Quote:
Originally Posted by maxnz
So, if MN decides to make the switch,
What needs to be done before we can make the switch?
How long would it be until we can make the switch?
Would we be ready by the 2018 or 2019 seasons? Or even 2017?
From what I've read on this thread, the pros far outweigh the cons, so why can't we work towards this?
As for location, there are a lot of places that host offseason events, so that might be a good place to start.
We could call it the Minnesota District (MN) or we could include IA, ND, SD and WI and call it the Upper Midwest District (UMW).
|
The most important part is having the leadership in MN want to make the move to the District System. Once you have that then you can make it happen.
The leaders of what has become the PNW District were approached by FIRST in the 2012 season with the request that we move to the District System for the 2013 season. Since it was still a relatively new concept with 2 different models, FiM and MAR we decided to wait until the 2014 season and use the 2013 season to figure out how we wanted to implement it and prepare.
The most important thing in my opinion would be to train more key volunteers during the preceding season. That means having people shadow the current key volunteers and learn the ropes "on the job". So probably a little too late for the 2017 season but if the process was started now they could have everything in place for a relatively smooth transition for the 2018 season, IF, and it is a big IF, growth is held to a minimum so that the total number of teams for the first season is less than 240. Once you cross that threshold it becomes a much bigger problem as you can not do it in 12 events as FIRST has mandated that the max event size is 40 teams to ensure the ability to have the mandated 12 qualification matches of the District System.
It is easier now because you have many footsteps to follow that trace a few different paths.
For example in the PNW district the choice was made to own all the necessary equipment to produce an event with the exception of generators, and some tables or additional pipe and drape when needed for a particular event and not available from the venue. That did require a larger initial capital investment but the math said that all of that equipment would be amortized in 1-3 years vs the rental fees.
The people behind FIRST in IN actually contracted with the PNW district to bring our AV people and equipment for IRI the season before they made the switch to train their people. We also provided a list of all of our equipment which I believe they mainly duplicated at least on the AV side.
There are some differences in how the Districts are produced. From my understanding FiM uses trailers pulled by pickups to put the fields in for transport with a minimal amount of road cases. In the PNW we decided to follow FIRST's lead and put everything in road cases and use a semi trailer that we rent and hire a truck and driver to transport. We have a warehouse for offseason storage that also doubles as the office, meeting and training space, area for a practice field, and even Geek's Gala our own version of Robo Prom. MAR and CPK use Pods both for transport and off-season storage.
So there are a number of variations in the implementation models used in the District System that can be mixed and matched to create something that would work best for MN. For example I know that a number of the new areas have followed MAR's use of Pods for storage and transport but our AV set up.
If you really want to join the District System and reap the many benefits to teams you need to let MN's leadership know that you want it AND you are willing to be part of the solution by training to be a key or regular volunteer next season.
As usual the statements are my own opinion. They are based on participating back in the dark days of the Regional System and in our 3rd year of the District System. They are based on talking to many teams about their feelings on the change, students, mentors and volunteers.