New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Read the announcement here.

What do you think?

-dave



.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Also, an FAQ page is available. Direct link to the announcement on the FIRST homepage here.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Good.
We have to cut down on some spending over the next few seasons, and one of those things is the amount of regionals that we can attend, keeping distance in mind. With events closer to home, we wouldn't have to worry about hotel fees and other costs associated with traveling to distant regionals.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

This could be interesting... It's more like traditional sports. At the same time, you can have other events ("open" events, if the new Regional system works out) that any team can attend (the ones outside Michigan), kind of like how the National League plays the American League and NL West plays NL East or NL Central on a regular basis, to keep things interesting.

I think FIRST might have something there! Now if it works...

It's also going to make Fantasy FIRST extra fun.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I guess we won't be going to West Michigan this year like we thought.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Fantasy First would be cool, no more fantasy baseball.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I like the idea as it will hopefully allow for teams to attend more events, and as long as there are also at least some traditional regionals teams will still be able to travel around to meet teams from other regions of the country.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I would like to know the 7 competition sites. Kettering University, home of the rookie regional, will probably be a site. What is going to be the championship event, will it be housed in Eastern Michigan, where GLR takes place, or Grand Valley where WMR takes place? What will become of the other two regionals? I would love to hear what sites these are going to be held at. It is weird that these competitions will be for only Michigan teams, look at all of the teams that would not have been able to compete at Michigan regionals this year: 71, 2171, 888, 63, 291, and others. I am not completely sold on it yet, but we will see as more info comes out.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

The Season Long league is taking signups now. See the appropriate thread.

FAQ, Jack, FAQ. Detroit and WMR are district; GLR is the State Championship for this year. Kettering will be a district event. (Points 14 and 15 in the FAQ document linked to farther up the page.)

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I think this is a good move for FIRST in Michigan.

Also, Michigan FIRSTers are undertaking an important and potentially difficult experiment, from which the whole FIRST community is likely to benefit in years beyond 2009.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

FAQ said West and Detroit would be district events and Great Lakes the State Championships.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Why are there sixteen districts if there will be only seven competitions?

Edited: ...or is it that of the sixteen district events, seven are limited only to teams from Michigan? It reads, "the state will be divided into 16 districts that lead to an April 2009 Michigan State Championship. The Michigan pilot will also include seven district evens in which on Michigan teams can compete within the state." This is written poorly.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

The sixteen districts are geographic divisions to aid in planning team growth within the state.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

From what I read they get to play in two events for one fee and only have to pay extra for the State Championship and whatever outside regionals they choose. Is this correct?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

That is correct.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

This seems like a huge step forward for FIRST, maybe other states will adapt this model in the future.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Not spending much time thinking about it, I think this could be a boon for the quality of the regionals just outside of Michigan, as the lockout of non-Michigan teams from competing at the generally high-demand Michigan events might make those teams seek out the Buckeyes and Boilermakers and Pittsburghs (and Waterloos? and....) of the world.

Not to mention the Michigan teams are free to escape from their own state and still participate in these non-Michigan events themselves.

So....if FIRST chooses to have an open enrollment phase for Championship registration again this year, are Michigan teams eligible to sign up then, or must they only qualify via their new district guidelines or via earning their way in at a non-Michigan regional?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

A thought -- are FIRST and NI prepared to troubleshoot a brand new control system at these additional events? It seems a weird time to implement two radical shifts in how the program operates in a single season.

Another thought -- knowing that practically nothing of a team's registration fee goes toward supporting a regional event, I'm having trouble reconciling how teams in Michigan can justifiably play more for their single registration fee. The FAQ seems to deftly ignore how much the registration fee for Michigan teams will be; I'm curious to learn if it'll be higher or lower than elsewhere and how the time spent playing matches for that fee compares with teams from other states paying a similar amount.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Not to be a stick in the mud but the Michigan teams getting two events for the price of one doesn't sit well with me. Also we don't know what the fee for the State Championship will be, I bet it won't be $4K.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Your turn to be sent to the FAQ, Travis. The answer is yes, but they can also qualify outside of Michigan (normal methods, barring RCA) or at the Michigan championship. FAQ point 11.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I think something like this is a necessary step in the growth of FRC in particular. I'm not sure if it's the best way to do things, but I am sure I couldn't have suggested anything better. It does make me wonder how the "district" scheme might be expanded to other regions, especially those with sparsely-spread teams.

I'm glad we didn't already make firm plans to attend a Michigan regional next year. I'm also very happy not to be a Michigan team right now, and I offer any Karma I can spare to those teams who need it.

I suspect the district events won't have quite the level of audiovisual production staffing that we've come to expect from regional competitions.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I think the registration fee is the same, the big difference is that Michigan teams get 2 district events as opposed to 1 regional event. By the sounds of it the district events will be similar, but more economical versions of a regional event (more like Kettering Rookie event or off season events). These district events are not garuanteed trips to the Championship, but only the State Championship.

Overall it looks like a good trade-off to me, but I am glad that they are doing a trial run.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I believe the State Championship fee will in fact be $4,000.

While for the 2009 season there is no doubt Michigan teams are being given more plays for less it is simply the first step in effecting that change for the entire country. So yes if things turn out well then there is, perhaps, an additional cost benefit to being a Michigan teams in the short term. But I think it's important to judge this change based on whether or not it is beneficial for FIRST across the country because if it is then everyone will have the same advantages in time. I'm not sure if the answer is yes, but that's why it's a pilot program.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Actually, I did read it, but I glanced past the blurb about the pre-registration. I must not have been as captivated by the enagaging writing style as others....:D

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Do you have inside information for that? The FAQ say's the teams will have to pay an "additional fee" for the State event while also stating in the same section that for out of state regionals they will pay "regular FRC registration fees." That seems like a pretty important distinction.

Look I'm not entirely against the pilot program. FIRST needs to change something for FRC to continue growing. I just want to know how much of a potential advantage MI teams may get.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Yes I can confirm the cost is the same as any other additional event ($4,000).

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I just going to poke into this thread for one moment. I'm curious to see what people have to think about this, and want to invoke a conversation about it.

I personally love the air of competitions. A huge set of bleachers/arena seating full of chanting and cheering team members while robots go at it under the field lighting is what defines a great event for me. Being a driver, I don't get to be up in the stands with my team, however I do get to stare into the masses while teams with students you've never met before cheer for your alliance to take the victory. That's definitely one thing that makes FIRST so different from any other organization in my opinion. With Michigan going from three regional events this year to an astounding eight will either stretch the wallet of FIRST, or they'll have to slightly dumb down the quality of the event. Now I've been in FIRST for only a year now, but I don't want to see other students miss what I've gotten to experience.

I don't have a clue how many teams the state of Michigan has, or even how many rookie teams it will have this coming season, but something tells me that each of those district events won't have the average fifty or so teams that current regionals have. Having that many teams adds depth, along with other things. I just wouldn't enjoy an event with fewer teams as I would one with fifty or more. I could bring up other points, but I'm going to stop and see what you all can take out of what I've written so far.

I just want to see what you all feel about the possible fact that these events may be less of an experience than that of current events. Again, I'm simply looking at it through the eyes of someone who doesn't want other students to miss out on what I've had. Is a drop in quality really worth bringing in more teams?

[Disclaimer: I've probably over-written this, thus making my point hard to understand. If you don't wish to try and figure out what I mean, by all means ignore this. :rolleyes: ]

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

One way to look at this is that we have to start somewhere. It appears that Michigan has established/is establishing an infrastructure that can provide this opportunity as one possible solution to the growth/costs/concerns.

