Michigan, be honest, how is the district model?

[EricH]

I don't know about reducing the trophy awards. So, I'll propose this system:

Blue Banner awards go on--RCA, Event Winner. No points are assigned.

Other awards get points based on perceived value: RAS, EI, RI get something about 30 points, the "engineering" awards get something like 20, other awards get 10 or so. Making eliminations is worth 10 points by itself; 20 for the finalists. (Someone else can do the exact numbers; MI does this as part of their points values, but do different points values. FIRST also used to do something like this, back before 2004, but I don't recall the details.)

Then, you take the points earners and either cut the field in half or take anybody above a certain value (or average value, or other similar item), and those teams get the Championship bids.

[ratdude747]

Originally Posted by EricH

I don't know about reducing the trophy awards. So, I'll propose this system:

Blue Banner awards go on--RCA, Event Winner. No points are assigned.

Other awards get points based on perceived value: RAS, EI, RI get something about 30 points, the "engineering" awards get something like 20, other awards get 10 or so. Making eliminations is worth 10 points by itself; 20 for the finalists. (Someone else can do the exact numbers; MI does this as part of their points values, but do different points values. FIRST also used to do something like this, back before 2004, but I don't recall the details.)

Then, you take the points earners and either cut the field in half or take anybody above a certain value (or average value, or other similar item), and those teams get the Championship bids.

that would also work... sounds complex but then again it is a complex problem.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Craig Roys

You do not need to do a State/Regional Championship in order to benefit from the district model...by that I mean if you don't have a high enough concentration of teams for a state or regional championship then don't. However, teams could still benefit from playing more smaller competitions for less.

Say there's only 40 teams in a particular region; would you rather play one regional for $4-5k and get around 8-10 matches and maybe eliminations; or would you want to play two events against the same teams for the same amount of money and get 24 matches (12 per event) plus any elimination matches? Maybe you've got 60 teams in a particular area; then you could put on three 40 team competitions where all the teams register for any 2 of them. I'm sure there are many other ways to organize something around this idea.

The whole idea is more matches for less money. More time competing with the robot you spent 6+ weeks working on. If FIRST is going to continue to grow, it has to become more affordable for teams with more ROI. I'll admit that I was a little bit skeptical when the FiM system was initially introduced, but I can't see ever going back. Our first 3 years as a team (2006-2008) we averaged between 12 and 13 matches per season from our initial investment. In our past 3 years (2009-2011) we averaged between 33 and 34 matches per season from our initial investment (which, I believe, was less than the initial registration cost for the first 3 years). If you take out eliminations since those aren't guaranteed matches; then we averaged around 9 matches per season for the first 3 years for our initial registration vs a guaranteed 24 matches per season now from our initial registration. Even if there were no State Championship, I would still prefer this model because it gets you more playing time for less money.

Matches per event has almost nothing to do with the district system. Basically every strategy to increase matches per event that FiM used can be applied to a traditional regional without changing to a district system. FiM districts just end up running a much tighter and longer schedule (for more total matches) than any equivalent sized (or smaller) regional. The matches per event can, and in my opinion should, be increased under the traditional regional method.

The argument for more events at the same cost is valid, though.

[Craig Roys]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Matches per event has almost nothing to do with the district system. Basically every strategy to increase matches per event that FiM used can be applied to a traditional regional without changing to a district system. FiM districts just end up running a much tighter and longer schedule (for more total matches) than any equivalent sized (or smaller) regional. The matches per event can, and in my opinion should, be increased under the traditional regional method.

The argument for more events at the same cost is valid, though.

I wasn't so much talking about matches per event (although under the current FIRST Regional format, teams are unable to get 12 qualification matches in - I agree that could/should be changed), but rather number of matches per initial investment. Initial investment outside MI gets you 1 Regional with only 8-10 matches guaranteed. Initial registration in MI gets you 2 District events with 24 matches guaranteed.

