One coach rule

[nick reynolds]

Im not overly happy about the one coach rule, and speaking for my self I will explain.
We are very lucky to have a reasonably large amount of very dedicated adults who work very close with the students. They each deserve their moment in glory and to expierience the joy of being on stage, They worked for it and deserve it.
At a normal regional you might get 8 games and that would mean that only 8 adults get the chance to be on stage, When there were 2 coaches then 16 adults got to enjoy the thrill. We even had sponsors get the chance to go up on stage.
I really dont think in the 2 minutes of the game that adults make that much of a diference as the game plan is going to go the way its going to go. One good reason to have an extra adult on the stage is to help the students get off the field safely as many times when the team wins the students go into balistic mode, not that the adults dont but to a lesser degree.
I hope F.I.R.S.T. will reconsider this poor move or some adults may think that theres no reward for all the hard work they have done, now before every one shoots down my "Reward" word I only want you to understand that its a "Reward" as an EXTRA perk. I love the perks of being on stage, it makes me feel like a kid again.
Nick237....... 237 is the team # not my age.

[David Kelly]

see this thread http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1486

[Raul]

As I said in a previous post, the need to keep track of points this year just as in 2000 magnifies the need for a second coach/mentor or whatever. I believe this game requires the extar coach and thus this was the wrong year to reduce the number of people in the driver station.

I am not necessarily arguing that it should be two adult coaches. Some teams prefer strictly students as coaches. The point is to have the extra person up there to help keep track of whether you are winning or losing and by how much. And, of course, the idea of giving one more person, whether student or adult, a chance to experience being on stage is very important as perk or reward.

Raul

[Jeff Waegelin]

With a few exceptions for single matches, our team has always used a 5 student team. Only occasionally did we let an adult on.
I personally think that two coaches are necessary, be they students or adults, due to the need to keep track of the field as a whole for strategy to work best.

[JVN]

There are 2 coaches per alliance, they should be able to communicate pretty well... One of them could be used to keep track of the score... the human player could also be used in this respect (when he/she isn't busy lobbing halfcourt shots to even out the score).

I think this year we're gonna have to work on (just like in 2000) merging 2 team's "field crews" into one effectively working unit.

but... since it looks like I'm gonna be the coach... I wouldn't mind some help :D Im not sure If I want the kind of pressure that comes with coaching alone.

~JVN
Strategy Head, and reluctant coach for team 229
Clarkson U

[Ed Sparks]

I'm gonna stick my neck waaaaay out there with this statement but I believe that:

FIRST isn't ONLY about the students.......


There, I said it, now let me explain a little.

I'm here to tell you (especially those who want the adults held to minimal involvement) that we mentors often get "life changing experiences" when we experience the thrill of participating in a positive way with our students on the field. It is an experience I have never been able to justify with words. I've been elected to be a coach every year that out team has been in existence (5 years so far) and every time I go to the field, I fall deeper into my commitment to the values of FIRST. I always used the second coaching position to involve other team mentors and students so that they too can experience the thrill of the "Floor". The sounds, the point of view, the excitement, the thrill of victory, and the aggony of defeat are far more intensive when experience inside those white lines on the carpet. Just ask anyone who's been there.

If FIRST or the FIRST community continually detract from the "payoffs" of this experience, I fear that good folks may leave the program and that would be unfortunate. All of the mentors want to be important in some way at some level. To say they are not welcome or in some in-direct way say that they are not important would jeopardize their involvement. We all have ego's, it's a normal thing.

Once again, This isn't a student robot contest. It's a challenge to inspire students. Do this in whatever way your team chooses but don't write rules to limit the options.

Just my humble opinion.

I'll step off the box now........ :)

[Todd Derbyshire]

Ok so the only people you can have in the player station is a coach two operators and a human player right. Out of these people you can have 3 students and an adult or four students. It seems to me that alot of the strategy this year is going to have to be taught to the drive team as now only one coach is going to be able to tell the kids what to do. People are saying use the human player to keep track of the game but he or she can't do that because he or she is launching balls at goals for the game plus a human player is always positioned in the back of the player station therefore they really can't see the development of the game. I believe that an excellent scouting team and an intelligent drive team is the key to victory this year.


Todd who sees a foreshadowing of watching qualification matches the night before the elimination rounds in the hotel room in Florida!!!!!!

[Anton Abaya]

now for my 2 cents.

The students are ninnies. But so are the coaches too.

This is both a good thing for some teams, and a bad thing for others. On my team, it was simple. One coach was there to strategize, the other was to coach the students on what NOT to do on the robot (dont break it, or dont overdo something).