Any time there is change, concerns/risks arise and they should be addressed by the volunteer leadership. Hopefully, at the end of the 2009 season, we will all learn of the benefits that come from this 'experiment' and how the teams were impacted.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I went to the Kettering Rookie regional and it was pretty cool. As you guessed it was not the Rock Concert that GLR is, but it did feel more like a high school sporting event.

I think that to keep it affordable they will get rid of some of the spectacle. Also the district events are supposed to be 35-45 teams, so they will be smaller than many regionals.

Hopefully this gets made up for by an outstanding State Championship.

This will definitely be one of the questions we ask our kids at the end of next season.

P.S. I think MI has right around 120 teams. Next year should be about 130-140. 7 districts x 40 teams/event = 280 event slots = everybody gets 2 slots.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I see what you're talking about. I imagine to hold this many events, they'll have to find some way to cut down costs. Where, we don't know yet. And like you said, the experience will be different. I'm very shaky on the whole idea, but let's see what happens.

Now for my question. If this were adapted for all of FIRST, the way I understand it teams would have to stay in state. Correct me if I'm wrong. One thing that I enjoy about our team is that we travel to a far away regional. Now traveling isn't the only reason I'm here, but it certainly is a big bonus. It's nice to get away from home and to see other places.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

True. That makes me wonder...at the end of the season, I'll either be glad that I was part of the experiment if it works out excellently, or upset if it doesn't really work out so well.

Now, my question is, if this expands, will everyone be confined to their own state for regionals? If all states were to adopt this, then nobody would be able to travel out of state for a regional, correct?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

As a traveler to many more events, I've long known the benefits multiple events can offer a team. As a mentor to a one-regional team that lost its local regional to another university three hours off, I've long been frustrated by the astronomically high cost of going to a second event. Even with a relatively small traveling crew (I think we brought about 15 students and about eight teachers, mentors, and spouses), the costs related to getting to an event and staying overnight can double the $4,000 required to register for the second event. If this program can achieve its aims of bringing more chances to play closer to teams, I'd gladly trade some of the bright lights.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I expressed some concern about the quality of an event run with a smaller budget last year with respect to the Kettering Rookie event, another pilot program in Michigan.

While I can't speak for communication through other channels, there has been remarkably little discussion here about that event. There appear to be few photos from the event in CD-Media and what discussion I've found seems to focus heavily on the benefit of the program to rookie teams and not at all on the quality of the experience when compared to that provided by other regional events.

As a pilot, the implication is that this structure may be implemented elsewhere in the future. Why, then, has there been little information about the organization of this pilot -- and the success of last year's pilot -- presented to FIRST volunteers in other parts of the country? Again, maybe that information is available through other channels, but this is the first that many have heard of this.

A lot about this is being kept close to the vest and that makes me uneasy.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

My initial impression upon reading the announcement is that this would be a great year to be a team in Michigan! The proposed structure scales much better to eventually having a FIRST team in every high school, lowers cost for the bulk of participants, and results in more playing time for Michigan teams.

Michigan teams, for a lower initial entry fee then teams in other states, will get to attend two district events, rather than one regional event. This is a big benefit, as not only do these Michigan teams get more playing time for less money, but they have the opportunity to think about, and then fix, the robot in between the two district events. In order for teams in other states to have that opportunity, they need to register for not only one regional, but two regionals, at a total cost of $10000 - ($6000 for initial event; $4000 for the subsequent event.)

Seems to me that this would be a great year to be a Michigan team, as a Michigan team that in 2009 attended 2 regionals for a total cost of $10000 will likely be able to attend possibly as many as 4 tournaments for the same price. (2 Michigan district events, the Michigan championship (assuming they qualify), and an out-of-state event.) The savings for low-budget teams will be even greater -- a one-regional attendee in 2008 ($6000 total) will now be able to attend two district events (twice as much play time!) for significantly less than $6000, plus have time to think about (and then fix) the robot in between those two district events.

Hopefully the Michigan FIRST program will be able to realize some significant growth in 2009, plus make it possible for continued scalable growth in 2010!

I'm also very glad that the regional we attend in NH isn't abutting Michigan -- I think Michigan teams venturing out of state to late-season regionals will enjoy a significant advantage with respect to increased playing experience as compared with the non-Michigan teams at those same regionals. (The same holds true for the Michigan teams attending the Championships.)

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

To answer a few questions based on the info I have (not the official word, by any means):

There will be 7 district events and 1 state championship.
Each district event will have approximately 35-40 team capacity for 2009.
Each district event will have similar audio/visual set up to the 2008 Kettering Rookie event, which lowers the cost of each event.
$5000 covers FRC registration, KOP, and two district event entries.
$4000 for Michigan State Championship entry, which will be the regular FRC Regional Event A/V set up. The MI State Championship will be held at Eastern Michigan University in 2009.

Michigan teams wishing to attend out of state regionals will pay the usual fee for second regional attendance.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

So much for doing the Dallas-Detroit "Home & Home" exchange with 217. :rolleyes:

-John

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

First of all, I would like to congratulate and thank the people in MI FIRST that put in all the time and effort generating this pilot and are taking the risk to try something new to try and advance FIRST. I'm sure there have been hundreds (if not thousands) of hours put into this and it's only to do one thing...make FIRST better.

Second...this wasn't done to give Michigan teams any advantage in awards, playing time, or chances in Atlanta. It is to try something that will hopefully help FIRST.

I think we are getting ahead of ourselves thinking about how this will roll out to the rest of FIRST... While we need to think about it, I think it's too early to focus on it.

As for some comments raised in this thread...

1. I think the NI control issue is irrelevant to this pilot. It is going to be a challenge regardless if it's at a district type event, or a traditional regional. I am sure the technical level of the volunteers at the district events will match a traditional regional. The district just might not be as flashy.

2. I would think that the experience for a team competing at two, lower cost, less flashy, district events would be better than the experience of only one big regional because that is all they can afford.

I also think that some of the more interesting points are being overlooked in this thread...

1. The MI teams being able to keep their robots instead of shipping them (BIG cost savings here!!!).
2. The 8 hour fix-it day before the district events

And last but not least, thanks to FIRST for considering and implementing this pilot. It's easy to keep doing what we've being doing since it's a success. Plus, I am sure there will be a lot of people complaining one way or another about this and I think their open mindedness is great!

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

People have been referencing this being a necessary step for FRC to continue growing.

I say why do we want FRC to keep growing?

It's an unrealistic goal for FRC to be in every school in the country. It's not happening; not now, not ever; not even if there's a regional event within 3 blocks of every high school in America.

Why do we want to continue to oversaturate local economies? Most teams are barely staying afloat year to year as it is. Many teams have to drop out after a few years.

It's been my opinion for a very long time that FIRST ought to spend all their effort making their FRC teams as strong as they possibly can, not worrying about being able to claim abc% of of schools in state xyz have FRC teams.

How is the program going to be better off having 3,000 teams, with most of them not having proper resources (mentors, teachers, corporate sponsors, etc), vs 1500 teams that have a strong base to work from.

Prior to dropping VEX, I saw FTC as the most viable platform for having a team in every school in the country. At this point I'd be perfectly happy to see a period of a few years where we see zero rookie teams, and no veteran teams dropping out.

That said, I don't like this idea at all. I don't like change in general, but I've got to say I'm glad it's not CA that's following this model.

I have a couple of main issues with this plan:

1) Regionals will feel more like high school sporting events. They will not be nearly as impressive as they currently are. Which is going to look better to sponsors, potential benefactors, etc: taking them to a high school gym, without all the A/V, and everything else that makes a FIRST event special, or taking them to a professional sporting venue filled with FIRST teams, professional A/V, etc? It'll be like a bunch of offseason events.

