Are 8 play regional reasonable?

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Originally Posted by TCMJ1816

While watching Top 25 last night they brought up the point that many regional competition only offer 8 qualification plays per team. In Minnesota we have 208 teams, and a vast majority of those teams only get one event a year.

I see 2 major issues with this:
-This make the $5000 it costs to register for events pretty crazy, $625 a match isn't appealing for many of the low budget teams around FIRST.
-This also leaves the teams that do qualify for champs hugely unprepared. Most MN teams at champs will have ~20 plays, versus district teams that will have 40+ plays. EDIT: Many teams come into champs with 80+ plays

There definitely isn't a great solution to this problem, other than going to districts, but that has been addressed in the past.

Peter,
Are you aware of the push to get other regionals in MN.? Are you aware of the demand on volunteers for the existing events? Did you mention the number of teams served in the double Duluth event? The Minnesota events are some of the largest in the country.
In Duluth, the volunteer picture took an entire field to hold and the photographer was required to take the picture from the balcony. And still there were not enough.
There are people working tirelessly behind the scenes to continue to improve MN. However, among other issues, many rural teams in MN do not have enough adults to supply the volunteer pool at the event they attend. I know the volunteer coordinator personally and the job of manning all of the required volunteer positions is nearly impossible. While teams may not be happy with the number of matches at a single event, there are a variety of other alternatives that a team can follow. I can assure you (and everyone reading this) that every event in MN is working hard to get volunteers. Many come from other states, without their teams, to volunteer at MN events including the State Championship. I wish Illinois had a State Championship. We have tried to influence the state for many years but thus far have failed. A lot more of our teams get only one regional event and have no state champs to look forward to.

Nick,
Do you know of any other sport in Minnesota that has two championships? The State League is not as simple as you like to think.

WildStang has been around for a long time. Our rookie year, the only regional was in Manchester and the Champs were in Disney World. Our second year, there were two regionals, Manchester and Chicago. When other regionals started later, we traveled to Ann Arbor, MI. That event was further from us than Duluth. Teams work out the issues to get to events. Minnesota teams will work out this issues too. The same for Sydney, which I expect will be a wonderful event. While there will not be as many rookies as the first Minnesota event (I was LRI at that event), there will be more than twenty and some from very small, outback schools. I pray they all will have a wonderful time. I will do my best to make that happen, see you in a few days.

[Ginger Power]

Originally Posted by Al Skierkiewicz

I know the volunteer coordinator personally and the job of manning all of the required volunteer positions is nearly impossible.

Can confirm that managing volunteers is incredibly difficult. In my short experience managing around 30 Bison Robotics Volunteers, I can say it's one if the most challenging things I've done. I work very closely with the Volunteer Coordinator for Minnesota and I am blown away by how smoothly the events run, given the challenges that are overcome. Nothing but positive things to say about the leadership in Minnesota.

I'm not so sure that the "rural teams" in Minnesota don't have volunteers to contribute. Being that I'm from one of those rural teams, and I work with many more of them within our local hub, I know they have volunteers to contribute. They just have no incentive to do so right now. Now obviously there are smaller teams out there, and teams that would be incapable of providing volunteers, but there are many more teams out there with enough people to provide many volunteers. I would argue the latter outnumber the former.

I fully agree that MN FIRST is doing their best, and the leadership is doing their best. I'm very appreciative of their efforts. I just wish I could do more to help.

[Bryan Herbst]

Originally Posted by Ginger Power

I'm not so sure that the "rural teams" in Minnesota don't have volunteers to contribute. Being that I'm from one of those rural teams, and I work with many more of them within our local hub, I know they have volunteers to contribute. They just have no incentive to do so right now. Now obviously there are smaller teams out there, and teams that would be incapable of providing volunteers, but there are many more teams out there with enough people to provide many volunteers. I would argue the latter outnumber the former.

When I think "rural" I don't think "Becker." You guys are certainly more rural than New Brighton, but still what I would consider suburban (subrurban-lite?). I don't mean to devalue you or Becker- you guys do some awesome stuff! I just have a slightly different definition that I think will clear up the point on rural teams.

When I talk about rural teams who don't have the resources to provide volunteers, I'm talking about schools like Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig which had an enrollment of 197 in 2014 compared to Becker's ~800. Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig is is in Bena, MN, which has a population of 118 compared to Becker's 4,645.

They actually did have an FRC team from 2010 through 2013. They were one of my favorite teams back when I was an inspector because I could tell how much work they put into getting a viable robot put together and down to the Twin Cities.

