Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1599801)

[This part mainly for humor.]
@Sean: The main pass north-south is higher than PA's highest point, by about 900'. I'd say that everything's bigger in CA, but any Texans reading this would probably object. :p (On a serious note, speaking of Texas, they actually submitted paperwork for districts and they've got a bigger spread/cluster effect than CA. Think we could learn a few lessons from those documents, but I don't recall them being made public.)

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV (Post 1599807)

The Texas documents aren't public, I haven't seen them. I can tell you we have fewer teams then California but we do have a very big spread problem but also probably more clusters so that may make events easier. The plan was likely 9-10 events. We are using the extra year to get prepapred, hopefully more off-season events (only have 3 this year so far, California has way more) and train volunteers.

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1599801)

I also have some experience along those lines, and have been able to draw from some other persons' experiences as well.

If I had to point to a single thing that would keep districts from happening in SoCal, based on my experience and hearing the chatter... I'll point out three.

1) "Non-team" influences. That would be, as discussed previously, some combination of CAFIRST, school administrations, and other persons or groups that aren't necessarily affiliated with teams but have some stake in how FIRST is run in CA. No need to repeat that discussion. (I think the solution is to educate those folks on the benefits to the teams, and to them.)

2) Disunity (not discord, mind you)--this is more of a "we're not actually pulling together, only in the same general direction" than anything else. I'm only aware of WRRF in NorCal as far as robotics support organizations. I'm aware of SCRRF (LARobotics) and OCRA for sure down this way, and if I'm not mistaken there's another group in San Diego. All three will need to work together, more than simply coordinating when their offseason events happen so there aren't conflicts (they're really good at avoiding each other's event dates). Working together can produce a stronger pull than three individual yanks. I don't see a lot of that. Though there was that one year where the events all scheduled back-to-back and got one field for all the events, everybody pitching in to assist in insurance and moving it around the state--that's what we really need to see, everybody working together for a better experience. (#notajoke: I heard that the rev 1 proposal was the first time that SCRRF was officially aware that CAFIRST owned fields. We've been using the same wooden field for much of the last decade, with repairs of course, and sometimes a metal one.)

3) "Hey, aren't you the same person doing this as the last 5 years?" I'm not sure about the other groups, but for whatever reason, finding new people to fill old shoes isn't exactly easy. Either the new folks disappear after a season or two, or they never show up. Leaves the "incumbents" there, until they suddenly can't make it and somebody has to step up. (I didn't duck quick enough when that happened with the head ref at the Fall Classic a couple years back.) There's also the problem of "what can I do to help" turning into "where'd that volunteer go, he said he'd help?", but that could have a number of factors that aren't obvious and there isn't a single solution to that issue.


I think it can be done... but again, it's got to be together. Let's say we figure on two years as the timeframe. I think the first year would be dealing with a lot of the core issues--see the first two items above--on top of talking the system over with teams to identify where they can help (and maybe they can help with those items too). The second year would be the major push: venues, volunteers, and other similar items, in detail, along with getting the proposal in to HQ for a yea/nay. Am I sure it could be done in two years? Not really. It seems to me like dealing with the second-year stuff is being done first--my point of view, not necessarily accurate--which, while helpful in terms of making it faster later, doesn't address any of the first-year stuff that would need to be handled first. Does it need to be done, sure! Can it be done at the same time, sure! But the question is, are we ignoring issues that could prevent us from moving even faster? If we are, we need to stop ignoring those issues and solve them. Or: What do we not know that could wreck plans?

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery (Post 1599735)

I think the point is that CA FIRSTers and its 501c (or plural) need to investigate the impact of any potential state (or other) funding on a "split" state format. That's not to say it should automatically rule out a split state format or that the state of California would be guaranteed not to support multiple partial state organizations, but it's a factor worthy of consideration. Getting blindsided by such as issue would be a definite negative for everyone involved, and especially so for those who hope to create a Michigan-like FRC environment in California.

Also, there's mountains between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, too. ;)

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad (Post 1600146)

There's a tradition in CA of split state organizations, particularly for HS sports. The Sections run largely independent of the statewide CIF and are quite akin to the state HS federations elsewhere. I follow HS track & field closely and I'm not aware of any other state with a similar geographic split in organizations. (There are states with differences based on type of schools, e.g., public, private, Catholic...) I would expect anyone would look at a N/S split in FRC as being quite similar, and in fact may even expect it.

Originally Posted by Christopher149 (Post 1600152)

It's only 1 state org (MHSAA), but Michigan has separate LP and UP track & field Finals. But most? other sports are statewide i.e. basketball.

Originally Posted by jpetito (Post 1601354)

Nice job Mike representing us on Twitch/Spotlight.

Originally Posted by jpetito (Post 1601354)

Nice job Mike representing us on Twitch/Spotlight.

Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1600155)

The UP being an outlier, Michigan is much smaller and closer together than California.

Traffic is bad in the San Jose/San Fran area, as well in LA/SD. So any southern team going all the way north to compete (or vice versa) has a pretty brutal drive.