Now people may argue IRI, and yes, IRI is better than most regionals--but for a couple key reasons. At IRI you have 72 of the best teams in the country. It could literally be held in a cornfield in the middle of Indiana and nobody would care, because the competition is simply that good. IRI also has amazingly dedicated volunteers, who have been doing this for the better part of a decade. How many of these district events will have planners with this much experience? Not many.

2) Quality/variety of teams. This probably won't be noticed in MI, since MI is home to many of FIRST's best teams, but I can guarantee it will be elsewhere. In states without an abundance of top teams, the competitions will not be very exciting. It's boring watching FRC events without good robots,and without having non-local talent coming in to the historically weaker events, you end up with the same group of teams, and a not very exciting competition. Even if we disregard such situations, one of the best parts of a regional event is getting to meet and play with new teams from all over the country (and Canada, Mexico, Brazil, etc).

Such a situation leaves me with 2 conclusions: either everyone stays home so they can maximize their number of events, or all the powerhouse teams don't play at home, so that they can see some variety, and play with the best of the best. I'm not a fan of either situation.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

While the district events will not be identical copies of the regional events the intention is to make them look and feel as close as possible. The Kettering Rookie Regional from last year was a proof of concept and not the final plan for these district events. It is likely that it will be dressed up even more for the district version. I would expect the district events to come very close to a full regional in the look and feel department.

A lot of the cost reduction is not coming from cutting things out of the event, but instead from leveraging the support of venues and local sponsors to receive more things at reduced costs.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I think this is such a good question. Based on the information we have now, I think it would mean that everyone has to compete in thier own state, untill the Championship. Meeting and working with new and different teams from accross the country is always fun and worthwhile and shouldn't only be for those team who qualify for the Championship. If this is the case, I would be very interested to see how the style of play differs from state to state and then how all the styles blend in Atlanta. Overall, I'm think this is a great idea and I'm excited to see how it works out, but this one part I'm not a fan of.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Part of the bigger picture is the developing future/careers of scientists, mathematicians, and engineers - high schoolers graduating and moving on into those fields. Making the competitions more readily available in all the competitive areas of FIRST would help drive this.

There is life beyond FIRST. It is in the career choices that are being made and will continue to be made by its members and alumni. That is a short term and a long term goal that does and will impact our communities and our world.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Question is, when will the district events and MI championship be scheduled relative to the adjoining out of state regionals?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

The single largest reason why the district events are being limited to Michigan teams only for the 2009 season is logistics. The amount of work required to start up a single new event is enormous. For 2009 Michigan is going to go from three events to a total of eight. This number of events should just barely ensure two spots for every team in the state, depending on the number of rookies. It was simply not feasible to add enough events to have slots available for out of state teams. This, however, does not preclude that possibility from existing in the future.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Perhaps my biggest concern, which I forgot to even mention, is how will FIRST find enough volunteers?

They're already hard pressed to find enough qualified people for the key jobs each regional requires. Now Michigan will have 2.5 times the number of events they held in 2008, plus they will not have the volunteers that potentially came to the event with their out of state teams. Nor can they feasibly expect the same volunteers to volunteer twice as many times as last year. Where will all the new volunteers come from, and will there be enough qualified volunteers to fill crucial positions, without the event suffering?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I've read comparisons to organized high school sports and things like Little League, but it seems to me that these things would not be nearly as popular were it not for their professional counterparts. FIRST agrees, even, going so far as to teach us that a culture cultivates what it celebrates.

This feels to me like FIRST is creating Little League before it creates Major League Baseball.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Something that hasn't (I think) been touched upon in this thread yet is the lack of the practice day. Instead, teams will have an 8 hour window to fix/build their robots in the week leading up to the event. This places a lot of trust into the hands of the teams, doesn't it? I'm not saying that teams would abuse the privilege of being able to access their robot prior to the competition, but it's unfortunately not a guarantee. The FAQ says robots will be stored at a local facility, so for the 8-hour window, they can pick it up and must return it on time? It's the only way I currently see that is feasible for monitoring this.

Also, with the lack of a practice day, what about things such as scouting? Of course you still get the first day of competition, but I've always viewed the practice day as an all-important resource to get some valuable scouting done. Rookie teams being tossed into the fray of the competition with possibly no experience in facing opponents at an event may suffer as well. The old adage "Practice, Practice, Practice" comes to mind.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

For those asking about cost structure:

$5000 intial fee (KOP and 2 district competitions)
$4000 State Championship
$4000 Out of state competition
$5000 FIRST Championship

I'm definitely intrigued by this. It does seem to be the way FIRST needs to head if they wish to continue to grow. Of course I'm a little biased being a MI team knowing we will get two competitions for our initial fee.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

First question is this mandatory for all Michigan FIRST teams? If it is it should not be.

We are in almost the very most northern tip of the upper peninsula and even if they think it is cheaper to only have to pay for 1 comp to get to play in 2 the cost of busing down 10+ hours to lower Michigan twice is not going to save us any money, and we are a low budget team. In all reality unless they have a district competition in the UP this is not cost effective for any of the teams in the UP.

We go to the Wisconsin regional because its the nearest one and its the cheapest to travel to.

Also this, to me that is, is taking away one of the best things i liked about FIRST, the fact that i can compete and talk to people from around the world. This is just limiting it to teams is Michigan, and that is not as exciting. Yes Michigan has lots of good teams and interesting people but its not even close to talking to someone and competing with people from New Zealand or Israel or Brazil.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Michigan is in a great situation to try this as a pilot program. If it works in Michigan it can work in a lot of other areas - IL/IN/MO, CA, New England, NY/NJ/PA, maybe DE/MD/VA, etc. Pick any reasonably sized region with about 100 teams, and although you wouldn't be able to call it a State Championship, you could hold several districts advancing to Regional championships. Right now it would NOT work in a lot of other areas - the Northwest, Plains, most of the Southeast - because there isn't a high enough density of teams. Michigan will provide a little experience for teams from sparser regions of the country - even though there are two districts in the Upper Peninsula there are currently only 3 teams in the UP. (Two of the 16 geographical district, which I presume is to allow for eventual expansion - there will only be 7 district events the first year). Those teams plus a few more from the northern Lower Peninsula will be able to provide some input as to how this would work in an area where one district might be nearby, but the other would involve a bit of travel.

The Kettering Rookie District last year was a "real" event, tempered somewhat by the fact that all the teams were rookies and thus it didn't necessarily have the same amount of spirit and traditions that you might find at established regionals. There was a screen, there was sound and a DJ, an MC and announcer. There was a full referee crew, although about only about half were certified. There was a smallish panel of judges and, as a rookie-only event, an appropriate number of awards. There was a full-spec competition field (although that doesn't guarantee anything, the 3+ hour delay proves that!)

I think the biggest question in this is one that has been voiced, what about teams that like to travel to a distant regional? This year they can still do that, subject to time and money. It will be interesting to see what would happen if more regions adopt the district concept - would teams be able to "share" points earned at a district away from your region?

As I understand it, there are two primary goals to be met - lower cost and managing growth. Michigan has a very ambitious goal of having a FRC program in 50% of high schools - some schools would have joint programs. Even now, with 3 regular regionals, there was very little room for any expansion. Detroit Regional filled up within hours of registration opening. (And at only 33 teams capacity, it serves as the model for the district events. Many HS or community college fieldhouses would be at least as large as Wayne State's.) Lower cost comes about by being able to compete in two district competitions for the same cost as one regional, nearer to home than having to travel to an away regional. Plus the district events will be Friday-Saturday only, so teams that do have to travel won't have as high of lodging expenses and students will miss less school.