[Ginger Power]

Originally Posted by Tanis

When I think "rural" I don't think "Becker." You guys are certainly more rural than New Brighton, but still what I would consider suburban (subrurban-lite?). I don't mean to devalue you or Becker- you guys do some awesome stuff! I just have a slightly different definition that I think will clear up the point on rural teams.

When I talk about rural teams who don't have the resources to provide volunteers, I'm talking about schools like Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig which had an enrollment of 197 in 2014 compared to Becker's ~800. Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig is is in Bena, MN, which has a population of 118 compared to Becker's 4,645.

They actually did have an FRC team from 2010 through 2013. They were one of my favorite teams back when I was an inspector because I could tell how much work they put into getting a viable robot put together and down to the Twin Cities.

In terms of population you have a great point. I don't see your post as devaluing Becker at all! It's kind of cool that we're not looked at as a bunch of people from the sticks

I'm of the mindset that any non-twin cities/Duluth team is rural. Your definition fits the situation far better. I agree that there are rural teams that fit your definition that can't contribute volunteers. DROBA Warriors from Deer River (3036) is an example. They have a graduating class of ~30 people. As I mentioned in my post above, I don't think the number of small teams outweighs the volunteer power of the larger teams in MN. In other words, I think the larger teams can make up the volunteer deficit that the smaller teams will leave.

I'm not sure that my statement is true regionally, especially in northern Minnesota. It'd be very interesting to see some data about the size of teams in Minnesota on a map. It'd provide some nice, positive reinforcement for the "build it and they will come" statement that myself and others have put out there. It might be that there is literally nobody to come, even if the desire is there.

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

I'm sorry; I cannot comprehend the concept of "can't contribute volunteers".
Do you have students on your team? Yes. Good; this means you also have at least 1 parent per student. Even if you have 5 students, that's 5 parents! Look; volunteers!!! Like it or not, when the student signs up for robotics, the parent does too.

I've been on a small team (< 15) for many years and currently mentor a big team (> 45) and I have NEVER had a problem finding volunteers from my team. There are just no excuses. I get it; people work. But not everyone works. (Note: hs students can be volunteers too)

[Jaci]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

Like it or not, when the student signs up for robotics, the parent does too.

No.

Parents are there to support their child, but don't sign up for the role of what is essentially unpaid work. Students go to FRC to do what THEY want to do, under the guidance of their mentors (the ones who actually sign up for this), their parents shouldn't be roped into doing volunteer work. While some parents are more than happy to volunteer, for others this concept is just simply too far out of reach

[Linkathon1986]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

I'm sorry; I cannot comprehend the concept of "can't contribute volunteers".
Do you have students on your team? Yes. Good; this means you also have at least 1 parent per student. Even if you have 5 students, that's 5 parents! Look; volunteers!!! Like it or not, when the student signs up for robotics, the parent does too.

I'm sorry. I really am. I had no intentions on entering this, but this has been bothering me for a while. I love FIRST. I made a large mistake joining in my sophomore year, and my parents agree. They are extremely proud of me, its easy to tell. But just because they are my parents and proud doesn't mean that they help. Now don't get me wrong. They really want to. They have made our build team dinner once and gone to the Northern Lights regional to cheer us on, but that's only for only about an hour. They simply don't have time. Mom works and is pregnant with twins, expecting at any time, and Dad is stay-at-home. Soon he has to watch three little kids running around as mom goes to work. I understand that this is not the case for everyone, but in today's age, it is a very real thing to be busy with everyday life.

I'm sorry if I come off as rude. I mean this in a polite way, but I am garbage at conveying my words to not sound irritated or offensive. I merely mean that not everyone will have time to volunteer for a FIRST event .

[cadandcookies]

Originally Posted by Al Skierkiewicz

Nick,
Do you know of any other sport in Minnesota that has two championships? The State League is not as simple as you like to think.

No, I do not. It's worth noting though that the case where Minnesota goes to districts solo and MSHSL refuses to blend the state tournaments strikes me as less likely than the other two scenarios (if we go to districts with anyone else, we aren't hosting a MN State tournament, it's a district championship for an area that includes MN), unless someone as tactful as I am is handling that discussion (which I would hope wouldn't be the case).

With regards to your last point, you are (partially) correct-- the "what to do with MN State" is a thorny issue within an even thornier issue. My post did not reflect that complexity, and I can definitely see how it comes off as me having little appreciation for the effort that goes into the tournament, or a lack of understanding of the complexities involved in running it (or any event). While it may be true that I do not have the first hand experience of spending years volunteering and building a regional system from scratch, I do have an exceptional amount of respect and appreciation for the people that have made the events that changed my life as a student possible.