On occassion, the students may come up with a strategy. But on some teams, the students arent that bright. On some teams coaches might fight. And on others, coaches might be too forceful. Though adults probably will not fight, students might.

So it is a mixed blessing. I still think they should not have done it. I think FIRST should ask us before they make major decisions like these.

After all, isnt this our competition too?

-anton

[Nate Smith]

Originally posted by Anton Abaya
I think FIRST should ask us before they make major decisions like these.


If my memory serves me correctly, this very topic was brought up at the MI team forum...it was a very heated discussion over whether there should be adults in the driver station...several possible solutions were presented(none of which I remember right now), but it appears they may have tried to take a middle ground by eliminating one person from the field team, rather than explicitely saying "one coach must be a student."

[Raul]

Ed Sparks, I congratulate you on sticking your neck out and saying what many of us also feel.

This rule sucks for many reasons. IT DOES NOT SOLVE ANY PROBLEMS! Or, at least it creates more problems than it solves. I will not list them all since many have already stated them in some form or another.

FIRST, if you are listening, I hope your reconsider!

[Raul]

I even have to change my title from "Engineer/Coach on #111" to "Engineer on #111"!:(

Raul

[Tom Fairchild]

Honestly, I'm relatively insulted with what you people expect out of the students. Last year, I was the driver for my team. We had two adult mentors out for most of the matches, with a student programmer replacing one of the adults every now and then when we had potentiometer issues. The coaches job was to make sure the me and the other operator were aware of other things happening on the field that were not near our robot. They also helped count down time for us as well. I was the one who strategized with the other teams. I don't see how teams could do it any other way. The impression that I get in some of these posts is that adults need to be there in case something doesn't work that someone who knows about the robot could be there to know what's going on. I knew as much about last year's robot as most of our mentor's.

~Tom Fairchild~, who was a driver and a student and still knew everything about his bot.

edit: I feel like I should tag a little extra onto this post. Usually it was when mentors got involved in strategy talks that we got into problems. Yes, I realize that coaches also do many more valuable things, especially this year when they can keep track of score, but have a little faith in us "children." We'll do just fine.

[Chris Hibner]

Since FIRST reads these forums, I figure that the more people that complain, the more likely things will change. Therefore:

I agree with everything from Nick, Raul, and Ed Sparks. Ed really hit the nail on the head as far as I'm concerned. The time I spend with the students during the matches is what keeps me energized throughout this whole thing. I would hate to have that taken away. I hope FIRST reconsiders this and makes a change before the first regional.

[Kit Gerhart]

Ed and Raul, now that you have 'stuck your necks out,' I will do so as well.

I am now starting my seventh year as an engineer/mentor with our team. I have been involved because I feel that I am helping kids develop an interest in science and technology, but I have other, selfish reasons as well. I like being involved in competitions with machines, whether robots, model airplanes, or cars, and I like being "where the action is." The closest you can get to that as an adult member of a FIRST team is to be an on-field coach. I really like being in that position during matches, just as Woody likes starting the matches and Dean likes talking about FIRST while standing on his new invention.

I have been a coach for three of my six years on our team. I have earned the position largely because I "know the robot" and how it performs better than the other potential coaches, and I generally get along well with the students. I have lead the testing and evaluation our driver candidates most of my years of participation.

The bottom line is this. I am one of many adult mentors within FIRST who like being on stage during matches, and who feels that we have "earned" the chance to be there. There are a lot more of us than one per team. It is highly likely that with a "one coach" rule, I would never have had that opportunity because I am not the best negotiator on our team, and because I am not in an official "team leadership" position on the team. If there were only one coach, I would not have been that person, and I think I can safely say that, had I not had the opportunity to be a coach those three years, I would have "faded away" from involvement with our team years ago.

I don't expect to be "the" coach this year, not do I care too much because I have had my chance in previous years. We have other people on our team who would do a better job than I would in some ways, and who deserve the opportunity. The reason I agree strongly with Raul that 'this rule sucks' is that, had it been in place six years ago, it is very unlikely that I would still be involved in FIRST, and I am far from the only adult mentor who would be affected this way.

Lets all go have fun now.

[kevinw]

When TRW Automotive Electronics started a FIRST team, we had a number of engineers who volunteered their time. However, the time commitment is significant, and only a small core of engineers has returned year after year, until this core is basically all that remains. If the one coach rule had been in effect from the beginning, this core would probably be 2 engineers smaller or so. I imagine it would be a short time before we no longer had enough engineering support for a team. Is the 1 coach rule really helping the students? Perhaps in the short term by reducing the number of strategists, but I sincerely doubt that this will be positive in the long term. Was this the main goal of reducing the number of participants on the field? Probably. Will the trade-offs be worth it in the end? I suspect not.