To address the lack of a practice day: At Kettering there was a block of practice Friday morning. I believe it was a first-come-first-served line. Given that the goal is to have about 12 rounds of play, the teams will get a lot of driving and will improve over the course of the event. And then they get 12 more games at their next event! Scouting will be different, I'm not sure to say more difficult or not, but there will be less teams overall to scout.

I am very excited to see how this concept will pan out.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

- I can't possibly see this working in some states. If you look, most (maybe not most, but a lot) states have less than the proposed 40 per district event. What are the teams in Rhode Island, Vermont, Maine, Alaska, etc. supposed to do. I honestly can't see this as a feasible competition format for all of FIRST.

- As Cory said, we should strengthen the existing teams. There's enough struggling teams that could use help. Quality not quantity.

- The way it seems is that FIRST wants a team in every school, which won't happen. Sponsorships are already hard enough to come by without trying to compete with 10-15 other teams in your area.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I think that whatever I think I'll have to learn to deal with it...

I'm happy this isn't coming to CA next year...

Here are my thoughts:

-One major advantage I see from this is that more competitions will allow teams to improve their robots more over the course of the competition (particularly the rookies). For rookies that only attend one event, they do not get another chance to improve their robots.

-The state championship sounds very fun. I like the idea of regional championships. It would be cool if the top teams from each region got to compete before going to Atlanta. (I'm not sure this would work on the state-by-state basis since many states don't have enough teams).

-I agree with what Cory said. Instead of starting new teams we should really work on improving the teams that are already established. There are plenty of teams here in the Bay Area that are over 8 years old and are still struggling. The experience for students will be better if money, mentors, students, and sponsors are concentrated rather than spread thin...

-I don't like high school sporting events. Actually I just don't like sports period... I'm thouroughly against FIRST becoming more sports-like, and less unique.

-If FIRST didn't take risks, we'd still be playing 1v1 on a feild covered in corn. Right?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Alright... I had a response written up that was far too wordy, so here's the point form version:

Good:

• More plays for the $$ for Michigan teams.
• Tiered events let low to mid level teams experience the playoffs sometimes.
• Reduces shipping/drayage costs.

Bad:

• Kinda tough if you're from Windsor (or other community bordering Michigan) and were planning to play in Detroit. Now you have to spend MORE and travel FURTHER.
  
• "State only" model might be practical (except for above point) but undermines the broad-based international competition that is part of the great appeal of FIRST. Philosophically I like the fact that FRC is currently "blind" to political borders and would like to see it stay that way!

But how....?

• Will they do a quality tech inspection without the practice day?
  
• Will tech inspectors really keep a team from playing in their first match of the day for a minor rule infraction... say... the wrong colour of wires or incorrect length of pneumatic cylinder? These are all things that get identified by tech inspectors and fixed by a team on a practice day that are not likely to be noticed during an 8 hour fix-it window.

And on that note... will teams really get a better experience if they show up ten pounds overweight and miss their first five matches as they try to meet tech? How will that effect the experience of their alliance partners?


It will be interesting to see how it all works out.

Jason

P.S. There are some interesting parallels between this structure and the one announced for the VEX robotics competition earlier this year.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

1. Yay cost savings! Cost savings might be one of the other reasons that the program is going to be piloted in MI. Our economy is completely horrible, since many families have parents working in the car industry, and LOTS of job cuts are happening so that the companies can stay alive. And this isn't just in the car industry; it's getting really hard for anyone to find jobs because of the same reasons. This is affecting sponsorships, too. Sponsorships give us money. I can't speak for anyone else, but 1189 has to stretch our budget over the next few years, because we can't guarantee our sponsorship from GM in upcoming years due to this. We're going to be saving every penny we get, and without shipping costs, we'll be able to save a good amount of money on it. [/long explanation that goes slightly off topic]

2. That's instead of the Thursday practice day. Think about it, we'd only get about 8 hours if we were at the event venue. Though I suppose that the advantage here is that we have access to our own shops, and don't have to rely on what we can bring into the pits.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

To comment on a few items in this thread:

The goal of this initiative is to test a new model of FIRST Competition.

The purpose of this change is to increase the "Return on Investment" (ROI) for teams. All teams who compete in FIRST commit a certain amount of Investment in the areas of Time, Money and Effort in order to build a robot and manage the team. Their Return on this investment is how many times they get to play with this robot, and the experience of the competition events.

In today's system, the ROI for many teams is very low and many teams compete at only one event. Creating a system where teams can compete at 2 events for the price of one effectively doubles the ROI for many teams. The new district events will guarantee 12 qualifying rounds per event compared to many of today's events today which often only have 8 rounds/team. Thus in 2009, a team can get 24 qualifying rounds for the same price as 8 round cost in 2008, a 300% increase in ROI! Odds of advancing to eliminations increases for all teams at the new smaller events.

Other factors further increasing this are, reduced travel costs, no shipping costs, etc.

An earlier post spoke of sustainability of existing teams. This change will help everyone, new and veterans, because it reduces the amount of time, money and effort that all teams must commit while maintaining as much of the experience as possible.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Actually, you'd get 12 hours at the event on Thursday, plus an opportunity to use a competition field, something very few teams have access to.

I hope it doesn't turn out badly, but I can see all kinds of unfortunate scenarios playing out due to eliminating Thursday.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I agree with Cory on this one, FIRST Robotics Challenge is not for every high school... there I said it. I have seen too many situations where FRC just doesn't work at a high school, and I am now seeing it first hand trying to start a team in a city and region that hasn't ever heard of FIRST. Trying to convince a cash strapped school that you can run a $10,000+ robotics program when there are easier and cheaper alternatives available isn't easy.

It comes down to one simple fact: the cost of entry is too high. Yea I know FIRST does a great job getting sponsors to subsidize some of the cost, but $10,000 to run a basic team is still too much for a large number of schools. The major selling point of FIRST is that it really isn't just your average high school competition, it is an advanced robotics competition that is run more like a professional sporting event then a simple one day high school science competition.

By having these small regional events leading up to the normal sized state event, you are reducing the quality of the regionals, and by association will reduce the quality of the competition, robots, and ultimately the great learning experience that FIRST is.

FRC needs to continue to be what it is, the most advanced high school robotics competition in the world. Where students get a unique opportunity to work with engineers on an advanced very real world engineering problem. Lets not water-down what is a great competition and learning experience just so we can accommodate teams that don't have the resources to compete. Let FTC and VEX be the platform that gets the ideals and competition of FIRST into every high school. There is no reason why FTC and VEX can't be in every high school, but there are plenty of reasons why FRC can't and shouldn't try to be.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Again I'm agreeing with Cory on this one (seems to be turning into a trend...). Thursdays are boring for a reason, because 95% of the robots don't work properly yet (at the first regionals at least, but it isn't that much better at second regionals). Practice matches are a HUGE reason for why the competition gets interesting Friday afternoon. Without Thursday.... Friday is going to be ugly.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I'm almost inclined to agree with Cory and Jonathan. There are quite a few valid objections to the new structure. These have been raised already; therefore, I won't go into them.

There are also good reasons to make the change permanent and even more widespread. Again, these have been brought up already.

However, I would like to remind everyone that this is a PILOT. As such, it may fail. It will almost certainly lead to changes. It may succeed. We won't know until next April/May whether it worked; more importantly, whether it worked the way it was intended to. We can only observe how it goes and give FIRST feedback as spectators and participants. I'm going to give FIRST the benefit of the doubt on this one, because it's an experiment. But if it doesn't work out, then someone will need to figure up some other way of reducing costs and/or improving return; i.e. increasing the "value" (in this case, bang-for-the-buck) of FIRST.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Wow this sounds really interesting, I can't wait to see how this turns out. Is this the key to the future of FIRST? I will definitely keep my eye on Michigan this year.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Your dissenting point actually just made the point as to why this pilot is a good idea. The reason for trying this change is due to the fact that the cost IS too high for a lot of schools. So what's the solution? Lower the cost per event. Obviously this isn't the end solution, but if everyone decides that they can enjoy a pared down competition just as much as one with all of the thrills, then maybe they can expand on this solution and find other ways to cut costs without ruining the inspiration.