Originally Posted by Chief Hedgehog

And for those of you that discount the MN State Tourney as a mere off-season event - you are incredibly wrong. I can speak for all the teams involved as they take this event as seriously as any other FRC event.

You cannot speak for every team involved. This is true of your team and your area, but it is not universally true. When I was on 2220, the state tournament WAS seen as a glorified offseason event by many of us involved. Heck, I've been vocal in the past about that view point. Since then I've come to appreciate it much more-- making state was HUGE for 2667 last year.

That being said, I can't say that an extra event for ~30 out of 208 teams is nearly as important in my mind as getting EVERY team a second play, and possible triple the matches (without considering extra events like Champs, District Champs, a third play, or elimination matches). Up until this year, 4607 has been in the same 1-regional club as 2667, and I know you guys have been in the same boat of having bad luck ruin your chances of qualifying for Championships. You know how bad it is to be in that position, and, since you've made it to doing two regionals, I assume you know how hard it is to find the funds to do another event.

The MN State Championship, or another regional (heck, as many regionals as you want to add here) are NOT a replacement for a district system. They are part of a system that benefit disproportionately teams that can afford the costs of another regional, or are already performing well enough that they've qualified for Champs (about half of the teams that qualified for MSHSL last year attended Champs in '14 or '15, and an even larger percentage attended two or more "actual" events). It is very difficult for teams to break a cycle of low performance and low funding (which feed into each other). It happens, but it certainly isn't the norm. Adding regionals, a state championship-- they're not solutions to the problem. They're at best band aids on a gaping chest wound of inequity, and at worst, things that can make us complacent.

Towards this end: 8 matches for regionals are only acceptable if we let them be, if we sit back and hope that the people in charge can somehow put the whole world on their shoulders. I know that the broader community can take some of that weight, but we need to actually step up and take it, and be welcomed to do so. It is not the person organizing volunteers who is doing the volunteers a favor by giving them a position-- it is a mutually beneficial relationship that doesn't work to its fullest potential unless both parties are willing to trust the other.

I am extremely proud, happy, excited about the progress robotics programs have made in MN and generally around the world, even since I started competing, but especially from the humble beginnings of FIRST in general. Yet there is so much more yet to be done. So much more we can do, and so much more that we can become. I can see this future in Michigan, I can see it from New England to the Pacific Northwest, and yes, I can see parts of it in Minnesota. But if we cannot take advantage of ALL the resources available to us-- this includes college students, alumni, and, more broadly, people that don't "fit the mold" of being key volunteers-- it is likely too difficult of a future for just a few people to build. FIRST excels at creating a community broader than just grey-haired professionals mentoring white suburban students-- we can leverage that incredible diversity of talent and passion to create a beautiful future for our communities.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

I know people who have been called up and told not to post here about districts in MN, or to be told that they would not be assigned to a volunteer role because of posts on social media or CD. I know that there are incredibly talented and passionate people who have just flat out given up on volunteering here in Minnesota because they no longer want to deal with the "Minnesota drama."

There's a lot of good discussion in this thread, but this comment by Nick is concerning. If the leadership of an organization is threatening volunteers for posting on CD about districts, I think that organization has larger problems than trying to make a switch to districts. Hopefully what Nick is referring to is a small number of isolated incidents as opposed to a concerted effort by a region to stifle open discussion.

[Chief Hedgehog]

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

You cannot speak for every team involved. This is true of your team and your area, but it is not universally true. When I was on 2220, the state tournament WAS seen as a glorified offseason event by many of us involved. Heck, I've been vocal in the past about that view point. Since then I've come to appreciate it much more-- making state was HUGE for 2667 last year.

That being said, I can't say that an extra event for ~30 out of 208 teams is nearly as important in my mind as getting EVERY team a second play, and possible triple the matches (without considering extra events like Champs, District Champs, a third play, or elimination matches). Up until this year, 4607 has been in the same 1-regional club as 2667, and I know you guys have been in the same boat of having bad luck ruin your chances of qualifying for Championships. You know how bad it is to be in that position, and, since you've made it to doing two regionals, I assume you know how hard it is to find the funds to do another event.

You are correct Nick - I should not have spoken for all teams in Minnesota. It is just that my team has our sights on the State Tourney every season. This is our main objective. And in the two seasons that we were fortunate enough to qualify - the other teams were all in to win it. A regional win (and it's qualification to the World Champs) is one thing, but to most school-attached teams, a State Tournament berth means much more to the local community.

As for my logic - if the team qualifies for the State Tourney, more than likely the team qualified for the Champs (or had been honored with great awards and finished high in the quals). So I always gear my kids up for a State Berth. Last year was a disappointment as our robot could not connect to FMS for 6 of the matches and browned out in 2. This year was different as we carried our alliance partners in the first day and then had to show our defensive prowess the last day.