[SharkBite]

i know for some teams the one coach rule is a dissapointment for the coaches, but to be perfectly honest the driver team should be fine without them. Unless the driver is brand new, they tend to be the strategist on our team and it works out really well in most cases. Sometimes a coach can offer insight on something or help to calculate the current score but two coaches are not needed to do this. Also, a relatively inactive human player (once the balls are gone, thats it) can be used to help tally the score as well. Even so, the extra person to help carry equiptment will be missed


Becky

[Ed Sparks]

Sharkbite,


It's not about extra eyes, or an extra brain, or someone to help carry hardware. It's about wanting to go to the battle. It's just as much an adrenaline rush for the mentors as it is for the student drivers and human player. It's about celebrating all of the hard work that we (mentors) put into the program. It's about being a team in competition as we were in the design phase. It's about the high fives and the "That's OK" huggs.

I (and all of the other mentors) know that the students could compete without any mentor coaches. I just think "inspiration" applies to both the students and mentors and this new rule erodes mentor inspiration.

I hope FIRST re-thinks this ...... :(

[kevinw]

My sentiments exactly, Ed.

[Anne Shade]

On the team that I was on last year (608), we, the Georgia Tech students, acted as coaches/engineers. We found that when up on stage, we were often treated as high school students. The adults often try to take control of the situation and be very forceful. They often did not listen to ideas from us or high school students. Students are able to develop adequate strategies and to know enough about their robot to compete on stage (or at least they should). I from experience that being on stage is a great high but these are high school teams and the high school students should at least have the oppportunity to run the show. I agree with there only being one adult per team so that the students are able to make the decisions. I realize that not all the adults are this way but there are enough that are to make it difficult for us younger people. I do agree that having 2 coaches per team would be much better but I think FIRST wanted to test a new method. Just my opinion.

[Joe Johnson]

I think it was just fine having 2 mentors with the drive team.

I agree that it is inspirational for the kids and for the mentors to be out there with the drive team.

Our team has historically had a teacher and an engineer as coaches on the field.

This year we will have only one or the other. We will get over it but it will be difficult to choose between them.

I join with Ed in his call for FIRST to rethink this rule.

Joe J.

[s_alaniz]

... I Agree with FIRST... not that I DISagree with everyone else. There HAS to be a LEAST one mentor coach. Leadership inpiration should extend to the actual competition so the adult mentor coach is NECESSARY. Besides, some teams DO need an adult coach to bear the ultimate responsibility for the team's performance. That's not a responsibility I would put on a student. (That sound was the sound of all 600+ teams chimeing in saying THEIR team is the exception and really don't need adults...)

I think it's interesting so many people want to defend additional coaches because of the "Thrill" of being up front. And a little disappointing. Last year, I got to go on stage as a coach but not because of our team. PBS was filming our team for a documentary and they were having problems keeping their "on robot camera" operating so I went along to help with technical difficulties. Yes it IS an exciting place. However, in my previous 5 years as a mentor I have never been on stage and if you think about it, MOST team student members participating in F.I.R.S.T. will never get to go on stage.
We have a problem every year becase EVERY team member wants to be the guy on the joysticks. I tell our students that's not what it's all about and as a mentor showing example, I defer to people I think are better suited as coaches. I sit in the stands, I cheer, (I do my bird imitations), I do what I can to support the team. I think this is also part of the "Gracious Professionalism" we point to as a hallmark of F.I.R.S.T. I will not be on stage at all this year and that's OK. I know who I believe is best suited as team coach so I have no problem with the one coach rule.

Two coaches would be fine, but NOT just for the "Thrill" factor.


Best to all

Steve


"What good is technology if you can't abuse it?" - Ted Forth

[Ed Sparks]

It's great that we can all have our own opinion........

but

It saddens me that you are reducing what I'm trying to say to getting a "Thrill".

That's not it either.

I'm done with this thread, not that I'm taking my soccer ball and going home, I just said what needed to be said and I hope others will do the same. I leave it to the other mentors.

:)

[Paul Copioli]

Well, here goes my take ... I, too will probably be sticking my neck out.