[Rich Kressly]

Frank,

I don't visit here a lot these days, but I did send an email along to my former team - 1712 - with some of my thoughts on the matter. In brief, here are my thoughts:

1. Michigan has worked very hard to put a system in place that works well by a good number of metrics in their home region.
2. It's a shame some folks don't hear, very clearly, what both Jim and Sean are saying in this thread about doing what works for your region, and treating/addressing variables individually.
3. MI is pretty clear that increased FRC events per team and higher levels of on field play are primary goals of their organization. I like these goals, but they can have other unintended, and negative, consequences.
4. Local "control" is certainly a positive in many ways, but I really wonder about the effect on local volunteers, their schedules, their lives, what it means for everything else they already do (off seasons, FTC, VEX, FLL, JrFLL, Seaperch, BEST, etc) in the MAR region (and other regions without similar makeup to Michigan).
5. I've seen a lot of statistics in relationship to FiM model in the past few years. Is there any usable data on graduates of district vs "traditional" FRC model? Maybe from before districts and after districts in MI? Does a district type model inspire more students toward socially conscious futures in STEM than traditional model? Does it help increase the participation of students in STEM activities? Shouldn't we be more concerned about these metrics than who's more able to win a state/regional/world championship? Again, as Jim and others say, it comes down to purposes and goals.

[Ryan Dognaux]

Some things to take into consideration with the district model in the Mid-Atlantic Region:

- If the district model does get implemented for this upcoming season, everyone in the region needs to know exactly what they are getting for their registration fee. This includes number of events with entry fee, time frame of those events, and whether the format of the events will be changing or not. People want to know what they are getting for their money and providing this information in advance will be appreciated by all teams.

- I believe there has been discussion of running these events on a Saturday, Sunday schedule instead of a Friday, Saturday schedule as Michigan does. While I understand the difficulty of securing venues to host events (especially within High Schools, as securing a gym on a Thursday evening and Friday during the school year is incredibly difficult), I do not think a Saturday & Sunday structure would work well. You'd have people attending religious activities in the morning, thus attendance would drop significantly, and some teams might even have a hard time fielding a drive team Sunday morning.

One question I have to Michigan teams - are any district events hosted in high schools, and if so, how did you go about reserving an entire gym & pit area on a Friday school day?

Ultimately, I think a district event model would benefit this region with the proximity of teams in the area. However, it needs to be properly thought out and many aspects need to be planned and communicated before being implemented.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux

One question I have to Michigan teams - are any district events hosted in high schools, and if so, how did you go about reserving an entire gym & pit area on a Friday school day?

Most of the events are in High Schools:
Traverse - HS
Kettering - Univ.
Waterford - HS
W Mich - Univ.
Detroit (Wayne) - Univ.
Niles - HS
Ann Arbor - HS
Livonia - HS
Troy - HS

I'm not sure what is done to get the needed space (big gym for field, nearby aux gym or similar for pits). I do know most of the HS personnel are glad to host the events. They like the exposure and publicity.

[dag0620]

Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux

Some things to take into consideration with the district model in the Mid-Atlantic Region:

- If the district model does get implemented for this upcoming season, everyone in the region needs to know exactly what they are getting for their registration fee. This includes number of events with entry fee, time frame of those events, and whether the format of the events will be changing or not. People want to know what they are getting for their money and providing this information in advance will be appreciated by all teams.

- I believe there has been discussion of running these events on a Saturday, Sunday schedule instead of a Friday, Saturday schedule as Michigan does. While I understand the difficulty of securing venues to host events (especially within High Schools, as securing a gym on a Thursday evening and Friday during the school year is incredibly difficult), I do not think a Saturday & Sunday structure would work well. You'd have people attending religious activities in the morning, thus attendance would drop significantly, and some teams might even have a hard time fielding a drive team Sunday morning.

One question I have to Michigan teams - are any district events hosted in high schools, and if so, how did you go about reserving an entire gym & pit area on a Friday school day?