What bothers me is everyone saying that they shouldn't try it because people won't have the great experience, etc. etc. Well that is why the SHOULD try it. How will anyone know what the experience will actually be like until they try it?

There is a great competition that everyone talks about that acts as a pared down version of a regional. It has scaled back audio-visuals, two day format, and many of the other things being proposed for this pilot. This competition is called the IRI. I'm sure many people agree that they have a pretty good competition experience there.

I guess my point is, let's see how it plays out before we condemn it to failure.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I'm not a big fan of this idea as it sits on paper. It seems good but then in the same respect it doesn't. You're essentially dumbing down two regionals and letting the teams compete at these instead of one normal regional. At the same time the teams are competing against local teams so the diversity is lost. I love going to regionals and meeting people who live hours and states away, but here you'll meet the people in the town next to you. I think this has good intentions but may not fair as well as many seem. In reality, all FIRST is doing with this is trying to make more teams in a state and a time with struggling economies. Almost all of us here know how hard it can be to get sponsors when you're the only team for miles and times are good, now imagine if they're are 5 teams in the same 10mile radius competing for sponsors, how will that work?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I agree. And we enjoy having you guys at Wisconsin every year. That's something that makes regionals better than any state competition. It's awesome seeing a Canadian team coming down to Chicago. It's fun seeing a Michigan team go to Canada.

Another example:

This year at the Minnesota Regional, 44 of the 54 registered teams were above 2000 in number. 30 of them were rookies. The only veteran teams (5+ years in FRC) were 93, 525, 876, and 877. Not one of them is from Minnesota.

These 4 teams (in addition to 1816, the second oldest Minnesota team) held the regional together. They were in the pits helping other teams, they supplied loads of volunteers, they made up over a third of those in attendance. Without these four, I have no doubt that the regional wouldn't have gone as smoothly.

Minnesota will likely see a growth in 2009 equal to, if not larger, than its 2008 growth. How does ONE competition have a chance in hell to operate smoothly with the oldest team at the regional only 3 years old. Now lets figure out how a state like Minnesota could operate 5 or 6 competitions, most of them with no teams over 2 years old.

Don't get me wrong, the 2nd and 3rd year teams in Minnesota are some of the most mature 2nd and 3rd year teams in the country, but regardless, situations like this seem a little ridiculous.

FIRST thrives on veteran teams growing rookie teams into veteran teams. Look at what they are doing for testing the NI control system: just that.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Excellent points Chris. I'd be happy to find out the pilot turns out to be awesome and have to eat my words.

I just hope the effort to give teams 2 regionals instead of one doesn't result in two watered down events instead of one good one. Without a practice day, most teams will probably get half a regional's worth of competition out of their first event.

You're right though. It is too early to condemn it to failure.
If this became widespread, certain regions would comprise more than one state, I'm sure

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I think the best thing anyone who will be directly involved in the new system can do is employ some teamwork, some intelligence, and some creativity and just try to make 2009 the best year yet for FIRST in Michigan. If the new system doesn't work out, at least it won't be for a lack of effort.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Yes the cost of entry is high, do I believe that should change? no. There is a reason the cost of entry is high, because FIRST is such a superior robotics program when compared to lower-cost alternatives. That is why FIRST is special, by focusing on making it more 'approachable' and cheaper you are reducing the qualities that make FIRST a special program. Yea its really hard to build a robot with a team of students and engineers in six weeks, and yea its really hard to find the money to fund a team, but that's the challenge: running a successful FIRST team is hard work. For me that's just how I like it, make it more challenging.

To lower the cost of entry, in this case allowing teams to enter two mini-regionals, too much would have to be taken away from the experience of FIRST. I'm not saying don't try it, I'll be watching Michigan just as closely as everyone else, I'm just worried about the direction here.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Definitely. I'd say that the Northeast/New England would probably be one region, while the area of Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, and the rest of the northern Great Plains would be another. Then more regions could spin off. (Note: Regions are only meant to be examples...)

As for the "if it becomes more widespread, how do teams from different regions interact" question, we'll cross that bridge when and if we come to it.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I've attached the pdf I received in my email a few hours ago. It seems to detail more information which many have requested in this thread.

I'm still... composing... my personal opinion

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Just to be clear there are not a large number of differences between the district format and a regional format. The biggest change is Thursday has been reduced to an optional 4 hours, with the other missing 8 hours allotted to teams to use off site.

The crew running the event, the tournament structure, the awards, the field, will all be within the within the normal bounds of regional events that are currently being run.

Low cost does not mean there are a ton of cut corners but merely finding ways to maximize the usage of the resources we have (local sponsors donating more of the items etc...). Even reducing the length of Thursday was not to cut costs but rather to allow for teams to attend more events while missing the same number of school days.

As many have mentioned there are some technical issues involved with the shortened format but aside from that I’m not sure where the idea of the district event being a stripped down regional is coming from. What parts of a regional are missing that so degrade the quality of the event?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

As I'm sure you're aware, the budget for a typical regional event is typically somewhere between a quarter- and half-million dollars. I'd like to believe that there's not much pork there and that regional planning committees are practicing due diligence in making sponsorship dollars go as far as possible.

You are now suggesting that Michigan will be able to support more than twice as many events as last season at the same level of quality of regional events. Whereas before, regional planning committees in Michigan might have to raise, say, $750,000, it follows that the 2009 season will require $2,000,000. I am skeptical that you'll be able to make up the difference -- $1.25M -- through donations and support from local businesses. Necessarily, and admittedly, you are using venues, high school gymnasiums included, that do not have the same cache as those used by many other events.

There is appreciable benefit in generating interest in our progam when I am able to tell people that our competition will take place in KeyArena, Seattle's basketball stadium. It is more challenging to get people to understand the scope and value of the program, I think, if I instead have to invite them to the Franklin High School gymnasium.

I don't see how you can possibly provide experiences that are of the same caliber as today's regional events without a comparable budget. If you are able to provide an experience that matches the event we have here -- held in a large stadium, lighting trusses, gobos, television cameras, DJ, projection screens, professional presentation, etc. -- for such a significantly smaller cost, well, what the Hell is my regional planning committee doing wrong?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I would guess that this has already occurred and is continuing. The news is hitting the wires now but there has had to be a lot of ground work, teamwork, intelligence, creativity, commitment, and courage to implement this type of change. It is a pilot program for one season and it is innovative. For an entire state to be involved on this level means FIRST is making an impact and like it or not, we have to heed that.

We can't hold back the tides of change, just like we can't stop time. A pilot program can try this out, test it, and then go from there. The FIRST community can rally around this state and these FIRSTers and support the effort, the initiative, the pluck, and the commitment of the volunteer leadership and all of the teams that will be a part of this.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

24 matches for the same low cost of $6000? Sweet! If only they threw in a free bonus practice day, I wouldn't only be sold, I'd move to Michigan!

That said, the loss of the practice day makes me worried, especially if they plan on having a lot of rookies. In the five years I've been involved with FRC, the practice day has been instrumental every single time. That would set me on edge if I lived in Michigan. Using IRI as an example is pretty invalid in terms of practice, as all those robots have seen at least one full event, and I'd bet a pretty good portion of them have seen multiple events.

