(Lack of) Value in the Regional Model

[Kevin Kolodziej]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

The regional experience can be further improved independent of which areas become districts. FIRST HQ can make outlines to regional planning committees, regional directors, and FTAs more clear on the quantities of matches to be run. FIRST HQ can make outlines to the judges advisors about how to distribute judges. If anything, this sounds like a great place for input by the FRC team advocate*.

While the discussion about regionals vs districts is important, Sean hit the nail on the head. The fact is that districts WILL eventually be universal (for all but a few select locations), but until that happens, most of us are stuck with the regional model. This is not a *BAD* thing, but the regional model needs some refinement, and the areas that Sean hit on is exactly what I'm after.

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

While it would be nice to do six minute turn around times and give people more matches you also have to realize that there is little margin for error with such a tight window. Often the events will suffer death by a thousand paper cuts. A minute lost here, a minute lost there and next thing you know you are a half hour behind. God forbid something serious happens to the field or a team comes out that is just not connecting at all. It is really hard to make an event run smoothly without losing time. In my personal opinion I think they should at least do seven minute turnaround times for the championships but Ii know they are going to push for six minute turn around times. That's gonna be a tall order to pull off.

You're absolutely right. The schedule must be properly crafted to allow for unforeseen circumstances. The answer is not to universally apply 6 minute cycle times, but possibly to allow the cycle to be adjusted on the fly if things are going smoothly. Cycle time is also related to directives given for introductions, load-in/out of robots, and of course, field reset. We were spoiled last year where field reset was a piece of cake compared to this year. '13 wasn't terrible and neither was '12.

No doubt its a tough thing to figure out - if it were easy, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[JesseK]

For everyone comparing VA to Orlando, there is an external factor here. We have a new head of VA FIRST, and this was his first time running an event on this scale (AFAIK). I wouldn't worry about burdening him with telematics until he's had a chance to digest what it takes to run a successful FRC event. From the webcast, I think he did very well as there weren't any discernible issues.

I've seen several sides to how Regionals are run, including from a corporate sponsor's perspective. Sponsoring of venues for the DC or VCU events brings up the question of relative value every single year. This is especially highlighted by the fact that 1000's of kids over 8 years in local VRC and FTC events got just as much out of their competition events as FRC. Yet FRC itself is a premium program with its specific merits, so they continue to sponsor it.

I don't understand how the tradeoffs to districts in VA are any different from any other area of the country, especially those areas which have overcome the same problems inherent with transitioning to the district system that VA has. I seem to remember a survey about districts a couple of years ago, but I don't remember if the actual results were ever posted from that survey.\

Originally Posted by Sunshine

IMHO a big part (being redundant now) in the overall experience for kids is getting out and raising $$.

For teams who usually attend 2 Regionals and have a reserve for World Champs, the amount of fundraising will be the roughly same as a team who attends 2 district events, District Champs and has a reserve for World Champs. Thus I think the fundraising argument is somewhat weak.

Also, the kids will get 2 chances to present Chairman's by default at the District events. They'll get another opportunity at District Champs, if they got CA at a District Event.

[Nemo]

FIRST HQ makes the teams do their fundraising for them. We raise something like $20 million each year in the form of registration fees to pay for the cost of running FIRST HQ and whatever else it pays for.

FIRST doesn't tell us where this money goes. Their annual report has one line that says "XY million: FRC expenses," and that's all we get to see.

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Nemo

FIRST HQ makes the teams do their fundraising for them. We raise something like $20 million each year in the form of registration fees to pay for the cost of running FIRST HQ and whatever else it pays for.

IMO this is a good system. It promotes partnerships between schools (or other pre-college student groups) and industry sponsors, and it provides an entry-level for sponsoring the mission of FIRST: sponsor a team. Other kinds of sponsorship should begin there, because a sponsor needs to see FIRST from a team's perspective to understand how this thing of ours works.

Originally Posted by Nemo

FIRST doesn't tell us where this money goes. Their annual report has one line that says "XY million: FRC expenses," and that's all we get to see.

I expect this to change as Frank and his HQ team continuously improve transparency. Their track record since Frank took over the FRC is great and getting better all the time. The CD community can help by keeping our concern about transparency where FIRST can see it. Frank can't do this all by himself.

[MrRoboSteve]

Originally Posted by Nemo

FIRST HQ makes the teams do their fundraising for them. We raise something like $20 million each year in the form of registration fees to pay for the cost of running FIRST HQ and whatever else it pays for.

FIRST doesn't tell us where this money goes. Their annual report has one line that says "XY million: FRC expenses," and that's all we get to see.

It took me two minutes to find the audited financial statements and the form 990, which have a lot more data than "XY million: FRC expenses."

[ratdude747]

I will preface this post by reminding you, the viewer, that these are my personal opinions, nothing less, nothing more.