I am optimistic that MN can get to Districts soon - and in doing so there should be a way that the 'District Championships' can also double as the MSHSL State Tournament. If this is a non-starter for either organization, then I feel that we will remain as a Regional area for some time - and that is a severe concern for the students and schools involved. At this point, there is little we can do about the problem.

I have been a MSHSL coach in multiple sports for over 10 years - and I know that sometimes the powers that be in that organization can be difficult. However, I am optimistic that with the strong growth of FRC in MN can help to sway some of the officials at the MSHSL office. A great concern for me is that there is no FRC/Robotics representation in the MSHSL office or in the MSHSCA ranks. I am also aware that they (MSHSL) do not want to set a precedent (as they have been sued a few times in the last number of years). This is a warranted concern.

For my part, I have been a coach for most of my adult life - and as much as I would like to think that all adults would look out for the betterment of student achievement, this is not always the case. But in the case of MN FIRST - and all of my dealings with them - they are truly looking out for the betterment of the students and the brand of MN FIRST.

I will end with this - FRC (and the CD Community) is amazing. Here we are debating what is best for the students and the teams. We are not arguing over trivial aspects - we are discussing (passionately) the potential growth problems of an organization that we all love. Where else do you find this type of discussion?

[ratdude747]

Originally Posted by Karthik

There's a lot of good discussion in this thread, but this comment by Nick is concerning. If the leadership of an organization is threatening volunteers for posting on CD about districts, I think that organization has larger problems than trying to make a switch to districts. Hopefully what Nick is referring to is a small number of isolated incidents as opposed to a concerted effort by a region to stifle open discussion.

I agree, although there are a number of things one gets told not to post on CD. There are several, as a young key volunteer, I've been told "you say nothing on chief" about without even mentioning chief. Obviously I won't say what they are, and the reasons why are sound.

My point here is that organizations labeling certain topics as "don't say on chief" isn't anything new, although I absolutely agree that MN Districts shouldn't be one of those topics, as long as it's discussed fairly and respectfully.

[FrankJ]

[quote=ratdude747;1556840]I agree, although there are a number of things one gets told not to post on CD. There are several, as a young key volunteer, I've been told "you say nothing on chief" about without even mentioning chief. Obviously I won't say what they are, and the reasons why are sound./QUOTE]

I have been volunteering with First for several years now. I have never been told not to comment on CD. I know quite a few senior volunteers and judges that post regularly on CD. Obviously there are subjects where they hold confidential information that they do not comment on. Other areas that would be inappropriate for them to comment on. They also have to be careful that their views are not interpreted to be First official positions. That is far from a general ban.

While this might not be total the other Frank's doing... I have noticed that First has been noticeably more responsive to the Fist communities comments and concerns during his directorship.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

John,
I was far from ungracious. I merely asked if Peter had knowledge of the things I listed. They are important in this discussion and I do have some knowledge of Minnesota events and their future. I do know that FIRST people in Minnesota are working very hard. Their work shows all over the state. Minnesota has more robotics teams than Boys Hockey. In a state that is hockey oriented that is a big whopping win.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Here's my question for you, and it's a simple one - Do you think 8 play regionals are a bad experience for teams?

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

...

Hi Mr Stratis,

I know this is a long thread, but I believe you missed this question directed at you. Just wanted to bring it to your attention.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by Gregor

Hi Mr Stratis,

I know this is a long thread, but I believe you missed this question directed at you. Just wanted to bring it to your attention.

It all depends on the team and their situation.

If you're talking about extending the day to add more plays, that could cause serious issues for teams - I've had teams that had to leave by a certain time due to school rules before, and extending the day would be bad for them.

If you're talking about ensuring fewer teams at events so each team gets more plays, then teams that have serious issues and need time to fix them would have a bad experience having to miss matches or sit on the field not moving because they couldn't get everything changed in time.

If you're talking about limiting the team numbers to ensure more plays, then you're actively reducing the number of teams that can play in a region. MN right now has spots for 246 teams to get plays. If we reduce each of our events to 40 teams, then we'll only have room for 160 teams to get plays. That means more teams would have to spend money traveling. Adding events is rather difficult, as it would mean more money - the current events would still cost about the same, and we'd need to add 2 more to keep the same number of plays in the state. That's an increase of 50% in donations to support our events for the same number of plays, something that simply can't happen.

So, is it bad for teams? You tell me. It might be good, it might be bad. It might be dependent on the year and the team in question. The only team I can answer that question for is my own, and I wouldn't want to answer it without getting direct feedback from my students.