FIRST Chesapeake Districts

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

:cough: 2 champs joke :cough:

He's 3 hours behind on the joke, cut him some slack.

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by Qbot2640

NC is confirmed for an "Indiana style" small district system in 2016. I foresee expanding that district to include SC in the future. From the rumors I've heard, SC was approached early on to join, but resisted...this may or may not be true. GA could also expand, but I'm not close to any of the discussions there.

More toward the original topic - I am liking the thought of two Virginia district events within reasonable driving distance of Northern NC...giving us some potential options for inter-district 3rd events!

You know what is also within reasonable driving distance to Northern NC?

:cough: Rumble in the Roads :cough:

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

Correct. Let's look at one that doesn't include DCMP:

Single Regional - registration fee + travel costs

District 1 - registration fee + no travel costs
District 2 - no registration fee + travel costs

In this situation it should basically come out to even, but if you have to travel twice because there isn't a district event close to you then the cost goes up compared to a single regional. However, you still have the option to only go to one district event, and you still get an increase in value by doing this.

There's really a couple other scenarios we should look into, compare, and then see how many teams meet them.

First we need to look at the current state. For 1 or 2 regional teams (3+ regional teams are already an outlier and it makes the scenarios explode) there's 5 states they could be in:

A.Single Regional w/o travel cost
B.Single Regional w/ travel cost
C.Double Regional w/ no travel costs
D.Double Regional w/ 1 travel cost
E.Double Regional w/ 2 travel costs

I'm also conveniently claiming that travel to location A approximately equivalent to location B. I'm fairly confident that this assumption will hold relatively true for local (ground based) travel.

From there we have 3 states they can transition to (I'm ignoring the single district scenario because I think it's a bad scenario and should be actively discouraged):

F.Districts w/o travel cost
G.District w/ 1 travel cost
H.District w/2 travel costs

So, in theory there's 15 different scenarios we need to look at. Of these the following are more than likely cost neutral:

A -> F
B -> G

The following would be cost saving:

B -> F
C -> F
C -> G (assumes local travel cost < $4000)
D -> F
D -> G (assumes local travel cost < $4000)
E -> F
E -> G
E--> H

And the following are increasing cost:

A -> G
A -> H
B -> H
C -> H
D -> H

The next step, which I haven't done, is to find which percentages of teams in your district are in each of these transition groups and ensure you are benefiting the majority.

The big concerns for me are the ones in the A -> G, A -> H and B -> H transition groups because these are already incredibly vulnerable teams.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

The big concerns for me are the ones in the A -> G, A -> H and B -> H transition groups because these are already incredibly vulnerable teams.

If the tentative district event placements hold, there will be no teams moving from category A to G or H, as the existing regional areas are all playing host to a new district event.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

If the tentative district event placements hold, there will be no teams moving from category A to G or H, as the existing regional areas are all playing host to a new district event.

It also more or less precludes the (C, D , E) -> H transitions. Leaving only the B -> H transition as a possible in this district. And I'd be willing to bet that it's a very small number of teams in that situation. (if any)


Also, I'm not Payne Train.

[TDav540]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Why must the minority of teams be catered to for "equity's sake?" The population central of teams in the district is far closer to the MD site than Richmond/VCU. Having the DCMP there makes a lot more sense for the district as a whole, even if it's not ideal for some teams. Why not leave it near the population center for utility's sake?

Yes, there are teams that end up paying more in travel costs when they move from one regional competition to competing two, three, or fours times in a district system. It really shouldn't be as surprising or as controversial that competing in more events ends up costing more money to sparsely located teams.

I think that there isn't any significant way to feasibly reduce the travel costs for teams in Western Virginia and the Hampton Roads area (possibly only exception a second district in Hampton Roads). However, I still believe that, ideally, all teams would have to travel only once within their district. Obviously this isn't possible, as Western VA provides the exception. But I think it would be fair to have the teams in the DC metro area travel for the District Championship. If they had to only travel for the District Championship at VCU (since the other events are nearby and within driving distance), then the Central Virginia and Metro DC area teams would only have to travel one time before Worlds. To help the Hampton Roads teams and some Northern VA teams, the future 8th and 9th district events should be thrown in the Winchester and Norfolk areas. This would ensure that the fewest number of teams possible have to travel twice in the region.

TLDR: In order to make the equity of travel better (hence making team growth easier), the district championship should be at VCU at least 50% of the time.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by TDav540

I think that there isn't any significant way to feasibly reduce the travel costs for teams in Western Virginia and the Hampton Roads area (possibly only exception a second district in Hampton Roads). However, I still believe that, ideally, all teams would have to travel only once within their district. Obviously this isn't possible, as Western VA provides the exception. But I think it would be fair to have the teams in the DC metro area travel for the District Championship. If they had to only travel for the District Championship at VCU (since the other events are nearby and within driving distance), then the Central Virginia and Metro DC area teams would only have to travel one time before Worlds. To help the Hampton Roads teams and some Northern VA teams, the future 8th and 9th district events should be thrown in the Winchester and Norfolk areas. This would ensure that the fewest number of teams possible have to travel twice in the region.

TLDR: In order to make the equity of travel better (hence making team growth easier), the district championship should be at VCU at least 50% of the time.

