View Single Post
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-09-2012, 02:10
Aren Siekmeier's Avatar
Aren Siekmeier Aren Siekmeier is offline
on walkabout
FRC #2175 (The Fighting Calculators)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: 대한민국
Posts: 735
Aren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond reputeAren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond reputeAren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond reputeAren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond reputeAren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond reputeAren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond reputeAren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond reputeAren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond reputeAren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond reputeAren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond reputeAren Siekmeier has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/2013 Championship Registration/2013 FRC Season Dates and Deadline

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Blake View Post
I can't get anybody who's defended/promoted the District Model here to overlay it on Texas and weigh-in on my question... so, I'm giving up on that discussion...
Not sure if I'm one to take heed of, but I have no doubts that a District model implemented anywhere with sufficient density will do nothing but raise the bar for those going on to the Championship. Yes, District wins will be easier in Texas than Regional wins once were, but rightly so with the teams more spread out among events, and the idea is that the District events are at a lower level, so to speak. To move on to the World Championship, you still have to compete and do very well at the State/Region Championship (in this case the Texas State Championship), and it seems unambiguous to me that this would be much more difficult than advancing from one of the former Texas Regionals, since you now have all 4-5 of the powerhouses you mentioned and many other competitive teams who have made it through the district selection at the same event (rarely the case with the current model).

I think this has been explained already, and it sounds like you are afraid that the talent distribution in Texas drops off too fast for the above (maintained by high caliber out of state teams gracing you with their presence) to work. However, I also posit that the district model works wonders to raise the bar for everyone by encouraging more involvement and commitment via 2+ events. The teams have to come back and do it again, so they start seeing they need to continue to improve to have any shot, they can't just drop it until next year after the first event. It also builds community and a competitive spirit between teams seeing each other more at different events.

I myself am eager for Minnesota or some equivalent region to move over to this model, since we are quickly reaching a so-called "critical mass" (more like density) that makes the District system very appealing (for many other reasons as well). The exclusion of outside teams, however, is one feature I find very undesirable and that I hope will change.

As for the change at hand for the Regional model everywhere, I was wary when I first heard, but I'm liking it more and more. There are going to be issues, but this HAS to be better than filling those spots off the waitlist, right? (If you are mostly concerned with the level of competition at and the meaningfulness of getting to the championship event, which it seems we all are. Some might argue for the old waitlisting as a way for lower caliber teams to still get students inspired and pick themselves up by seeing the caliber of Champs every once in a while, but I suggest that the district model does this very well.)

Last edited by Aren Siekmeier : 23-09-2012 at 03:58.
Reply With Quote