Also, the way I read it, Michigan teams pay the full fee and have no chance of qualifying for Atlanta unless they pay another $4000 to play at the State Championship, right? That seems to me like it could potentially be a pretty hard sell to a school, and cost some deserving teams on low budgets (especially rookies) a trip to Atlanta.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I want to know if they talked to all the teams in Michigan. I'm pretty sure they didn't, being the lead on my team i have not received anything from FIRST to see if my team would like to be involved in this new pilot program. But still I and i think lots of teams would like to know if anybody knows if this program is mandatory for Michigan teams to participate in. I certainly hope not as it is just going to be a bigger expense for my team to have to deal with.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

How? $5000 for KOP and TWO regionals? Two regionals for the price of one? That doesn't sound more expensive to me.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

They are located in a rural part of the state and it is easier for them to compete in Wisconsin than in Michigan. By requiring teams from Michigan to participate in the pilot, his team will now have to attend two events that are further away than the regional they've been attending and they will thus incur additional travel expenses.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Eric,

If you check out the pdf I posted, it says that it is mandatory for all Michigan teams. Thus, your money will automatically go toward 2 Michigan district competitions and if you do want to go to Wisconsin (the cheaper one according to your posts), there will be an additional fee.

(all I know about this is what I read in that pdf and my interpretations from it...)

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I am curious to see where the tech inspection fits into this format. Thursday usually isn't about installing upgrades to your robot, it's about having the official inspectors tell you if you need to change or fix something. If a team is 10 pounds overweight and has wiring issues, what makes us think they are going to figure it out by themselves in an 8 hour fix it window?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

If there are seven district events in Michigan at least one of them is bound to be farther north, I would imagine. At least somewhat so. If not, that could be a major pain to any teams in the UP or towards Mackinac.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

As a mentor of a small, county-wide team in rural West Michigan, I look forward to participationg in this pilot program.

We only had enough money for one event last season (like 75% of all FIRST teams). Our robot was badly damaged in the 2nd of our 8 matches and wasn't back to 100% until the 7th match. Our entire "functional" competition season consisted of 3 matches. I like anything that improves our "return on investment".

The new competition format doesn't change the real core of the learning process, which is the build season. The second regional also guarantees the opportunity to make mid-season improvements - another core learning event.

We will miss the practice day, but perhaps some good alternatives will develop in the course of the pilot program. Inspection logistics will be a challenge.

There seems to be simultaneous concern about diminishing the "experience" of the regionals while going to more of a high school "sports" model. I always thought that the noise, lights, & decoration were what made regionals like a sporting event (not that thats a bad thing).

There is a lot more to FIRST than the excitement of the competitions or the elegant designs and presence of the powerhouse teams. I believe that FIRST should follow a growth model that emphasizes opportunity for more students rather than protecting the quality of the experience for the few. Don't forget that FIRST isn't just about competing with robots - they are useless after the season is done. It is about inspiring students to pursue technical careers and turning them into gracious professionals.

I think this pilot program moves FIRST in the right direction by making the program more accessible to rookies and all of us in the great pool of cannon fodder for the powerhouses. We still may not win, but we will get to play longer on the same dime!

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

One thing that I'm puzzled about is: Michigan teams pay $5000 for 2 events. Does the rest of FIRST (as in, the other 1300 current teams and the rookies outside of MI) pay $6000 for one event or $5000 for one event? It seems that it's going to be easier to have one common price than to keep track of two different ones. (And then you also don't have to deal with border-jumpers, not that any FIRST team would even think of trying that!)

It's both a fairness issue and an organizational issue, and there isn't an easy answer. 200 or so teams pay less than the other 1300 or so and get more for their money. I understand this is a pilot, and designed to verify low-cost event/new tournament structure, but it's still not exactly fair. (I also know the world isn't fair. I've been on both sides of the divide in FRC.) Question is, do we all see lower entry fees, or just those teams? Because if it's only the teams in the pilot, EVERY team in FRC is going to want to be in Michigan or wherever it's expanded to next!

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

The analogy I'd make is that our current regional events are our version of MLB/NFL/NBA games, etc.

The pilot will be more like a high school basketball game. Which one is more exciting?

I too would like to know where the money is coming from. Knowing the MI's economy is in shambles, I find it hard to believe that sponsors will cover the added cost that will be incurred.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

FRC is not an easily [down] scalable competition model, down to local/district events. The nature of the competition makes it like the MLB/NBA kind of robotics competition, the crème de la crème of robotics competitions, the competitions everyone wants to aspire towards.

FIRST already has had* the perfect, scalable competition to get into every high school in the country: Vex. This is a system designed to be the "high school sports" model of robotics competitions. It is designed to inspire students all over, with the boundary of entering in terms of tools, resources, and money being very low while at the same time still providing for an exciting challenge.

What fun would high school sports be if there was nothing higher, no Division 1 College or Major Leage teams to aspire towards? FIRST is the engineering equivalent of sports, and we need the program that everyone wants to aspire towards (FRC), while still providing a great competition that everyone can be involved with quite easily (FTC/Vex).

And you can't make one competition model be able to suffice for both roles without loosing something along the way.

I want a robotics competition of some kind to be in every high school, to give every student an equal opportunity, but it's simple math and economics to determine that FRC is not the model to achieve that. It's too expensive, no matter how many corners are cut.

Once we get an FTC/Vex team in every school, then and only then would it be appropriate to look to "upgrade" them to FRC.

But the main reason why I oppose this, is that it screams of spreading sparse resources so thin that no one would ever really benefit from them, without concrete plans to increase the supply of money, resources, and volunteers. FIRST needs sustainable growth a lot more than we need more, more, MORE!!!1!! rookies, and yet they seem to be turning a blind eye to the best tool they have to achieve those goals (FTC/Vex).

And besides, it's kind of common sense that you don't go looking for millions and millions of dollars in new funding during economic hard times. Especially Michigan, which is certainly suffering the brunt of the downturn in the auto industry.

Overall, I'm going to keep an open mind about this until after the pilot season is over (and I'm staying keen to avoid conformation bias in the coming months...), but I'm just not liking it very much at this point in time.


* The new FTC still has potential, but I want to see how it plays out first.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Traditional FIRST events are exciting from start to end.
Losing any part of its luster does have a negative effect.
Although FIRST isn't about the competition itself, but about inspiring young kids in STEM, the reality is that sponsors, businesses, students, etc. are drawn to it by the competition itself.
Dean Kamen said it himself. Americans pay more attention to pro-sports than they do in inspiring young people in being the problem solvers of tomorrow.
FIRST is reaching an ever-growing audience because it uses the same concept as they do in sports.
It isn't just the adults, volunteers, parents and teachers we are trying to convince, its also these businesses and sponsors that are vital in making FIRST a reality.
The whole luster of a competition shouldn't be compromised.

I'm all for this new pilot program, as long as while its addressing the demand of new FRC teams, it doesn't compromise that portion of the whole program.
I also believe that the new fee structure is a great thing. Once the pilot is conducted and evaluators assess everything, they may find a better way of structuring other events to make the price tag lower.
As some teams have pointed out, they spend all of their time and resources, only to play 7-8 matches the whole season. That really isn't cost effective at all and will further the cause for teams to fold.
Our team has been lucky enough to get great funding and support. But the majority still feel that spending $$$$$$$$$$ on 20+ kids is just not worth it, when there are other programs that cost much less and address the same issues.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

To be honest, FIRST has done a horrible job at making sure the rookies continue on to be sustainable teams.

It seems like there is a lot of pressure (from FIRST HQ) on regional support staff to recruit as many teams as possible as quickly as possible. Once a rookie team is created, they're left hung out to dry. They then have to learn how to survive on their own, or fold. While there are resources available for struggling veteran teams, there are many more resources available for starting a new team.

