MI is the best?

[Jim Schaddelee]

Originally Posted by Hot_Copper_Frog

I think that people are assuming that having a small but incredibly elite cohort of teams is what makes Michigan successful, but I have to disagree. The district system may have "watered down" competitions in the sense that the most competitive teams are no longer playing together at every event, but it allows a large number of teams to play with and learn from them.

Is it more effective to have the top 10 teams at one district, or to have each of those teams at a different district? If you spread them out, younger and more inexperienced teams have the opportunity to interact with powerhouse teams and learn from them. While it might be more exciting to witness a bunch of them gathered at one competition, it's really not helping teams improve.

Rising tides lift all boats. If we work together to support our low resource and newer teams, we will create a stronger FIRST community as a whole.

I agree with what you are saying ,totally. The purpose of a super regional is for these teams that compete and to spread the knowledge gained, not to be elitist. Teams compete at multiple districts every year and that how the knowledge gets out. Maybe we need to schedule more time at districts for training. I don't consider my team to be "elite" we are good and the only reason we are even "good" is because of "great" ie. ( 71 111 67 33 in the early days and teams like 2054 1114 ) teams inspire us to work hard to improve.