Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ_Elliott
After seeing all the MN moving to districts talk, I can get that it would be a massive undertaking to get to districts. My question comes from the other side of the argument. What happens if we don't move to districts? Here are some fun facts.
Northern Lights - 60 teams
Lake Superior - 63 teams
10000 Lakes - 63 teams
North Star - 60 teams
Iowa - 21 Minnesota teams
Amount of regionals with more teams than 63 - 5 (64, 64, 66, 66, 66)
Percent of teams at the 4 MN regionals from Minnesota - 89%
I think that most people that have been following the threads realize that there would be quite a bit of work and money needed to move to districts. But what happens when MN First keeps growing... even if we maxed out at 66 teams and no other teams went to 2 regionals; right now with every thing the way it is we could add 18 teams...
|
This loads the system in other ways. The Iowa, WI, and Dakota teams who are regulars here have to find somewhere else to go. And we like it when they come to Minnesota! This should be a consideration with districts as well...
Districts for 208 MN teams would require (208*2/40=10.4) at least 11 district events with 40 teams each. Including about 20 teams who are just across the border adds another event, so 12 events (though this sort of arrangement is not well supported by HQ at the moment). Could possibly get by with 2 fields, 6 weeks of districts, DCMP week 7, but inevitably a 3rd field would be needed with any growth (which also allows a week 6 DCMP, to ease CMP planning). This is 3 times as many events, big load on the system, but better for teams. To echo another thread, the teams should be the focus. The challenge is how do we get there, and maybe adding individual regionals at first is better than nothing and a way to gradually build infrastructure.