Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto
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
|
Depending on the makeup of your communities in the district system, you likely have a vast supply of venues to choose from. This helps the district system have more leverage at the table than the in the regional system. For example, I would be surprised if there are many places able to support the double-double regional structure in MN besides the two places they already exist.
The district system top to bottom is far more fluid by design. I expect Chesapeake to shift to the WashingtonFIRST/PNW agreement with Manchester for the 2017 or 2018 season. The model there is effectively WAFIRST paying a franchise fee to HQ and the franchisee gets to run their operation however they want within the set rules. RPCs from my understanding always operated on a spectrum of influence and support from Manchester where newer or struggling events get more support than older events, but District systems are mostly left to their own devices for the better.
You shift from planning these monolithic events in the old 60+ team regionals with costs going over 100k for venue rental down to a very nimble schedule. You are not locked into venues that have to support the power consumption, seating, food and drink, janitorial and security, and etc for 60+ teams at a 3.5 day event. Rather, the district system is motivated intrinsically to pat down the budget ask for favors and make concessions they wouldn't be allowed to under the regional system, while simultaneously having more control of their own destiny that can lead them to buy certain equipment in a capital outlay plan. Why keep renting pipe and drape and AV equipment when you can find the money and buy and store it yourself? I mean, you already have fields in a warehouse somewhere; this stuff can probably squeeze into one of our trucks!
So I mean, you get this upside of freedom to control your own destiny as a geographic region or state-oriented program. You likely have more avenues to fundraise because of your new/newly more important 501c3 status and a much simpler model to follow than the regional model. However much like a young adult leaving the nest after she lands her first real job, it comes with it certain challenges. Budget for your own insurance, your own fields and associated equipment. You have to figure out whether or not to buy the really nice scissors to cut things now or buy the really cheap ones at the event site and where and how you would store one vs the other (That one was oddly specific for a reason; I know that's come up before in meetings). Maybe you want to buy your own A/V equipment? Not Manchester's problem anymore.
I haven't even said the "v" word yet. That's a train I think a lot of district systems will always be at least a little behind on, and every time a VC chooses the wrong fork in the road in terms of recruiting vs retention or reassignment vs termination, they run the risk of going in circles and ending up further behind than what is acceptable or tenable. That's not an envious task.
Back on topic; fun experiment! I would love to see more areas transition to the district model so areas can send more teams deeper into competitions and provide a real sense of seasonal progression outside of the "win or die" model.