Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Zondag
To comment on a few more items:
F: If anyone want to go out of state, it costs the same as always. Now you get a 2 for 1 deal if you stay in state, but if you want to skip one and spend your money to go somewhere else, go for it. Your loss for throwing away a freebie, but it will not cost any more to do this than it ever did in the past.
G: Remember, Nothing will ever get better without making changes and taking some risks. We all want FIRST to get better. "Better" means lower cost, more sustainable, more accessable, more visible, etc. This change is a big enabler to all this things.
In 2009 we will finally test a new model and find out if this is true. We will never know if we do not try!
|
Jim, as you know we've talked about this concept before and agree on most points.
What has caused some heart-burn among our folks though is that they LOVE going to the MWR in Chicago, and as it stands currently, we would not be able to elect going there until the 2nd or unrestricted round of event selection, IF the event is still open. Which means we could be shut-out or wait-listed for the event that the team most want to go to and we all know how much fun it is to make travel plans on "If's".
In effect it also means that all MI teams lose out on an event of choice if they want to go outside of the state for their first event selection, even though they still intend to play at 3 total regional/district events. We think our initial event selections should be left open and do not agree with this point. We understand that they want to push teams to do this in-state, but maybe if a team commits to 3 events (2 in-state 1 out of state) perhaps they could leave the initial event choice open like the other teams and not be confined to choosing in-state only events 1st round.
Also, if there are open spots at MI events, then out-of-state teams should be allowed to participate in MI as well, except of course for the State Regional/Championship.
I am personally a bit concerned about not having Thursday practice, we always learn a lot from them, but more so, what about the tech inspections? We have a lot of quality off-season events, but there are no official inspections based on the premise that everyone is still using previously FIRST officially inspected and approved robots. With minor latitude graciously provided for repairs.
At the Kettering Rookie Regional the Tech. inspections were a bit "liberal" because this was "practice" for the rookies. I'd like to see what the execution plan is for this. I'd sure hate to be the team that didn't have access to a good scale and had to try and lighten a robot once they were weighed in heavy at an event at 8AM Friday and were scheduled for the first round of qualifications. Will these events be as "liberal" as well? Will the non-conforming team have to sit out a match, play anyway? Something just doesn't sit right with that one right now...
Plus, by the Off-Season most teams have their robots pretty well in order, so between match time is not as critical. For a week #1 event not having the Thursday to make revisions/corrections could make for a very painful event for anyone scrambling to do so between matches Fri & Sat. Again, I'd like to see the details on how we are going to get the increased # of matches. Would it be through a 30-40 min. turn around time, or more play time through a longer day?
OK, one more parting thought and perhaps the biggest one. At the KRR-08 no question, it was a high quality event, but we also had a LOT of quality volunteers from veteran teams throughout the Midwest all working together to make it a successful event. Who is going to staff all of these Michigan district events? It's one thing for a single event, maybe two, but is there a sufficient volunteer resource base to cover all of that, plus run our own teams especially if there are two events the same weekend where many of the teams are also competing?
Details, details...