Ultimately, I think a district event model would benefit this region with the proximity of teams in the area. However, it needs to be properly thought out and many aspects need to be planned and communicated before being implemented.

I am, to be honest, surprised that all of FRC competitions don't do Saturday & Sunday for 2 Days, and Friday, Saturday, Sunday like NYC did this year for 3 days.

[Chris Hibner]

Originally Posted by dag0620

I to be honest am surprised that all of FRC competitions don't do Saturday & Sunday for 2 Days, and Friday, Saturday, Sunday like NYC did this year for 3 days.

I really wish we'd go to Saturday/Sunday in Michigan. I killed a week and a half of vacation to attend our team's FIRST events this year. I really don't think I can do that again next year.

[DSM33]

On the topic of FRC district events in high school gyms on Fridays I think that it's actually a benefit to the program. Since most of the district events occur in high school gyms it doesn't appear that getting to use high school gyms is a problem. Although I've only attended one high school gym district with my team (Troy), I can see playing on a Friday would be a good thing to attract attention to FIRST and FRC teams because students at the school which is hosting the event could spectate and learn about FIRST and the robotics programs at their school. I know that at least at the Troy District (Troy Athens High School) that students of Troy Athens sit in the stands not used by teams instead of a gym class on that Friday.

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by Chris Hibner

I really wish we'd go to Saturday/Sunday in Michigan. I killed a week and a half of vacation to attend our team's FIRST events this year. I really don't think I can do that again next year.

I also killed nearly 2 weeks' vacation to travel with the team to our events in 2011, and I just can't do that any more. Work used to be more understanding, but as management changes so do unwritten policies.

Right now MAR is holding webinars to get the word out and get feedback. There are several unanswered questions that need to get answered, such as:
> How can non-district teams also compete? (We would miss those Brazilians and Canadians)
> What happens to the money? (A significant surplus is anticipated; short-term MAR needs to buy a field and some other stuff, but long-term could this be refunded to opt-in teams?)
> Can teams opt out on an annual basis?
> Can teams also attend other regionals?
> What is the qualifying structure for the 12 teams going to St Louis? (I can account for 9 of the 12, how are the other 3 decided?)
> If a team is awarded Chairmans at a district, they need to go to 'State' to have a chance to 'win' RCA; what if they can't afford the 'State' Championship?

These and other thorny questions are in the process of research & answer, but it's kind of a chicken-vs-egg thing, and we still have no idea what FIRST might prefer. It's an interesting journey, I recommend everyone consider what they might do or decide if this were proposed in their area.

I DO NOT speak for my team, and this isn't an official statement.

[Lil' Lavery]

Unfortunately I keep missing the MAR forums/webinars due to scheduling issues. I hope to ask some questions about the system at one of them soon.


I have a pretty fundamental question that I'm not sure has been asked. In the short-term, could we simply relocate one (or both) of the area regionals to one of the alternate venues being proposed as district sites? Namely Philadelphia, which has usually been a ~40-45 team event anyway and had higher costs than Trenton. There were a number of proposed venues in the Philadelphia suburbs, why not just have a "traditional" regional at one of those?

That buys another year to continue planning and seek feedback from teams in order to make sure a district model is executed properly for this region.

Additionally, what about things like making our current regionals "bag'n'tag" events? Or running more total matches at our smaller events? The 44 team Philadelphia regional in 2010 only ran 66 total matches, thus why teams only had 9 qualifying matches. Michigan districts only have a few less teams, but get 12 qualifying matches per team by running around 80 matches. A simple increase in the amount of matches we run at our events can bring up the ROI numbers people love so much.

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

...
That buys another year to continue planning and seek feedback from teams in order to make sure a district model is executed properly for this region.
...

I can't imagine anyone thinks the area recently labeled MAR will be ready to implement a district system for the 2012 FRC season.

On the other hand I guess I can imagine it; but surely not...

Blake
PS: I thought the middle of the USA's Atlantic Coast was farther south than the area involved in this MAR; but I suppose that topic is a bit low on the priority list.