Having spent 7 years on the regional system, the most recent 3 as a volunteer, and this year on the district system, I have noticed some pro's and con's to both systems. Here's my personal take on switching to districts:

Pro's:

-Lower cost to Teams. Registration gets 2 events, not 1, out of the box, with a third only $1000 more (not $4000).
-More matches per team: as the Scorekeeper at all IN events this year, We have been (IIRC as per FIRST mandate) giving teams 12 Qual Matches per event.
-Reduced Travel costs: Fewer days and shorter travel distances (for most teams, minus border teams).
-More local events: In my case, as opposed to only being able to do 2 local events as a volunteer, now I can do 4. While many do not have schedules that this benifits, for those that do and love to volunteer, it is indeed a plus and also builds the "family" within the State's volunteers.

Con's:

-Higher up front costs to the state's organization: The state has to provide all the AV equipment, volunteer radios (minus the referees), Field perimeter (yay AndyMark for a lower cost field), and as we found out, the medals rack for the awards ceremony.
-Fewer "consumables"; We were shorted on name Badges and T-shirts... while the latter is not much of an issue as there is a lot of overlap between even crews, the Name badges are cheap enough that it feels, honestly, skimpy. Hence why my Badge has now two (soon, three) crossed out event names on it.
-(perceived) lower priority with support from HQ. There have been a few things that I am not going to mention publicly on CD (PM me if you REALLY want to know) that, at least from the sound of things, would we have been a regional event, would have been immediately fixed, but instead, as a district, are "less of an issue" and have been left in limbo. Obviously, the show must go on either way, and thanks to our determination we've pushed through the setbacks so much that most attendees wouldn't have noticed anything.
-Higher cost of Teams going to Championships. For a Non-HOF and Non-Legacy team (or a team not pre-qualified), they must effectively pay $4000 extra if they want to go to Worlds. Why? Their only two routes to get there are either thorough a regional as a 3rd event or making and attending State Champs, both of which are a $4000 check to HQ away. Sure, you get another event out of the deal, but if you want to play, you (or sponsors) gotta pay.

Non-issues:
-Size: the size and "flash" don't seem to be as big of a thing as one would have thought beforehand. While the audio and lighting isn't as good, the volunteer AV crew has done a great job (being scorekeeper, I have to work with them a lot).


Final thoughts:

Districts are the way of the future, like it or not. There have been and will be some growing pains as more places adopt the system. Once more areas are on it, I imagine that a lot of the con's on my list will no longer apply or be much reduced. However, the one issue that could be troublesome is championship fee issue, which to me, conflicts with the idea of having a bigger championship. There is only so much money in circulation, and to me, making championships should be a matter of merit, not of wealth. Sure, there has to be some cost somewhere, but this IMHO isn't the way to go. Overall, however, the system can be made to work well, better than the regional system, especially if the local FIRST family has enough determination and supports one another.

(again, there are my personal thoughts, no the thoughts of anybody else but me).

[mathking]

Joe said:

I believe that the District Model is the way FIRST gets us where we want to go: FIRST Robotics = Something Every High School Just Does.

This is what I want. Yes FIRST is expensive. But it is not really outrageously expensive compared to operating sports teams. (For the record, I am firm supporter of sports teams, and have read the article cited earlier in this thread about sports teams vs. math students and as a trained statistician have a few quibbles with it.) Most schools could probably afford $10000 a year to support a FIRST team as long as the team had a decent number of students. And if schools contribute more it should be easier to get sponsors to help when teams qualify to the district or world championships. Think about the cost of a field perimeter. Fairly expensive for one school. Not as great a cost for a group of schools. Think of your school's athletic league purchasing one for its teams to use. Furthermore, when this becomes something that schools just do, then travel costs for the first level of competition drop dramatically.

Yes, I will miss seeing some of the teams from far away (and maybe with inter-district play some of this could come back) but I will also be highly gratified to see kids from the local schools that don't have teams get a chance to play. And it will be fun to play some of our local rivals. I also coach track and field and cross country. These are two sports in which the opponents are often friends as well as rivals. I believe the quality of play will improve as we get more scrimmages and there is more local support for teams.

Yes the district model is more expensive than a regional model if you are a team that plans on one regional and the championship. But how many teams is that really? And most of those are probably infrequent qualifiers to the championship. The district model gives you a chance to more easily earn advancement to another level of competition. For some teams this could be a really a big deal. As I said in an earlier thread, we have been lucky enough to qualify for the world championships fairly often. Many other local teams have not. For teams that routinely attend at least two competitions before the Championships the district model offers a more economical model. For us, it would make attending two competitions an every year thing instead of a twice in thirteen years thing.

As for venues, I agree that all other things being equal, the big venues have more wow factor. But that is all other things being equal. Anyone who has ever been to a high school basketball game in Indiana can attest to the fact that even a small gym can be absolutely rocking with excitement. A good sized high school gym with a full crowd can be every bit as exciting as a half full college arena. It can certainly be louder. I think a lot of how such an event comes off depends on how the adults approach it. Any coach can tell you that the mental state of a team depends a lot on how the coach prepares them. I find it hard to believe, for example, that team 379 attends will not be a loud, exciting affair.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by JesseK

For everyone comparing VA to Orlando, there is an external factor here. We have a new head of VA FIRST, and this was his first time running an event on this scale (AFAIK). I wouldn't worry about burdening him with telematics until he's had a chance to digest what it takes to run a successful FRC event. From the webcast, I think he did very well as there weren't any discernible issues.

