, more everything. So I think this is why people are thinking; "hey, instead of throwing more regionals at the state. Here is another way of doing it that has worked for people." And going to what Mr. Stratis said in the other thread. Does adding another regional or adding more plays create a more inspiring experience? It depends on the team. Will adding another regional in say the Thief River Falls area solve a large issue? Yes. But do we have to do that and that only. Is adding another regional the only option that MN FIRST has? No. I think this is why the idea of Minnesota moving to districts has been brought up so much.

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

Additionally, adding another regional is a MAJOR new cost to teams. I can't see 2667 being able to afford to attend a new regional even if we wanted to next year. Sure we'll work towards it, but it's very unlikely. We simply don't have $4000 plus travel expenses, and our area is pretty tapped out when it comes to finding new sponsors (though we are continually trying to identify and bring companies on board). We want to become a two regional team, but right now it's basically impossible and even if we get a new MN regional (or two, or half a dozen) it basically goes to being very, extremely difficult. Districts would let us do two events, even if we would have to decline a district championships invitation due to lack of funding (which might be more feasible to find if our additional event was something as ear-catching as a district or state championship).

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

We and a few other teams in the state also enjoy the ability to attend an additional event (fronting a large registration fee plus travel costs). But this group is barely 1 out of every 6 teams in Minnesota. A district model brings the extra competition time to all teams for the lowest registration cost available. For some teams, travel costs can be minimal as well if there are two events nearby, but if your team likes to travel (we do too!) there are always other district events in other areas. We've seen the enormous benefit of the second event over the years, particularly giving opportunities for qualification in 2013 and 2016 that never could have materialized in 2010. The level of competition and explosive growth in Michigan can be at least partially attributed to how much more teams improve with a second event.

More matches at an event with fewer teams also has the advantage of getting play time with all the teams at the event and many more opportunities to learn from the matches. We've had 6 weeks (or more) for working on robots, now is the time to run them. You bring up good points for the other side though, and preferences here will differ.

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

This loads the system in other ways. The Iowa, WI, and Dakota teams who are regulars here have to find somewhere else to go. And we like it when they come to Minnesota! This should be a consideration with districts as well...

Districts for 208 MN teams would require (208*2/40=10.4) at least 11 district events with 40 teams each. Including about 20 teams who are just across the border adds another event, so 12 events (though this sort of arrangement is not well supported by HQ at the moment). Could possibly get by with 2 fields, 6 weeks of districts, DCMP week 7, but inevitably a 3rd field would be needed with any growth (which also allows a week 6 DCMP, to ease CMP planning). This is 3 times as many events, big load on the system, but better for teams. To echo another thread, the teams should be the focus. The challenge is how do we get there, and maybe adding individual regionals at first is better than nothing and a way to gradually build infrastructure.

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

Aren,
I think you need to take a closer look into match schedules and you will see that many people are looking at 30-35 teams per event and that makes the event total go to 14. One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is how many towns have hotel space for 30 teams.

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

This guy gets where a lot of folks who see behind the scenes are going.

Let me put it this way: I reffed 4/2 events I was signed up to ref this year. Basically every event within 2 hours driving. Yep. I added 2 events late (still not sure I ever ended up in VIMS for one of them).

I did some back of the envelope math, and there is no way we'd have been able to pull together enough ref crews to cover the 9 events needed for the quantity of teams involved if we'd been in a district system. On the plus side, now that the press-gangs--er, VCs and their minions--have finished recruiting for the year, there's a chance that we've got a solid core group of refs for next year...Assuming they all come back...

And that's just one of the many pieces that has to fall into place. Repeat for all your key volunteers, repeat for the non-key volunteers...

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

The members should be the #1 focus of what we as volunteers, mentors, and staff do.

If you had districts in the right places with the right amount of teams, you could potentially not need very many hotels if people were able to stay at their homes and travel to the venue each day.

To echo the expense and time to get districts going, why don't you get started now to ensure that FIRST in Minnesota can continue to keep growing at a reasonable pace? It's inevitable that Minnesota will out grow the regional system (and maybe even the district system). When thinking about pursuing or not pursing this change, remember the student members. They should always be put first and the decision should ultimately benefit them.

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

Yep I wasn't clear about that, we've taken this into account, I should have mentioned that 11/12 events is the minimum. The point was that 3 fields are a necessity. And of course 2 more events need more volunteers.

Hotel availability is an important factor I hadn't considered.

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

Should the teams be the focus? Or should achieving culture change be the focus?

Granted, those two are typically going to go hand in hand. But if underlying circumstances create an environment in which greater cultural change in the surrounding region can be achieved by fewer higher profile events, I don't think it's the wrong call to go that route (presuming the organizers have good reason to believe that's the case).

I'm not saying that's what's happening in Minnesota or anywhere else. In fact, I'd probably wager that, in general, the district format probably does a better job at changing the culture of the surrounding area than the regional format does. However, I am challenging the assertion that the team's experience is the only factor that should matter, which has been implied here and elsewhere. While it's certainly a massive factor, giving a service to the teams is not the ultimate goal. The ultimate goal is culture change.

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

Maybe I'm missing something, but I haven't actually seen anyone arguing against Districts completely. It seems like Minnesota, and many other areas, will eventually move to the District system. It's a matter of overcoming the obstacles needed to get there, and MN has pretty much all the obstacles. Time, patience, and constant offers to help are probably what is needed more than shouting and demanding for change.

So, once again, here's my offer to help: If anyone from Minnesota wants more experience volunteering and learning key volunteer roles, please contact me. I'm the Senior Volunteer Coordinator for Indiana, and I would be happy to have you come visit us and train. We are currently training a lot of new people from our own area, but we will do the best to fit you in and help give you experience. Come down and talk to us, ask us questions about everything that goes into managing our district area. The door is open.

Re: Experience promoting districts in Minnesota
 

The biggest problem with the regional system is that so many teams only get to compete in one event. Iterating on the design after seeing it perform on the real field in a real competition is huge. I would argue that improving the robot after the first event is the highest impact engineering experience that FRC offers.

When people are pointing out some of the difficulties involved with creating more events, I hope they will avoid implying that districts can't be done. It can be done.