If FIRST put as much effort and resources towards sustaining teams as they did recruiting new teams, we would not have the attrition rate we have now. One statistic I think would be interesting to see is what percentage of teams return AFTER folding? I'm betting that is a very low number. If that is the case, shouldn't it be a priority to keep veteran teams around since the likelihood of bringing a school back after they've folded is slim to none?

I think that FIRST is trying to grow too much too fast. As a result the quality of FIRST is being sacrificed. As Cory said, Regional Planning Committees are having a tough enough time finding skilled and experienced volunteers for critical positions. What happens if this becomes the future competition structure and California has 20 district events? There's no way all those district events are going to be able to find experienced volunteers for critical positions. As a result, the quality of the program will suffer. Suffer for what? So we have the room to start X number of new teams?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

To comment on a few more items:

A: The rookie pilot run at Kettering last year proved we can run a very high quality FIRST event for a fraction of the cost of typical regional event.

B: Item A is not exactly anything new, since very good off season events have been running for over a decade in many locations. Most of these events operate at 10% or less than the operating cost of a typcial FIRST Regional.

C: We have the money to run 8 events in Michigan next year if we do it this way. Financing will not be an issue.

D: We have the venues to for the events and we have many qualified volunteers and veterans to help get this going.

E: We have an estimated 120-130 teams in the State of Mich next year. This means if you compete at 2 events, there is probably no more overlap on team particapation than there was in 2008 if you did any two of GLR, WMR, DET, Cleveland, Chicago, Boiler, etc. The only reason overlay may increase is because now EVERYONE plays twice. If we enabled double plays for everyone thru any other means, the overlap issue would be the same as it will be in the new system.

F: If anyone want to go out of state, it costs the same as always. Now you get a 2 for 1 deal if you stay in state, but if you want to skip one and spend your money to go somewhere else, go for it. Your loss for throwing away a freebie, but it will not cost any more to do this than it ever did in the past.

G: Remember, Nothing will ever get better without making changes and taking some risks. We all want FIRST to get better. "Better" means lower cost, more sustainable, more accessable, more visible, etc. This change is a big enabler to all this things.

FRC today is profoundly different than FRC was in 1992. The league is over 60x its original size yet we are still using a competition structure designed when the league was small. Many have argued for a long time that we have outgrown this model. In 2009 we will finally test a new model and find out if this is true. We will never know if we do not try!

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

For Michigan teams and the future of FIRST, this looks great.

But like all plans such as these, the devil is in the details and execution of such plans ... and we have yet to see either. Good luck to MI FIRST and to all the Michigan teams ... I believe it's going to be a wild ride.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I have to admit, I'm curious as well. On one hand, they say that this is required for FIRST to continue in Michigan. On the other hand, they state that there is no plan to extend this other states. Which is it? Why is Michigan the only place that needs a new structure to be viable? Why the "political" double speak on the real reasons behind the change?

I don't see this changing the overall experience for many teams. I do see the quality of teams being sent from Michigan increasing, however. Requiring an average score and after than having a championship will tend to shed more of the teams that aren't performing at a top level. I.e., I suspect this format will send fewer of the teams who squeak in through alliance selection, etc., and send more of the "top 8" teams.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

Jim, as you know we've talked about this concept before and agree on most points.

What has caused some heart-burn among our folks though is that they LOVE going to the MWR in Chicago, and as it stands currently, we would not be able to elect going there until the 2nd or unrestricted round of event selection, IF the event is still open. Which means we could be shut-out or wait-listed for the event that the team most want to go to and we all know how much fun it is to make travel plans on "If's".

In effect it also means that all MI teams lose out on an event of choice if they want to go outside of the state for their first event selection, even though they still intend to play at 3 total regional/district events. We think our initial event selections should be left open and do not agree with this point. We understand that they want to push teams to do this in-state, but maybe if a team commits to 3 events (2 in-state 1 out of state) perhaps they could leave the initial event choice open like the other teams and not be confined to choosing in-state only events 1st round.

Also, if there are open spots at MI events, then out-of-state teams should be allowed to participate in MI as well, except of course for the State Regional/Championship.

I am personally a bit concerned about not having Thursday practice, we always learn a lot from them, but more so, what about the tech inspections? We have a lot of quality off-season events, but there are no official inspections based on the premise that everyone is still using previously FIRST officially inspected and approved robots. With minor latitude graciously provided for repairs.

At the Kettering Rookie Regional the Tech. inspections were a bit "liberal" because this was "practice" for the rookies. I'd like to see what the execution plan is for this. I'd sure hate to be the team that didn't have access to a good scale and had to try and lighten a robot once they were weighed in heavy at an event at 8AM Friday and were scheduled for the first round of qualifications. Will these events be as "liberal" as well? Will the non-conforming team have to sit out a match, play anyway? Something just doesn't sit right with that one right now...

Plus, by the Off-Season most teams have their robots pretty well in order, so between match time is not as critical. For a week #1 event not having the Thursday to make revisions/corrections could make for a very painful event for anyone scrambling to do so between matches Fri & Sat. Again, I'd like to see the details on how we are going to get the increased # of matches. Would it be through a 30-40 min. turn around time, or more play time through a longer day?

OK, one more parting thought and perhaps the biggest one. At the KRR-08 no question, it was a high quality event, but we also had a LOT of quality volunteers from veteran teams throughout the Midwest all working together to make it a successful event. Who is going to staff all of these Michigan district events? It's one thing for a single event, maybe two, but is there a sufficient volunteer resource base to cover all of that, plus run our own teams especially if there are two events the same weekend where many of the teams are also competing?

Details, details...

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I participated in the Thursday portion of the Kettering Rookie Regional. I also saw the review of the Pilot event and heard a lot of comments.

As M. Krass keeps pointing out, there was not a lot of feedback on CD about the event. This is for a couple of reasons.

As a pilot event for Rookies only, there was not a lot published to vetran teams.
Since Rookies were the ones competing, they would be the normal traffic on CD, but most Rookies do not figure out CD until late in their first year.

As a team that attends multiple regionals, I really liked the thursday night check in format. With it a reasonable drive (1 hour), I didn't have to take time off of work (this is huge for me as a volunteer). Pits were open late that night and they got a lot of machines inspected and ready to go that night including machines that were 30+ pounds overweight. Last I heard only 1 machine out of the 30+ teams were non-functional at the end of the event (there are often that many at a traditional regional). With the MI FIRST format, this team would get 1 more chance to get their machine going. The traditional format has them packing up and likely folding up after their first year.
As far as quality of the event goes, it was really quite good. I will talk to the organizers to see if they can put the Rookie Regional Wrap Up on CD so people can judge for themselves. People should keep in mind that the difference in "quality" isn't as big as they might expect.
As far as Michigan not being able to fit in the current model, there were 3 regionals with 140 total slots for 120 michigan teams (and out of state teams). If every team went to 1 michigan event that meant there were only 20 slots open for a second event. That means a lot of teams had to go out of state for a second event. As people have pointed out travling out of state costs at least 2x as much as local events thus requiring a significantly larger budget and time off of work (or only the competition team getting to travel).
I like the quality vs. quantity debate, but lets attach some numbers. If 120 teams get to experience an event rated at a 9 (scale of 1-10), or for the same price they get to experience 2 events rated at a 7, isn't that better? Or for teams that do two events, 2*9 versus 2*7+9(The state championship will be a 9) 18<23.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

We are in Houghton MI which is about as far north as you can get in MI. So the 2 buss trips we would have to take to lower michigan won't save us any money it will actually cost us more. The initial expense is cheaper but people have to consider transportation as well and that is not cheap at all.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

A couple of more points inspection:

At Kettering, ALL the teams were rookies. Thus many of them had never been through inspection before. We needed more inspectors than normal at this event because of this fact. At the 2009 events we will not have so many rookies at any of the events. Over 90% of the teams will have experience and will have done this before. They should know what they are doing and be much closer to having a legal robot when they arrive.

