New FIRST competition structure in Michigan

[Karibou]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

Hopefully, at the end of the 2009 season, we will all learn of the benefits that come from this 'experiment' and how the teams were impacted.

True. That makes me wonder...at the end of the season, I'll either be glad that I was part of the experiment if it works out excellently, or upset if it doesn't really work out so well.

Now, my question is, if this expands, will everyone be confined to their own state for regionals? If all states were to adopt this, then nobody would be able to travel out of state for a regional, correct?

[Billfred]

As a traveler to many more events, I've long known the benefits multiple events can offer a team. As a mentor to a one-regional team that lost its local regional to another university three hours off, I've long been frustrated by the astronomically high cost of going to a second event. Even with a relatively small traveling crew (I think we brought about 15 students and about eight teachers, mentors, and spouses), the costs related to getting to an event and staying overnight can double the $4,000 required to register for the second event. If this program can achieve its aims of bringing more chances to play closer to teams, I'd gladly trade some of the bright lights.

[Madison]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

One way to look at this is that we have to start somewhere. It appears that Michigan has established/is establishing an infrastructure that can provide this opportunity as one possible solution to the growth/costs/concerns.

Any time there is change, concerns/risks arise and they should be addressed by the volunteer leadership. Hopefully, at the end of the 2009 season, we will all learn of the benefits that come from this 'experiment' and how the teams were impacted.

I expressed some concern about the quality of an event run with a smaller budget last year with respect to the Kettering Rookie event, another pilot program in Michigan.

While I can't speak for communication through other channels, there has been remarkably little discussion here about that event. There appear to be few photos from the event in CD-Media and what discussion I've found seems to focus heavily on the benefit of the program to rookie teams and not at all on the quality of the experience when compared to that provided by other regional events.

As a pilot, the implication is that this structure may be implemented elsewhere in the future. Why, then, has there been little information about the organization of this pilot -- and the success of last year's pilot -- presented to FIRST volunteers in other parts of the country? Again, maybe that information is available through other channels, but this is the first that many have heard of this.

A lot about this is being kept close to the vest and that makes me uneasy.

[Ken Streeter]

Originally Posted by dlavery

What do you think?

My initial impression upon reading the announcement is that this would be a great year to be a team in Michigan! The proposed structure scales much better to eventually having a FIRST team in every high school, lowers cost for the bulk of participants, and results in more playing time for Michigan teams.

Michigan teams, for a lower initial entry fee then teams in other states, will get to attend two district events, rather than one regional event. This is a big benefit, as not only do these Michigan teams get more playing time for less money, but they have the opportunity to think about, and then fix, the robot in between the two district events. In order for teams in other states to have that opportunity, they need to register for not only one regional, but two regionals, at a total cost of $10000 - ($6000 for initial event; $4000 for the subsequent event.)

Seems to me that this would be a great year to be a Michigan team, as a Michigan team that in 2009 attended 2 regionals for a total cost of $10000 will likely be able to attend possibly as many as 4 tournaments for the same price. (2 Michigan district events, the Michigan championship (assuming they qualify), and an out-of-state event.) The savings for low-budget teams will be even greater -- a one-regional attendee in 2008 ($6000 total) will now be able to attend two district events (twice as much play time!) for significantly less than $6000, plus have time to think about (and then fix) the robot in between those two district events.

Hopefully the Michigan FIRST program will be able to realize some significant growth in 2009, plus make it possible for continued scalable growth in 2010!

I'm also very glad that the regional we attend in NH isn't abutting Michigan -- I think Michigan teams venturing out of state to late-season regionals will enjoy a significant advantage with respect to increased playing experience as compared with the non-Michigan teams at those same regionals. (The same holds true for the Michigan teams attending the Championships.)

[Pat McCarthy]

To answer a few questions based on the info I have (not the official word, by any means):

There will be 7 district events and 1 state championship.
Each district event will have approximately 35-40 team capacity for 2009.
Each district event will have similar audio/visual set up to the 2008 Kettering Rookie event, which lowers the cost of each event.
$5000 covers FRC registration, KOP, and two district event entries.
$4000 for Michigan State Championship entry, which will be the regular FRC Regional Event A/V set up. The MI State Championship will be held at Eastern Michigan University in 2009.

Michigan teams wishing to attend out of state regionals will pay the usual fee for second regional attendance.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by dlavery

What do you think?

So much for doing the Dallas-Detroit "Home & Home" exchange with 217.

-John

[Don Wright]

First of all, I would like to congratulate and thank the people in MI FIRST that put in all the time and effort generating this pilot and are taking the risk to try something new to try and advance FIRST. I'm sure there have been hundreds (if not thousands) of hours put into this and it's only to do one thing...make FIRST better.

Second...this wasn't done to give Michigan teams any advantage in awards, playing time, or chances in Atlanta. It is to try something that will hopefully help FIRST.

I think we are getting ahead of ourselves thinking about how this will roll out to the rest of FIRST... While we need to think about it, I think it's too early to focus on it.

As for some comments raised in this thread...

1. I think the NI control issue is irrelevant to this pilot. It is going to be a challenge regardless if it's at a district type event, or a traditional regional. I am sure the technical level of the volunteers at the district events will match a traditional regional. The district just might not be as flashy.

2. I would think that the experience for a team competing at two, lower cost, less flashy, district events would be better than the experience of only one big regional because that is all they can afford.

I also think that some of the more interesting points are being overlooked in this thread...

1. The MI teams being able to keep their robots instead of shipping them (BIG cost savings here!!!).
2. The 8 hour fix-it day before the district events

And last but not least, thanks to FIRST for considering and implementing this pilot. It's easy to keep doing what we've being doing since it's a success. Plus, I am sure there will be a lot of people complaining one way or another about this and I think their open mindedness is great!

