View Single Post
  #18   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-06-2016, 23:50
Ed Law's Avatar
Ed Law Ed Law is offline
Registered User
no team (formerly with 2834)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Foster City, CA, USA
Posts: 752
Ed Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond repute
Thumbs up Re: California District Proposal

Quote:
Originally Posted by plnyyanks View Post
Amazing work to everyone involved creating these materials - they're incredibly thorough and well written. This is a great resource for other regions looking to make the transition as well (hello, New York )



PODS are a pretty great way to transport a field, assuming they aren't cost-prohibitive. The biggest advantage is that your venue doesn't need a loading dock, which opens up the list of possibilities greatly (loading a field into a truck with only a lift gate/forklift is not fun, especially with the really heavy side boarder cases on an AndyMark field).
Michigan owns their trailers that house the fields and other equipment. I believe they were donated. They borrow a heavy duty truck from a sponsor to move the field and store the trailer at another sponsor's facility. Zero costs. The trailer has ramp door so it is easy to roll things on and off. No need for docks or liftgates. It is good to have a different mindset when running districts. Some Regional directors are used to writing big checks to get things done because they got enough funding from sponsors and they were budgeted. Running a district event is different because each district event is not expected to raise money from sponsors to cover all costs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FarmerJohn View Post
None of the higher-ups in FIRST CA like districts, which I'm guessing is why California doesn't have them. When I first started learning about this program I was told by some regional directors that districts were a surefire way to ruin everything that we've worked so hard for. Now after spending some time learning about them myself, especially with the help of these documents, I believe the FIRST CA higher-ups have their own agenda they're trying to push that isn't necessarily in the best interest of California teams.
Let's not jump to conclusions. I am sure they have good reasons. May be they believe sponsors prefer flashy regionals, or they get better press coverages when they are not at a crowded high school gym. Who knows. It is best to sit down and talk about it and hope the leaders will do what is best for most CA teams. It will never make everybody happy. Good leaders will do what is best for majority of current teams and the future of the program.
__________________
Please don't call me Mr. Ed, I am not a talking horse.

Last edited by Ed Law : 25-06-2016 at 01:15. Reason: clarify generalization
Reply With Quote