One of the fundamental problems with Thursday in the current format is that for many, Thursday is not Practice Day, Thursday is Rework Day. Many teams show up and tear their machine apart. They do not go out to practice and instead they spend the whole day wrenching. Why do they do this?...because they can. Now, teams are going to have to put more priority being ready to play when they show up beacuse the whole idea of "we'll fix it on Thursday when we get there" will no longer be an easy choice. Teams will still have this same amount of time to rework if they want, but now they are doing it on their own time. In reality, this will likely make the inspection process easier, not harder.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

There has been a lot of talk with other states about the Kettering Rookie Event. I was 1 of the many wonderful volunteers who helped to host this event.

It was an amazing 2 days. I can tell you that right now Arizona is trying to host an all rookie event and Canada's Event Coordinator's came to help out at Kettering. They came to see if it was viable for Canada to host something such as this as well. Trust me they loved it! We hosted the event for $500.00 a team, had them sleep in the dorms at Kettering for $14.00 a night for 2 people ( each person spent $7.00 per night). You won't find a hotel that cheap!

Sure we didn't provide all the bells and whistles that you would normally get but it was an extremely high quaility event. I never heard 1 bad comment other than the breakdown of the field. In actuallity that helped teams, it allowed them more time to work on the bots.

I am pretty excited about this. I am pretty sure Kettering will host the event in my area. If not Kettering than possibly Grand Blanc High school.

The email and package that was sent out to the Michigan teams did state in it, that the Michigan Championship will cost $4,000.00 However I was told at 1 point a few months ago Michigan teams won't be forced into participating in this event this 1st year if they wish to opt out. I am not sure if that has changed or not.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I would hope that the powers that be would see that a waiver of some kind needs to be in place for teams in the U.P. This is a test program and i see no need to make every team take part. However, if you take waiver you might not be able to play in states.
Also, Thursday is abit of a concern. One thought would be that a teams near the district, with good practice fields, would offer its use. Maybe with a small fee. That first friday could be ugly.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I'd maintain that FRC, even at the Championship or IRI level, is all strictly amateur. The FIRST equivalent of professional sports is no less than a career in science or technology. That is what we want (some of) the students to be aiming for.

I can imagine a future FRC season having only Michigan-style district and regional competitions, and a world championship event with participation based on merit alone. From a previous highly active thread, that would obviously make many people happy. But I can also see a use for a handful of official "invitationals" which teams can apply for regardless of region.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I don't see this as a problem, but as a good thing. If teams want to re-work they should be able to. This is making the competition that much better.

I really see no reason to get rid of Thursday. FIRST has proven time and time again that they graduate some of the best and brightest in the country and the world. You're actually missing the same amount of time if you were to attend one regional like a lot of teams do.

I have to agree wholeheartedly. If teams don't want to participate, that should give us an idea as to whether or not this is the direction we should take. As some have said, this is a downgrade for some teams. Forcing them to participate doesn't seem right.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I would love to see anything more about the rookie pilot from last season -- a wrap up by those that organized the event, photos, or video. I have been able to find three pictures of the event; only one of which offers a glimpse a the "stage," -- the field and seating. That picture did not impress me, reminding me more of an off-season competition than a world-class sporting event.

I would like to know more about media coverage of the rookie event. How were media guests and VIPs handled? Was there a catered reception, special seating or guided tours?

I think that, ultimately, if we're going to drive interest in science, technology, engineering and math on a national or global scale, we have to recognize that inspiration -- while enormously effective through direct mentoring -- can occur by other mechanisms. Interest by youth in becoming a professional athlete is disproportionately high compared to the number of youth that have met a professional athlete. Why can't the same be true of STEM heroes in the future?

Why does someone have to meet Paul or Andy or their local, homegrown equivalent to understand that what they do is cool and worthwhile? Why can't we put these guys up on ESPN (y'know, like we used to?) alongside their teams and drive interest that way?

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

I've been pondering the issue of tech inspection in this format for a bit and think there may be a solution. There is no technical reason that inspection MUST take place at an event... if tech inspectors are willing to volunteer their time in the evenings in the week leading up to an event, they could travel to a team's workshop, unseal the robot storage bag, complete a tech inspection and re-seal the bag. Then the team could use their 8 hour "fix it" window to make any neccesary changes and go through a quick re-inspection at the event. Yes, this would mean that tech inspectors would have to drive about the state, carrying a robot weigh scale with them, but in a state with a high density of teams and sufficient volunteers to handle 7 district events, this shouldn't be the same problem that would exist in other areas.

Alternatively there could be a district tech inspection on the Saturday... or a weekday evening... preceeding the event. The important part is that teams have a chance to correct any errors, and inspectors have sufficient time to complete a thorough, high quality inspection.

Jason

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

One thing I haven't picked up out of the discussion here is how Michigan teams are going to qualify for Atlanta. Do you go for winning districts? States? How/Where will Chairman's be awarded? Etc. If anyone could help me out it would be greatly appreciated.

I have mixed feelings at this point. This could either be the future of FIRST, or... unsuccessful. But hey, that's why this is a pilot right? We're bound to learn something from it, so it can't be all bad. :D

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

http://www.flickr.com/gp/20629362@N05/C9J3FV

Here is a link to the Kettering Rookie Event pictures. You have to understand that Kettering is one of the top universities in the world for engineering. It is in a small setting but one of the most unique schools you will ever see. Look it up in the Princeton Review or at Time Magazine ranking of top colleges in the US. Kettering is always at the top. I have sat on the committee their for the past 8 years, they don't do things 1/2 way or even 99% of the way. It is the best. We bring in bleachers, we have pits, we have the loud music we have the awards etc. We even had the officals from FIRST there were blown away. Yes we had a catered reception, we just didnt throw pizza at people unless that is what you wanted!!!:D Kettering is willing to give tours at any time. They have a fuel cell development program that they love to show off. Including if somebody wanted to take a ride in a fuel cell car, they will take you. It is the same field you play on, the field we used had been at the Midwest the week before.

Here in Michigan we pride ourselves on helping each other including and esp. the rookies. We look after each other like you wouldn't believe. We hold phone sessions with them on a weekly basis during build. If a team has an issue we make sure we find somebody nearby to aid them. Of course this doesn't work so well in the UP but we as veterans make ourselves available either through email or phone to them.

Take a look at the Championship. What state sticks out? Michigan! It seems every year or close to it, the Champion comes from here. We look at not just the issue in front of us, but look for ways to make it better.

I'm I convinced this is the way to go? I'm not sure, but I am willing to give it a shot before I shoot it down. I do think there will be teams who hate it and others who will love it and embrace it.

Isn't this what engineering is all about? Design it and see if you can improve it? I am going to be open minded about it!:)

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

The "optional Thursday check-in" may be a way to accomplish this.

See page two of the pdf Beth posted. Bullet 4 under 'District Events'.

Odd, the post is #67. How fitting for a post that good.

Re: New FIRST competition structure in Michigan
 

From what I've read, your team must qualify for the MI State Championship, and around 18 teams from that competition will qualify for Atlanta. It actually puts the MI teams at a disadvantage for Atlanta financially. $5000 + $4000 if you make it to MI. That's one chance to make Atlanta. One chance to Atlanta for an outside-Mich team is $6000. Not to mention any fees going along with Atlanta if you make it there.

MI teams are saving money, yes...unless you merit Atlanta, compared to teams who qualify through one regional.

[Disclaimer2: My information could very well be incorrect. Please excuse me if it is. Simply trying to point something out I noticed. :rolleyes: ]