Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!

[bigbeezy]

Originally Posted by Mr V

It is interesting that the announcement says that teams are required to attend two district events.

Hmm...maybe its a way to push to teams to register for and go to 2 events. Could be that teams are used to only going to 1 event and as such would just plan on 1 district event. It is also probably so that the X number of district events planned actually have enough teams (from Georgia) compete. If event attendance is too low, then they may have to go back to regional model or scale back on the number of district events offered.

[AGPapa]

Originally Posted by ttldomination

But the primary restriction still remains that 'regional' teams cannot come 'into the district.'

It's a pretty strange restriction too. Why can't regional teams go to a district event and have it "not count" for anything? (like a 3rd play for district teams). What's the reasoning behind this restriction? I can see that maybe FIRST would want more teams to sign up for more expensive regional events, but nearly all of the regionals have been full for the past few years.

Originally Posted by Mr V

It is interesting that the announcement says that teams are required to attend two district events.

I don't think there is a penalty for only going to one event, this is probably just to show teams that they can't just sign up for one event and pay half price or something. It's either $5000 for two events, or $0 for none.

[ebarker]

Originally Posted by Mr V

It is interesting that the announcement says that teams are required to attend two district events.

I'm on the committee,,,,,, that was a poorly worded sentence.

The team does not have to attend. They are eligible to attend two events and it is desired that they attend two events.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by AGPapa

I don't think there is a penalty for only going to one event, this is probably just to show teams that they can't just sign up for one event and pay half price or something. It's either $5000 for two events, or $0 for none.

It would be $5000 if you go to one or two events.

Originally Posted by ebarker

I'm on the committee,,,,,, that was a poorly worded sentence.

The team does not have to attend. They are eligible to attend two events and it is desired that they attend two events.

I was wondering if it was just poorly worded. That should be fixed though otherwise it may scare off a team that is certain that they can make two events happen. Yes it is highly desired that a team attends two district events but attending one is still better than attending zero.

I'd also suggest that the wording be changed from earning "quality points" to "qualifying points" because you earn points to qualify for DCMP.

I had a rookie team that I was working with this year that almost only attended one event because one of the two events that were close enough for them to attend coincided with another commitment he had. He tried to get me to drop that second event and I told him just to wait and see if something could be figured out. Lo and behold a parent who attended the first event stepped up, jumped through the school district hoops and took the kids. What he saw at the first event convinced him that he was going to make sure that the students were able to attend both events that they were entitled to.

Good luck to all of those involved. Making the transition to the district system is a lot of work but the benefits to the students are massive.

[logank013]

Originally Posted by Mr V

It is interesting that the announcement says that teams are required to attend two district events. Yes it is unlikely that you can move on to DCMP and then CMP if you only attend one event. You could however do it as winning Chairman's, Engineering Inspiration and Rookie All Star at a district event automatically qualifies you for DCMP. Winning those awards or being on the winning alliance at DCMP automatically qualify you for CMP. However if you can only attend one event you can only attend one event. What is the penalty if you only go to one district event other than it hurting you chances of moving on to DCMP and CMP? I know we have had that happen with one team in the PNW, and no they didn't qualify for DCMP.

In Indiana, only chairman's award allowed you to automatically advance to district champs. Engineering inspiration was an 8 point bonus and rookie all star was a 5 point bonus I believe.

[AdamStockton]

Originally Posted by logank013

Isn't texas going to the district model next year too?

I don't think that Texas is moving to districts this year, based on the fact that the Alamo Regional dates has been posted to the 2016 event calendar (http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...egional-events). Although it is still possible for this to change.

[JohnFogarty]

I'm interested to see what events show up considering I might have a hand in helping out a team in Augusta, Ga area this coming season.

[robochick1319]

Glad to hear our neighbors are moving on to the district model. I also hear NC is doing the same? Wonder what southern state will be next?

I really hope SC can do the same in the near future. Any advice for teams hoping to spark the growth of the district model?

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by FrankJ

The down side of districts is that you have to be in a district to go an event. I am going to miss the out of state and country teams we have competed with over the years.

Just wait a few years until there are more districts. Of course, inter-district play was allowed in 2015, but not counting towards you district's championship. Not to mention, you are still allowed to go to a regional if you wish in addition to competing in your district events.

Originally Posted by ebarker

The team does not have to attend. They are eligible to attend two events and it is desired that they attend two events.

...and they'd be crazy not to. It is well-proven that teams are more competitive at their second event compared to the first - with very few exceptions.

