Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Stratis
If they're anything like how we run things in MN, they have a pretty good idea ahead of time where their rookies are going to be. There are always some surprises, but I can tell you our RD already has a good idea of the number of rookies we'll have in the state next year, and I assume he only knows that number by having a list of schools somewhere that he eexpects to take the plunge.
What gets difficult is needing to hold back spots for those rookies as they try to find funding, knowing that there are teams on the waitlist you have to defer informing almost until kickoff!
|
Jon,
I know RD's work hard to identify and register new teams every year.
However, every RD already has a "good idea of the number of rookies" they will have next year. It's called their FIRST mandated growth figures. And it's their job (literally) to meet or surpass that figure.
Maybe your RD is way more prepared than ours (seems likely, since MN has experienced amazing growth over the past decade!), but our RD's are still talking to many schools all the way through the fall. Seems like nothing is set in stone until that team makes an account in TIMS and registers.
Matt,
I know MI has added some last-minute districts occasionally in the last few years.
Regardless, back to venues, when you increase your search scope to gymnasiums, a lot of flexibility opens up (more venues, less high-profile demand to compete for weekends, motivation for schools to host STEM activities, etc). I think 8-9 months is plenty of time to commit venues that adequately meet a schedule/location criteria set up by a District Organizer.
Doesn't seem like rocket surgery to me. I think there are much, much bigger challenges to districts than booking venues only 8 months in advance.
-Mike