I've seen several sides to how Regionals are run, including from a corporate sponsor's perspective. Sponsoring of venues for the DC or VCU events brings up the question of relative value every single year. This is especially highlighted by the fact that 1000's of kids over 8 years in local VRC and FTC events got just as much out of their competition events as FRC. Yet FRC itself is a premium program with its specific merits, so they continue to sponsor it.

I don't understand how the tradeoffs to districts in VA are any different from any other area of the country, especially those areas which have overcome the same problems inherent with transitioning to the district system that VA has. I seem to remember a survey about districts a couple of years ago, but I don't remember if the actual results were ever posted from that survey.\


For teams who usually attend 2 Regionals and have a reserve for World Champs, the amount of fundraising will be the roughly same as a team who attends 2 district events, District Champs and has a reserve for World Champs. Thus I think the fundraising argument is somewhat weak.

Also, the kids will get 2 chances to present Chairman's by default at the District events. They'll get another opportunity at District Champs, if they got CA at a District Event.

I don't think Stan set the cycle time at VA. Jeff Wetzel was the FTA at the event and he posts on here frequently so if he catches this he could provide insight. I wouldn't be surprised if the long cycle times were due to the occasional really long delays in connecting on Thursday, but I have no clue what it was.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Sunshine

I for one do not like the idea of playing in a HS gym. Playing in a large arena is an experience most of our students and their families will never get otherwise.

Agreed, however FRC has started a trend of hosting actual regional events at high schools. There are four regionals at high schools this season, and I expect that number to grow in the future. (Unless the switch to districts happens a lot faster than anticipated.

[smart1]

Just a hypothetical question I have about first switching to districts, what about teams in Iowa or other states with few Frc teams? What would they do?

[cadandcookies]

Originally Posted by smart1

Just a hypothetical question I have about first switching to districts, what about teams in Iowa or other states with few Frc teams? What would they do?

In past threads there have been a few different suggestions-- ranging from voluntary inclusion (something that seems unlikely), to having them play at other regional events. Personally, I'd love to see a North-Midwest (MN, WI, IA, ND, SD) District system happen somehow, but that seems pretty unlikely based on current precedents.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

In past threads there have been a few different suggestions-- ranging from voluntary inclusion (something that seems unlikely), to having them play at other regional events. Personally, I'd love to see a North-Midwest (MN, WI, IA, ND, SD) District system happen somehow, but that seems pretty unlikely based on current precedents.

I've always been a fan of keeping a few traditional regionals around like back in the "Open" days, even with 90+% of FRC in the district system. Have a Midwest, Southwest, Pacific, Southeast, Northeast, Hawaii, Eurpoean, and Pan-Pacific "Open" that stick around. Just like regionals, but outside of teams that have to go there, other teams can apply to go to the open tournaments.

[Bruceb]

I for one do not like playing only with my neighbors. I like meeting and competing with teams from around the country and world. That's why we do Midwest, for the international feel.

I've always felt the Wisconsin Regional was very well run. I like the venue floor, the seating and the downtown atmosphere.

As you know, FIRST is more than just building robots. One of the great experiences our kids get involves fundraising and securing sponsors. This allows us to do two regionals. The second one at a location of our choice. This extends the season for our students and enriches the experience. Also gives them twice as many matches. As a side note, doing regionals around the Midwest has taught me just how appreciative I am about the Wisconsin Regional.

Please FIRST, keep both models and let people choose. As a consumer I like choices. I will not choose attending the high school gym. Hate the bleacher environment, FIRST is better than that.[/quote]




I second this completely.!!!

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by Bruceb

I for one do not like playing only with my neighbors. I like meeting and competing with teams from around the country and world.

I'm a big fan of meeting teams from faraway places. Now that Indiana is doing District events, I figure I can get my "exotic" fix at IRI. :-) I'm also looking forward to further refinements of the cross-district competition rules, with more teams ranging further afield.

The other big opportunity is the FIRST Championship. If you want to play with world-wide teams, that's an incentive to be a world-class team yourself.

That's why we do Midwest, for the international feel.

The last time the TechnoKats attended the Midwest Regional, I got quite a different "feel". It seemed like a big block of Chicago teams with a few further-away teams struggling to be inspiring against a tide of unexcited local students. That is likely because I spent much of my time there trying to work with some of the most underperforming, underfunded, and undermentored teams there, but it's what I took away from the event.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Bruceb

I for one do not like playing only with my neighbors. I like meeting and competing with teams from around the country and world. That's why we do Midwest, for the international feel.

I volunteer at events far and wide and there isn't really all that many teams that go to the event outside the area (unless you're a destination event like Orlando or NYC and even then there's not a huge number of teams coming from far and away). GTCR was strictly Canadian teams with only one team from Quebec. The show went on fine.
Like Alan said I can get my exotic fix from the off season (and championships, of course).