[Cory]

People have been referencing this being a necessary step for FRC to continue growing.

I say why do we want FRC to keep growing?

It's an unrealistic goal for FRC to be in every school in the country. It's not happening; not now, not ever; not even if there's a regional event within 3 blocks of every high school in America.

Why do we want to continue to oversaturate local economies? Most teams are barely staying afloat year to year as it is. Many teams have to drop out after a few years.

It's been my opinion for a very long time that FIRST ought to spend all their effort making their FRC teams as strong as they possibly can, not worrying about being able to claim abc% of of schools in state xyz have FRC teams.

How is the program going to be better off having 3,000 teams, with most of them not having proper resources (mentors, teachers, corporate sponsors, etc), vs 1500 teams that have a strong base to work from.

Prior to dropping VEX, I saw FTC as the most viable platform for having a team in every school in the country. At this point I'd be perfectly happy to see a period of a few years where we see zero rookie teams, and no veteran teams dropping out.

That said, I don't like this idea at all. I don't like change in general, but I've got to say I'm glad it's not CA that's following this model.

I have a couple of main issues with this plan:

1) Regionals will feel more like high school sporting events. They will not be nearly as impressive as they currently are. Which is going to look better to sponsors, potential benefactors, etc: taking them to a high school gym, without all the A/V, and everything else that makes a FIRST event special, or taking them to a professional sporting venue filled with FIRST teams, professional A/V, etc? It'll be like a bunch of offseason events.

Now people may argue IRI, and yes, IRI is better than most regionals--but for a couple key reasons. At IRI you have 72 of the best teams in the country. It could literally be held in a cornfield in the middle of Indiana and nobody would care, because the competition is simply that good. IRI also has amazingly dedicated volunteers, who have been doing this for the better part of a decade. How many of these district events will have planners with this much experience? Not many.

2) Quality/variety of teams. This probably won't be noticed in MI, since MI is home to many of FIRST's best teams, but I can guarantee it will be elsewhere. In states without an abundance of top teams, the competitions will not be very exciting. It's boring watching FRC events without good robots,and without having non-local talent coming in to the historically weaker events, you end up with the same group of teams, and a not very exciting competition. Even if we disregard such situations, one of the best parts of a regional event is getting to meet and play with new teams from all over the country (and Canada, Mexico, Brazil, etc).

Such a situation leaves me with 2 conclusions: either everyone stays home so they can maximize their number of events, or all the powerhouse teams don't play at home, so that they can see some variety, and play with the best of the best. I'm not a fan of either situation.

[dtk]

While the district events will not be identical copies of the regional events the intention is to make them look and feel as close as possible. The Kettering Rookie Regional from last year was a proof of concept and not the final plan for these district events. It is likely that it will be dressed up even more for the district version. I would expect the district events to come very close to a full regional in the look and feel department.

A lot of the cost reduction is not coming from cutting things out of the event, but instead from leveraging the support of venues and local sponsors to receive more things at reduced costs.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Karibou

Now, my question is, if this expands, will everyone be confined to their own state for regionals? If all states were to adopt this, then nobody would be able to travel out of state for a regional, correct?

I think this is such a good question. Based on the information we have now, I think it would mean that everyone has to compete in thier own state, untill the Championship. Meeting and working with new and different teams from accross the country is always fun and worthwhile and shouldn't only be for those team who qualify for the Championship. If this is the case, I would be very interested to see how the style of play differs from state to state and then how all the styles blend in Atlanta. Overall, I'm think this is a great idea and I'm excited to see how it works out, but this one part I'm not a fan of.

[JaneYoung]

Part of the bigger picture is the developing future/careers of scientists, mathematicians, and engineers - high schoolers graduating and moving on into those fields. Making the competitions more readily available in all the competitive areas of FIRST would help drive this.

There is life beyond FIRST. It is in the career choices that are being made and will continue to be made by its members and alumni. That is a short term and a long term goal that does and will impact our communities and our world.

[Travis Hoffman]

Originally Posted by Ken Streeter

I'm also very glad that the regional we attend in NH isn't abutting Michigan -- I think Michigan teams venturing out of state to late-season regionals will enjoy a significant advantage with respect to increased playing experience as compared with the non-Michigan teams at those same regionals. (The same holds true for the Michigan teams attending the Championships.)

Question is, when will the district events and MI championship be scheduled relative to the adjoining out of state regionals?

[dtk]

The single largest reason why the district events are being limited to Michigan teams only for the 2009 season is logistics. The amount of work required to start up a single new event is enormous. For 2009 Michigan is going to go from three events to a total of eight. This number of events should just barely ensure two spots for every team in the state, depending on the number of rookies. It was simply not feasible to add enough events to have slots available for out of state teams. This, however, does not preclude that possibility from existing in the future.

[Cory]

Perhaps my biggest concern, which I forgot to even mention, is how will FIRST find enough volunteers?

They're already hard pressed to find enough qualified people for the key jobs each regional requires. Now Michigan will have 2.5 times the number of events they held in 2008, plus they will not have the volunteers that potentially came to the event with their out of state teams. Nor can they feasibly expect the same volunteers to volunteer twice as many times as last year. Where will all the new volunteers come from, and will there be enough qualified volunteers to fill crucial positions, without the event suffering?

[Madison]

I've read comparisons to organized high school sports and things like Little League, but it seems to me that these things would not be nearly as popular were it not for their professional counterparts. FIRST agrees, even, going so far as to teach us that a culture cultivates what it celebrates.

This feels to me like FIRST is creating Little League before it creates Major League Baseball.