The Everywhere Else District

[logank013]

Originally Posted by Nate Laverdure

This idea has probably already been presented elsewhere on CD-- if this was your idea first, you are welcome to claim priority below. Understand, however, that you have altogether missed the opportunity to give the idea a cool name. In fact, this proposal is almost the same as the proposals for a super regional system fleetingly seen in previous years, just rephrased into the terminology of the district model.

Proposal
The Everywhere Else District is a district system for every FRC team which is not already a part of the already-established district systems.

The Everywhere Else District is awkward to imagine, because it lumps together disconnected and distant areas like western PA, Israel, and Hawaii into one territory. These are places that can sustain one or two regional events but can't (for whatever reason) establish a district. The territory claimed by the Everywhere Else District is the entire world, minus the territories of the other established district systems.

Key features of the Everywhere Else District:

• Upon implementation in 2017, ALL former "regional" events like Western Canada and Las Vegas become "district" events within the Everywhere Else District.
• High performance in the Everywhere Else District qualifies a subset of teams for a "DCMP" in Houston. Team performance is measured by the standard points ranking system used by all 8 other district systems.
• High performance at the "DCMP" in Houston qualifies a further subset of teams for the "CMP" in Detroit.

New district systems would be free to emerge even after the implementation of the Everywhere Else District. The territory claimed by the newly-forming district system would simply be carved out of the Everywhere Else District.

The Everywhere Else District would to turn ALL remaining regionals into district events by 2017, well ahead of previous growth projections. It would create a system where all teams (regardless of their geography) would have the opportunity to participate in 3 distinct tiers of play. The change would also immediately allow the possibility of unlimited interdistrict play.

The idea of creating an everywhere else district just seems... Bad. I'm one of the biggest supporters of districts. There is only one issue with this idea... with this. Ignoring the whole volunteer factor, You need to reach a certain FRC team density before going to districts. Why? You want to make districts where at least 2 events are within a 2 hour drive max for every team. Why? You want to make it where any team can go to their two district events without staying at hotels. Why? It saves huge amounts of money. I suggest the minimum team to square mileage ratio is around 50 teams for every 40,000 miles squared. That is about where IN districts are and Indiana is at the Minimum range a district should be when you focus on the 2 hour drive guideline. If you make certain areas like South Dakota apart of the everywhere district, they'd be forced to go to 2 events instead of choosing to go to 1. Of course, it would cut down on the registration costs but that isn't the point of districts. We payed the same for registration in 2015 for districts as we did in 2014 for regionals. The whole point of districts is to cut down on hotel costs and create more FRC teams in an area. Making an everywhere else district would just make it more expensive for almost every FRC team who is currently in the regional area. They'd have to travel and pay hotel expenses for 2-3 times the amount of regionals. In order for an area to go to districts, they need to reach a certain team density so the district won't fail to start out with. Hopefully, This makes sense.