Re: Texas Regionals
 

Andrew... 5241 San Antonio, TX USA is gone... teacher retired and that was it.

--Michael

Re: Texas Regionals
 

Andrew... HOLY CRAP 25 rookies... NOW that's what I'm talking about!!

Only 1 rookie in San Antonio which is odd given past growth... but state-wise looking good...

Team retention still an issue if that 13 number holds and also what's being put into place so that 2012, 2013, 2014 drop-off doesn't happen again with this BIG batch of rookies?

I'm trying to do some contributions to sustainabiltiy here in San Antonio working with a handful of teams and I think I've found an approach/methods that works... but I can't be everywhere...

--Michael

Re: Texas Regionals
 

Because more qual matches (double) played for the same $5,000.00... smaller competitions so greater chance to play in Saturday Elims for even more matches played... and more teams likely to achieve recognition through trophies/medals because less teams at each district competition.

More play and recognition (for some where there was _none_ before) creates a positive feed-back loop in my experience that changes a team's chemistry and appetite for future seasons and therefore they do what needs to be done to keep going... it's a beautiful thing... ;-)

--Michael Blake

Re: Texas Regionals
 

I know its a minor clarification, but as I noted above, one of those teams is a re-rookie. Losing 12 teams out of ~130-140 veterans in my mind isn't "ideal" but it is sustainable.

In the Dallas area, that basically leaves us with only 1 true loss, of ~50-60 teams within a 100 mile radius. We definitely suffered from a lot of "easy money" from the JCP grants in the 2009-2011 time frame, but I think the majority of the teams that were struggling have folded. I see a lot of "2nd tier/3rd tier" type teams that are gaining new mentorship, doing more in the offseason, and just generally growing.

I know they are also piloting a new grant model where they pair rookies with an established veteran, and the veteran gets a grant based on their support of the rookie. This goes from the fall (planning) into the Spring (assisting with purchasing/design/logistics/etc), and is renewable for a 2nd year. I think this type of activity, that focuses on veteran mentorship of rookies is definitely a step towards sustainability.

Finally, Plano ISD has really been stepping their support of robotics, and are pushing to get it in more schools. This has support at the superintendent level, which is trickling down. Dallas ISD is generally a bit more disjointed, but I'm continuing to sense more support for robotics. The UIL endorsement really did make a noticeable change in how I interface with the district, and the "legitimacy" of our program in the district's eyes.

Re: Texas Regionals
 

Steven... it's good to hear of a team having a positive effect from UIL involvement in FRC since my own experience was so negative.

--Michael

Re: Texas Regionals
 

Steven... from what I've gathered this new mentoring program is starting with a small amount of teams and is called TARP... I'm not sure what the acronym stands for.

The mentoring team receives a substantial $$ sum at the _end_ of each of the 2 seasons it mentors the rookie team. I know the $$ amount paid but I'm not sure it's being shared publicly yet by FiT so I'll let them publish it when they're ready.

I think this TARP approach is a good start but may not be ambitious enough and limiting to how many rookie teams can benefit if it's one rookie at a time for each veteran team. Reality is how many Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams are there in Texas and you don't want Tier 3 and Tier 4 teams mentoring rookies IMO.

I hope they expand this TARP funding so that Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams can take on multiple numbers (at same time) of rookies _AND_ lower performing/at-risk veterans--Tier 4 (I call them wookiees--rookies and wookiees get it? LOL).

Rookies = teams with students/mentors with zero or very little FRC experience.
Wookiees = veteran teams that are lower-perfoming and/or at-risk of sustaining -- Tier 4.

The goal is to get rookies/wookiees to at least Tier 3 - Plausible to be picked for Saturday Elims.

PARR (Project Alamo Robotics Rising) https://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/s...highlight=PARR -- last season during the entire build season we had multiple numbers of rookies/wookiees at our shop every week--some weekends we had up to 5 teams including 3481. It ALL worked out really well for those teams that traveled to our shop. Every team that came will tell you their needle was moved up-up on their performance in competition and it greatly affected their desire to keep going and going for future seasons.

I've witnessed/experienced it--consistent group mentoring does work in helping produce sustaining teams if the lead team is at least a Tier 2 performer.

--Michael

Re: Texas Regionals
 

The problem arises when there are teams from places like Lubbock who need to go to multiple districts. That is an incredibly far drive for simply a district event. I feel that Texas may simply be too big for the district model, regardless of how many teams are in the state.

Re: Texas Regionals
 

It's also a terribly long way to drive to simply play 8 times and watch 2 top tier teams and a 24th placed team win, then go home with nothing.

Re: Texas Regionals
 

DING! DING! DING! GIVE this man a grant!!

Right. On.

--Michael Blake

Re: Texas Regionals
 

A couple things, almost all district events are 12 matches per team. With 9-10 events in the state the competition will be spread out more than it has been. We will see the start of that this year with 6 events. We should see a lot more awards spread out to a larger group of times just because there is more to go around.

Re: Texas Regionals
 

Allen... based on what you know can you state the general team count at these future 9-10 district events?

And will there be a hard cap on the amount of teams at a Texas district FRC event?

Thanks!

--Michael

Re: Texas Regionals
 

Not speaking officially at all. Districts almost never go over 40 teams, really hard to fit them into high school gyms and it starts screwing up the points system fairness, etc. I'd guess 32-40 but like PNW some of our further away events might be as small as 28. Ideally everything is run like FiM that has events that are all very close to 40 teams so that teams aren't incentivised to go to smaller events (same number of points, go to fewer teams at smaller events) but we probably can't do that because of how much area we have to cover. No matter what each district event normally has 12 matches per teams.

Re: Texas Regionals
 

So I thought about the distribution of Texas teams and it is quite sad for teams outside of the majors cities, map is attached.

Texas right now has about the same number of teams as PNW (3 less) so 9 district events should be run.

2 in the Dallas-Fort Worth Area
2 in San Antonio (That 1 little flag in san antonio is 17 teams)
1 in Austin
2 in Houston
The final 2 need to have atleast 1 in the west of the state Lubbock would work but it is to north for the rest of the state and probably 1 south of San Antonio

Re: Texas Regionals
 

Texas teams are used to some travel. You are probably right on most of those but I would guess one of the San Antonio events becomes a Waco event since we already have a regional there. Ideally we get more growth in the far west to be able to hold an additional event closer to El Paso.

With the two Lone Star events and Brazos Valley (Waco) we will have 3 regionals in high schools that could easily transition to districts in the future.

Re: Texas Regionals
 

I would agree with the DFW and Houston events, but I don't think there is enough teams currently on I35 from Waco to San Antonio to justify 3 events. One event in Waco and one in San Antonio should be enough. As for the other 3 events I would go for one around Lubbock, one around El Paso (there are 6 teams there and an airport), and one around McAllen/Brownsville (the southern tip).