Are 8 play regional reasonable?

[The other Gabe]

Originally Posted by Mr V

Student satisfaction in the District System is greatly improved. Our first season I spent a lot of time in the pits talking to students across all levels of teams. NOT A SINGLE student wanted to go back to the Regional System.

this. I did 2 years under the regionals and two years under district format, and it is so fantastic to be able to go to at least 2, usually 3 or 4 events (my team is good most years :v ), for a much lower cost than 3 events would cost if you were doing regional events. not to mention that the smaller district events are far more manageable when you account for schoolwork and missing class - Regionals take up far more time.

the district system is also far fairer IMO. in 2013, there's at least 3 teams I could list off the top of my head that absolutely deserved to go to world champs that couldn't since they didnt win anything at regionals. Due to the district points system, the team that gets second place at every event they go to earns their way to champs through that consistent quality.

[Deetman]

Something important to remember about the volunteer issue, specifically key volunteers... If you build it they will come.

At least here in MAR, going to districts itself grew the key volunteer base. We still have a lot of work to do to lessen the burden on some, but we're making progress. It forces you to open up key volunteer positions that others have had locked down for years at the regional events. Local events over fewer days (some not even requiring vacation day usage!) helps prompt people that never would have volunteered before. For that matter, there is no obligation to volunteer every week and you shouldn't feel forced to volunteer! Sure there are crazy people like me that would be at every event if they could be in two places at once, but there are also people that volunteer at one or two of the events.

[LFrisk]

Originally Posted by bkahl

Last I checked Iowa was its own state.

That is, unless it was swallowed up since I last visited my family there...

Iowa is being run by Iowa FIRST, but many of the volunteers there are from MN FIRST. (That's why I said IF you count it.)

Sorry for any confusion.

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by DareDad

Apart from a pile of disjointed small events in high school gyms and marginally more matches per team, what are "All the advantages" of moving to a district system?

I take this as a serious question; after all, if those of us in Districts cannot elaborate to others what the advantages are, one may fairly question if there really are any.

Advantages are subjective: What I see as an advantage, others might not. But here is what I see:

1. Not having to take vacation from work. Fri/Sat/Sun events mean I can just leave an hour early on a Friday and still attend every minute of the event. Big for me as a mentor, and many parents appreciate the zero out-of-school time and thus are more supportive.

2. Less travel. Smaller events tend to be nearer. MI UP folks may disagree though.

3. The feel and production values are easily at Regional level, but of course the organizers must deliberately make it so.

4. You really get to know your 'neighbors' after a few years: smaller venues and limited teams really makes things cozy in a good way.

Other posts have elaborated on other advantages, and I agree with those as well.

[Brian Maher]

I'd like to note that the smaller events and District Championship provide more opportunities for success. Instead of ~50% of teams at a ~48 team regional playing in elims, around two thirds of teams play in elims at a ~36 team district event. This creates more opportunities for success in elims, and more chances to win judged awards.

Winning our first (district) event in 2014 revitalized my team's morale. As the second pick of the second alliance, if the event were much larger, we very well may not have had this chance. That year was our first time at District Championship, and our experience iterating on our design, playing with MAR's best, and nearly qualifying for CMP motivated us to grow and push ourselves toward new success, both on and off the field.

The opportunities the District system presented have cause my team to advance leaps and bounds in the past few years. Last weekend, my team won its second competition and its first as an alliance captain. Districts help teams improve on so many levels, between the increased plays/$ and the more easily attained chances for success.

Disclaimer: I'm not saying it's all about the competition. Our success caused us to re-assess our priorities, and we went from being a team with very little outreach to a team regularly demonstrating our robot and getting people excited about STEM. Competitive success isn't everything but it sure makes a difference.

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by Ginger Power

I'd love to go to districts which would solve this problem. The issue is with key volunteers. Minnesota would have to do 12 events which is a lot of field setup/teardowns, and a lot more work for our key volunteers. I know our Volunteer Coordinator is crazy busy as is with 4 (5 if you count Iowa) events. We do have a great crop of college level volunteers on the way. When some of us start transferring into key volunteer positions, we'll be ready for the move to districts. Which will solve the problems.

A band-aid solution will be adding another regional which could happen within a year or two. This will allow more teams to do 2 events. The cost will still be crazy, but at least the opportunity will be there.

All we can do to help is recruit more volunteers, and get them trained into key volunteer positions!

