[jee7s]

If my count is right, I think we're at a net gain in the Alamo Region. I know Greater Austin had 100% retention and additionally picked up 1 team (5503 in Smithville). Combine that with 7 other rookies from the Alamo Region that have registered for Texas Regionals and I think we're in positive territory.

Based on conversations I've had with others, I know there are district model discussions going on. While I do respect that those having those discussions are respecting others' time during build season, I just wish they were more out in the open.

Regarding funding, if I understand things correctly, the way the District model payment scenario works is this: FIRST licenses the game to the District and collects registration fees from teams. Districts need to gain sponsors, resources, and money to fund their events. The District Championship is funded much like a regional event. So, until we have 3 fields along with the transportation logistics in Texas, District Model is rather no-go, IMHO.

Some specific responses:

@Paul Johnson:
Spot on. Nobody should be looking at Districts as a panacea. Speaking as a MAR alum who was still decently involved with MAR teams as the transition to District took place, I can say there was a lot of concerns on how to get all of those extra events running. Bear in mind that a lot of volunteers FRC has in Texas are dedicated, but asking them to volunteer two days on separate weekends isn't the same as asking for 4 days on one weekend. If we scale up to what the other Districts are at, we'll need a lot more help or a lot more time from those who already help.

@Robin Segrest, @John Schneider & @Allen Gregory IV:
Devil is in the details as always. One big hitch is venues. I know we have high schools that are big enough to handle these types of events, but do we have the venues in the right places with the right people to sponsor them. For example, TRR was held at the Austin Convention Center because we outgrew Anderson High School. Unlike the northeast and Indiana where there are large basketball gyms in every highschool, Texas tends to have large football stadia instead. Keep in mind that where we could swing it in the Anderson Gym with 36 teams and a $200 registration fee, we really can't have that kind of space problem if teams are paying $2000 for the event.

@Michael Blake:
I think you're forcing a system of tiering and ranking on teams based on your observations that is both rigid and absolute. There are many more mitigating factors that impact teams, and particularly impact the move to the District Model. Not every team will see a net benefit, and the model will present challenges and benefits for every team.

Take for example a tacit promise in the District Model: You get two events for the price of one and they are in daily driving distance. For example, in MAR, FRC 41 can attend the Bridgewater-Raritan event in an adjoining school distrct, and then attend one in North Brunswick or Clifton or Mount Olive. All of these schools are within 30 minutes drive of Watchung Hills. Do we have 24-36 teams within 30 minutes drive of each other? Maybe, but not all are.

So, if we were to have 8 events, where would they be and what would it mean? Does it mean that teams in Houtson and SA need to go to the Valley for a second event? Does it mean Houston needs two events to get all of the teams their the two plays they are promised? Does it mean Roscoe needs to book 6 days of hotel instead of 3? Does it mean a team from Texarkana that's late in registration finds themselves with an event in Edinburg as their only option? What about teams that qualify for District Championship on the last week of District events? What if their school board requires 3 weeks to get a trip approved? Are those teams just out of luck? These are the types of details Robin speaks to, and need to be hammered out.

It's not just about plays on the field and experience in the game. It's about justifying trips, setting budgets, and not spending money you don't have or can't raise. There are often complex administrative, and yes, political, situations in schools that make it relatively easy to go to one regional event, but much more difficult to explain the need to go to two events and then the need to get registration, buses, and approvals on two weeks' notice to go to a District Championship event, where you may need to go through that all over again if you qualify for FIRST Championship.

Oh, and I haven't even touched the UIL stuff....
My only three comments now are:
1. If getting UIL support means that schools receive significant benefit over non-school or non-UIL teams, this presents a significant issue for parity between teams. UIL may also require teams that are comprised of multiple schools or of schools combined with local organizations to split into multiple teams. (+1 AllenGregoryIV)

2. If UIL runs competitions during competition season that are not regional events or otherwise progress a team toward the FIRST Championship, we are all in for a huge headache, logistical and otherwise. (+2 AllenGregoryIV)

3. UIL support may have significant negatives in the existing FRC community. Fundamentally, that risks throwing a bunch of money at schools to start teams that are a) not equipped to do FRC, b) not properly cultured for Cooperition, and c) not properly cultured for Gracious Professionalism. Kinda sounds like 2009 & 2010...throw cash at schools to start teams. Those teams are generally lost and miserable. Those teams don't come back. Stat of the moment: of the 50 FRC Rookies in Texas from the 2009 season, only 12 remain.