I was at first skeptical about Mid-Atlantic districts, but after a few years there is no way any team would want to go back to Regionals. We play a ton more, costs a lot less, and have just as much fun per event. We also can afford to travel 'a distance' to meet international and other teams, when we want.

It is to be celebrated that GA is moving to districts. It is a little scary, but work with the committee and help them iron out the kinks, it will absolutely be far better for all.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by logank013

In Indiana, only chairman's award allowed you to automatically advance to district champs. Engineering inspiration was an 8 point bonus and rookie all star was a 5 point bonus I believe.

Yes I wasn't very clear. Winning EI or RAS at the district level qualifies the team to compete for that award at the DCMP but not the robot. However winning EI or RAS at DCMP qualifies the team and the robot for CMP. Both EI and RAS are worth 8 points.

[FrankJ]

Originally Posted by FrankJ

The down side of districts is that you have to be in a district to go an event. I am going to miss the out of state and country teams we have competed with over the years.

Don's thoughtful reply (inpart)

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

Just wait a few years until there are more districts. Of course, inter-district play was allowed in 2015, but not counting towards you district's championship. Not to mention, you are still allowed to go to a regional if you wish in addition to competing in your district events.

I am not really complaining about going to district. Georgia's choice was districts 2016 or 2017, not regional or district. Knowing the costs to put on a regional, I don't think they are sustainable for the long run. My lament is we will not see in any non district teams (FL, SC, TN, international teams, ETC) in Georgia, at least for 2016. We do have a choice of going to another district, but only NC is a reasonable commute. Going to a regional will be difficult cost & logistically wise. (Optimistically planning for 2 districts, & districts finals). Regional registration opens for districts teams late in registration. With the loss of 6 regionals in the south east & the addition of one (Alabama), the number of regionals with space available will be questionable even if we chose that option.

[Anupam Goli]

Originally Posted by FrankJ

I am not really complaining about going to district. Georgia's choice was districts 2016 or 2017, not regional or district. Knowing the costs to put on a regional, I don't think they are sustainable for the long run. My lament is we will not see in any non district teams (FL, SC, TN, international teams, ETC) in Georgia, at least for 2016. We do have a choice of going to another district, but only NC is a reasonable commute. Going to a regional will be difficult cost & logistically wise. (Optimistically planning for 2 districts, & districts finals). Regional registration opens for districts teams late in registration. With the loss of 6 regionals in the south east & the addition of one (Alabama), the number of regionals with space available will be questionable even if we chose that option.

It's a small price we pay in exchange for a better overall experience for our teams.

[D.Allred]

Originally Posted by FrankJ

Don's thoughtful reply (inpart)


I am not really complaining about going to district. Georgia's choice was districts 2016 or 2017, not regional or district. Knowing the costs to put on a regional, I don't think they are sustainable for the long run. My lament is we will not see in any non district teams (FL, SC, TN, international teams, ETC) in Georgia, at least for 2016. We do have a choice of going to another district, but only NC is a reasonable commute. Going to a regional will be difficult cost & logistically wise. (Optimistically planning for 2 districts, & districts finals). Regional registration opens for districts teams late in registration. With the loss of 6 regionals in the south east & the addition of one (Alabama), the number of regionals with space available will be questionable even if we chose that option.

It's going to be an interesting year in SC. Normally NC and GA comprise 15% to 20% of Palmetto Regional teams. I'd be surprised to see any this year. At this point, we don't have a locked in date since the venue is not available week 1.

Good luck with your district events!

David

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by AdamStockton

I don't think that Texas is moving to districts this year, based on the fact that the Alamo Regional dates has been posted to the 2016 event calendar (http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...egional-events). Although it is still possible for this to change.

No it's not, Texas will have the normal regional system for 2016. Venue contracts have been signed. The district committees for Texas are looking at 2017 as the earliest start for district play in Texas. It's nice to see that the smaller regions/states are going to be able to have districts quickly. Moving to districts in the smaller areas where you are replacing 1-2 regionals with 3-4 districts seems easier than in Texas were we are replacing 4 regionals with possibly 10 or more district events.

[Qbot2640]

Originally Posted by D.Allred

It's going to be an interesting year in SC. Normally NC and GA comprise 15% to 20% of Palmetto Regional teams. I'd be surprised to see any this year. At this point, we don't have a locked in date since the venue is not available week 1.

Good luck with your district events!

David

Finally...but too late! We avoided Palmetto in 2013 and 2014 because it was week 1...couldn't schedule any alternatives in 2015, so we came and showed just why we hate week 1 events so much (with our awful performance), and now that NC is switching to districts, Palmetto is finally going to be a different week. Bummer!