Welcome to the normal world before districts. Most teams worked their whole build season for a single Regional and 8 matches. Approximately 16 minutes of play time.

As for volunteers - it's time to force that back on the teams. The teams are the ones with the people resources, and that where you have to look to if you want to solve the problem. Announce districts well in advance of the season and explain each team is going to have to provide XX unskilled and 1 skilled individual (who will have to attend training, etc) for each event. After one rocky year, you'll end up with at least a couple dozen skilled individuals you can drag even deeper to make into skilled FTA's and the like.

[Mr V]

Some more great points about the many advantages of the District System.

A couple points I'd like to highlight:

Build it and they will come. Before the PNW District formed we had 1 or 2 of each key volunteer position. Yes the first year was rough on some of our key volunteers. It was made easier because we made the decision to make the move and started by recruiting and training more people for those positions before making the switch. Now 3 years in we have 5 of most key volunteers so that no one person has to cover more than 2 of the events since we only have 9 events + DCMP and in fact we now do not generally allow volunteers to work in the same key volunteer position at more than 2. Many do choose to take on multiple roles and attend more events. One of the keys of this is letting people know that there is a need for people to fill those positions and that they are welcome. We have found that many of the mentors and students have the knowledge and desire to be volunteers. It is a great way to keep people "in the family". We have those mentors who are ready to move on from that role when their kids graduate, that still want to be involved in a lower impact way. We also have a number of former students who volunteer at an event, Sat-Sun events make it easier for both of those groups.

A 501c3 organization is needed, but creating one is not some impossible feat and it is not blazing a new trail. There are now 8 districts that have been down a similar path who will gladly share how they did it. It is important to note that we all took different paths and some of the newer events have taken elements from multiple existing districts to create what works for them.

I've also had time to consider my time in the Regional System and the things that are better about it. I was only able to come up with two.

#1 In some of the venues that we had used in the PNW the seats are more comfortable than in the venues we use now. It certainly is not true across the board however because a couple of our district events have taken place in the same University gyms as the Regionals that preceded them.

#2 In Regionals there is a greater likelihood of seeing teams from out of your area. In the past we have had international teams from Mexico and Turkey. We have also had teams from MT, ID, CA and HI in the past. However with the interdistrict play we have seen teams from MI and hopefully we'll see more in the future.

Finally as mentioned above not every Regional is in a major league sports arena, some are in University Gyms, Convention centers and even HS Gyms while district events are held in HS and University Gyms and the DCMPs are sometimes held in sports arenas.

[maxnz]

So, if MN decides to make the switch,

What needs to be done before we can make the switch?
How long would it be until we can make the switch?
Would we be ready by the 2018 or 2019 seasons? Or even 2017?

From what I've read on this thread, the pros far outweigh the cons, so why can't we work towards this?

As for location, there are a lot of places that host offseason events, so that might be a good place to start.

We could call it the Minnesota District (MN) or we could include IA, ND, SD and WI and call it the Upper Midwest District (UMW).

[bjtheone]

Originally Posted by Tom Line

Welcome to the normal world before districts. Most teams worked their whole build season for a single Regional and 8 matches. Approximately 16 minutes of play time.

This is the biggest win for the district model. Up in the Frozen North (aka Canada) there are unfortunately not enough teams _yet_ to support the district model so we have regionals.

Given that, we have pretty much concluded that we need to (a) build two robots, and (b) attend 2 regionals in order to be able to test/iterate/improve the robot design and drive team. Which adds significantly to the costs of running a team. Attending one event, after all the work that is build season, seems like very little reward for all the work, but the second regional certainly adds a lot of cost.

Would love to be in a district model with weekend events, and robot access period instead of the craziness that the "practice" day at a regional can turn into.

[AGPapa]

Originally Posted by maxnz

We could call it the Minnesota District (MN) or we could include IA, ND, SD and WI and call it the Upper Midwest District (UMW).

If Minnesota goes into it's own district region by itself it will already have the most teams for a first-year district. Every other region went to districts with way less teams than Minnesota already has. Including other states and bumping that number up higher would make it even harder to organize that first year.

More teams means more events, which means more fields and more volunteers. Minnesota needs to switch before they get to 240 teams, that'll let them get by with only two fields. Waiting too long or adding other states makes the switch turn from hard to nearly impossible.

Originally Posted by bjtheone

This is the biggest win for the district model. Up in the Frozen North (aka Canada) there are unfortunately not enough teams _yet_ to support the district model so we have regionals.