You didn't answer my question. Why should a minority of teams be catered to in the name of "equity," when the most utility is provided by hosting the DCMP nearer to the population center?

This also isn't even touching on financial and scheduling concerns between the various venue options. We don't know for a fact that VCU is even an option for the appropriate weekends for a DCMP (6 or 7).

[connor.worley]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

You didn't answer my question. Why should a minority of teams be catered to in the name of "equity," when the most utility is provided by hosting the DCMP nearer to the population center?

If I'm reading his post correctly, for the sake of program growth in underrepresented areas. I still think having events near population centers is more important.

[TDav540]

Originally Posted by connor.worley

If I'm reading his post correctly, for the sake of program growth in underrepresented areas. I still think having events near population centers is more important.

Yes that was what I was going for.

I agree with you in a general sense that this is important. However, in this case, it isn't like Central VA doesn't have a large number of teams; it's the second largest in team density.

Also, I think this year was a scheduling issue. I think Sally or someone else mentioned that VCU was booked during Week 6. Regardless, there is no reason (besides convenience and a little break) that a Week 5 championship couldn't occur. Most teams in the state will be playing in Week 4 events anyway.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

You didn't answer my question. Why should a minority of teams be catered to in the name of "equity," when the most utility is provided by hosting the DCMP nearer to the population center?

This also isn't even touching on financial and scheduling concerns between the various venue options. We don't know for a fact that VCU is even an option for the appropriate weekends for a DCMP (6 or 7).

The calendar has opened up for those weeks in the past, and the event was on the VCU calendar until FIRST quietly pushed out that the 2015 kickoff would fall on January 9th, pushing the whole season back a week. The dates would be a Week 6 event any other year (like next year). And unless circumstances have changed, finances are not an issue at VCU.

There is something to be said about equality vs balance, which are not always the same thing. District system implementation is meant to cover a number of objectives, and under the spectrum of event location should exist a fulcrum that balances two objectives that can inherently oppose each other. In this case, balance should be found between "growing in underrepresented areas" and "adequately serving existing teams".

I am of the opinion that the locations that have been proposed do balance out pretty well, but YMMV.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by TDav540

Regardless, there is no reason (besides convenience and a little break) that a Week 5 championship couldn't occur. Most teams in the state will be playing in Week 4 events anyway.

Please don't give the steering committee ideas like that.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by connor.worley

If I'm reading his post correctly, for the sake of program growth in underrepresented areas. I still think having events near population centers is more important.

Originally Posted by TDav540

Yes that was what I was going for.

I agree with you in a general sense that this is important. However, in this case, it isn't like Central VA doesn't have a large number of teams; it's the second largest in team density.

See, here's my disconnect from that viewpoint. The DC metro area still has potential for growth as well. There's only 13 teams in DC for more than 40 high schools in the city. Not to mention the massive population advantage DC (both as a city and metro area) has over Richmond. Putting the DCMP in the DC metro area still allows for plenty of growth in the Chesapeake District, as well as serving the greatest utility towards existing teams and providing a venue with the more exposure.

Originally Posted by TDav540

Regardless, there is no reason (besides convenience and a little break) that a Week 5 championship couldn't occur. Most teams in the state will be playing in Week 4 events anyway.

Compressing the district schedule down that far would make finding venues significantly more challenging, and make the competition season incredibly fast paced/strenuous. I would definitely not recommend a week 5 DCMP. MAR has also seen significantly lower DCMP attendance acceptance rates when there's not a week between the final districts and DCMP.

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

The calendar has opened up for those weeks in the past, and the event was on the VCU calendar until FIRST quietly pushed out that the 2015 kickoff would fall on January 9th, pushing the whole season back a week. The dates would be a Week 6 event any other year (like next year). And unless circumstances have changed, finances are not an issue at VCU.

Changing to a district format means, by default, that circumstances have changed. Funding has to be allocated to all sorts of things that previously were not the responsibility of the district. Not to mention, just because a regional existed at a venue previously does not automatically mean is was a financially healthy scenario (look into the MAR presentations when the MAR district was announced regarding the cost of the venues for Philadelphia and Trenton).

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Changing to a district format means, by default, that circumstances have changed. Funding has to be allocated to all sorts of things that previously were not the responsibility of the district. Not to mention, just because a regional existed at a venue previously does not automatically mean is was a financially healthy scenario (look into the MAR presentations when the MAR district was announced regarding the cost of the venues for Philadelphia and Trenton).

Last I heard, the venue cost for the Siegel Center was a number that rhymes with zero.

[TDav540]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

See, here's my disconnect from that viewpoint. The DC metro area still has potential for growth as well. There's only 13 teams in DC for more than 40 high schools in the city. Not to mention the massive population advantage DC (both as a city and metro area) has over Richmond. Putting the DCMP in the DC metro area still allows for plenty of growth in the Chesapeake District, as well as serving the greatest utility towards existing teams and providing a venue with the more exposure.

Okay, that makes sense. Regardless, I still think they should have more events in Central/Eastern Virginia to help with the travel. Hopefully they'll expand there soon once more teams are formed.

[notmattlythgoe]

I'm actually happy that the DCMP is being held at UM. We have thoroughly the regional there the past 2 years. It also isn't increasing our amount of travel any compared to previous years.