Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ_Elliott
But this is kind of the point I am trying to make. To have another event is more money, more volunteers, more everything. So I think this is why people are thinking; "hey, instead of throwing more regionals at the state. Here is another way of doing it that has worked for people." And going to what Mr. Stratis said in the other thread. Does adding another regional or adding more plays create a more inspiring experience? It depends on the team. Will adding another regional in say the Thief River Falls area solve a large issue? Yes. But do we have to do that and that only. Is adding another regional the only option that MN FIRST has? No. I think this is why the idea of Minnesota moving to districts has been brought up so much.
|
Additionally, adding another regional is a MAJOR new cost to teams. I can't see 2667 being able to afford to attend a new regional even if we wanted to next year. Sure we'll work towards it, but it's very unlikely. We simply don't have $4000 plus travel expenses, and our area is pretty tapped out when it comes to finding new sponsors (though we are continually trying to identify and bring companies on board). We want to become a two regional team, but right now it's basically impossible and even if we get a new MN regional (or two, or half a dozen) it basically goes to being very, extremely difficult. Districts would let us do two events, even if we would have to decline a district championships invitation due to lack of funding (which might be more feasible to find if our additional event was something as ear-catching as a district or state championship).