Ontario absolutely has enough teams for districts right now. There are 137 teams in Ontario this year, more than MAR, CHS, IN, GA and NC.

[maxnz]

Originally Posted by AGPapa

If Minnesota goes into it's own district region by itself it will already have the most teams for a first-year district. Every other region went to districts with way less teams than Minnesota already has. Including other states and bumping that number up higher would make it even harder to organize that first year.

Would we be able to start with only Minnesota and then expand to include neighboring states after a couple years?

Also, how many active teams does MN have currently?

[AGPapa]

Originally Posted by maxnz

Would we be able to start with only Minnesota and then expand to include neighboring states after a couple years?

Also, how many active teams does MN have currently?

Minnesota has 208 teams this year.

I suppose they could expand later; PNW did add Alaska this year (although that was only one team).

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by maxnz

So, if MN decides to make the switch,

What needs to be done before we can make the switch?
How long would it be until we can make the switch?
Would we be ready by the 2018 or 2019 seasons? Or even 2017?

From what I've read on this thread, the pros far outweigh the cons, so why can't we work towards this?

As for location, there are a lot of places that host offseason events, so that might be a good place to start.

We could call it the Minnesota District (MN) or we could include IA, ND, SD and WI and call it the Upper Midwest District (UMW).

The most important part is having the leadership in MN want to make the move to the District System. Once you have that then you can make it happen.

The leaders of what has become the PNW District were approached by FIRST in the 2012 season with the request that we move to the District System for the 2013 season. Since it was still a relatively new concept with 2 different models, FiM and MAR we decided to wait until the 2014 season and use the 2013 season to figure out how we wanted to implement it and prepare.

The most important thing in my opinion would be to train more key volunteers during the preceding season. That means having people shadow the current key volunteers and learn the ropes "on the job". So probably a little too late for the 2017 season but if the process was started now they could have everything in place for a relatively smooth transition for the 2018 season, IF, and it is a big IF, growth is held to a minimum so that the total number of teams for the first season is less than 240. Once you cross that threshold it becomes a much bigger problem as you can not do it in 12 events as FIRST has mandated that the max event size is 40 teams to ensure the ability to have the mandated 12 qualification matches of the District System.

It is easier now because you have many footsteps to follow that trace a few different paths.

For example in the PNW district the choice was made to own all the necessary equipment to produce an event with the exception of generators, and some tables or additional pipe and drape when needed for a particular event and not available from the venue. That did require a larger initial capital investment but the math said that all of that equipment would be amortized in 1-3 years vs the rental fees.

The people behind FIRST in IN actually contracted with the PNW district to bring our AV people and equipment for IRI the season before they made the switch to train their people. We also provided a list of all of our equipment which I believe they mainly duplicated at least on the AV side.

There are some differences in how the Districts are produced. From my understanding FiM uses trailers pulled by pickups to put the fields in for transport with a minimal amount of road cases. In the PNW we decided to follow FIRST's lead and put everything in road cases and use a semi trailer that we rent and hire a truck and driver to transport. We have a warehouse for offseason storage that also doubles as the office, meeting and training space, area for a practice field, and even Geek's Gala our own version of Robo Prom. MAR and CPK use Pods both for transport and off-season storage.

So there are a number of variations in the implementation models used in the District System that can be mixed and matched to create something that would work best for MN. For example I know that a number of the new areas have followed MAR's use of Pods for storage and transport but our AV set up.

If you really want to join the District System and reap the many benefits to teams you need to let MN's leadership know that you want it AND you are willing to be part of the solution by training to be a key or regular volunteer next season.

As usual the statements are my own opinion. They are based on participating back in the dark days of the Regional System and in our 3rd year of the District System. They are based on talking to many teams about their feelings on the change, students, mentors and volunteers.

[The_ShamWOW88]

About the only thing I can think of I liked better before we went Districts, is the size of venue, for the most part, shrunk and sight-lines to the playing field aren't as great as they typically are in a traditional hockey/basketball venue.

Otherwise, paying 5000 for two events (24+ matches), the ability to pay 1000 to add 3rd+ events and then the chance at ranking well enough to compete at the district champs and Worlds without necessarily winning an event outright, I think I'll say I like districts.

[maxnz]

Minnesota added 19 teams this year. If we grow by the same number next year we're at 227, and the year after that 246.

Becoming a district is something we will want to do very soon if we want to be under the magic number of 240 when we switch.