I have been following this debate since before last year's forums. Last year's competition seemed to bring out the worst in all of us, students, coaches, etc. Now I know that not everyone acted like a ninny, BUT this debate really heated up after the bad experiences started piling up. I watched this discussion turn into a mentor vs. student debate. There are several students on this forum that have taken the stand that they don't need the engineers/mentors, etc. I also understand that there are several student run teams. If you think that you are doing just fine without any mentors, you have missed the entire point of FIRST. One thing FIRST is about is giving young adults people they can look up to, and be inspired by, other than professional athletes, racecar drivers, etc. Think of it as giving young people real life heros. The tone I have noticed in MANY student posts dating back to last year is that of "we really don't need the adults" and that saddens me. Like many other engineers on this forum, I give my heart and soul to our team and if our students had a "we don't need the engineers" attitude, I guarantee I would not be involved. FIRST is about inspiring students, FIRST is about getting students excited about engineering and the sciences, FIRST is NOT about pitting the students against the mentors.

My stands on this issue:

1. reducing the number to 4 is the biggest problem

2. Telling teams how many of the coaches have to be adults/students is detrimental

3. By FIRST reducing the number of adult mentors, they are saying that the adults are getting in the way ... wrong message.

-Paul

[s_alaniz]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ed Sparks
[B]Sharkbite,


"It's about wanting to go to the battle. It's just as much an adrenaline rush for the mentors as it is for the student drivers and human player. "


Geez Ed... Sorry if I mis-interperted what you wrote.... but hey that sentence sounded like "Thrill" to me... oh well... MY idea of a thrill is spinning around until I fall down..(which has gotten a LOT harder with all these soccer balls laying around everywhere...)

Best


Steve



"So you're saying we can look forward to robots behaving badly and demanding higher salaries." - Sally Forth

[Wayne Doenges]

I feel like putting my $.02 worth in now.

Let me get this straight, most of the high schools ask a company to sponsor them with money and engineers. The engineers volunteer there time for six weeks, coming in everyday after work and weekends too. NOW the students tell these same engineers that they don't need them anymore and they don't want to share the glory with them. Is that what I'm hearing?
This is my second year with Huntington High School. I have no kids but I enjoy helping the students. If these same students told me this I would be gone in a second.

*puts on flameproof lab coat*

Wayne Doenges

[keith edwards]

before going into the one negative thing I have to say about this year's game, I should say that over all I think it's great. this could be the best year ever in terms of competition that is inspiring to watch. congratulations to the game designers.

now about the one coach rule... there was a nice balance in the two coach system. what I observed is that when things go well, the student drivers get the credit, and when things go poorly, the criticism was received impartially and constructively by the two coaches. this is a nice structure, the coach is doing a high pressure job and deserves a buddy who can co-witness what happened in the players station and defray any second guessing.

narrowing down the coaching responsibility to one puts
an unreasonable amount of pressure on a single person.

not only is it impossible for one person to reliably keep track of enough information in real time to make the 'right' decisions, but one person has to shoulder the responsibility for making the right calls under pressure. in spite of people's best intentions, this structure is baiting a lot of second-guessing and blame, and we should avoid that systematically rather than just hoping no one ever gets emotional and waiting till afterwards to regret it.

I think, whatever it was they were trying to achieve with
this change, there must be a better way of acomplishing it.

plus, from a long term view, I think two coaches allows for better continuity. when someone new has to go in, they won't have to go up alone and inexperienced.

and I don't agree that the human player can simply take up the slack.. if you are really trying to compete to the best of your team's ability with a carefully analyzed strategy, it's hard enough to make the right last second call (especially this year!) from the sideline with no other responsibilities, it's even harder on the field.

whether or not they end up changing the rule, I do hope they sit down and seriously rethink it with an open mind.

[Kit Gerhart]

Originally posted by Anne Bergeron
On the team that I was on last year (608), we, the Georgia Tech students, acted as coaches/engineers. We found that when up on stage, we were often treated as high school students. The adults often try to take control of the situation and be very forceful. They often did not listen to ideas from us or high school students.

It is unfortunate that you were treated badly because you looked like kids. It certainly shouldn't have been that way. You need to remember, though, that last year's competition tended to bring out the worst in everyone. When you have 20 people, each having their own ideas, trying to work out a plan in about 3 minutes is not a recipe for civil discourse. With the 2 on 2 game, things go a whole lot more smoothly. I suspect that things will go better for you, whether two coaches or one.

[team222badbrad]

What coach are you guys talking about?? Whats a coach?? I don's see any coaches around here! What is there to compain about it should be 5 students and no coaches!! This year we are going to have 2 student drivers, 1 student human player, and 1 student spotter! The only case when we ever have adults is in emergencies!......

[meaubry]

Wow, the water looks knida hot in here - wonder if I should just jump in, they say thats the easiest way to get used to it - so here goes.
Coaches - How many has always been a function of the rules, not the roles. That's why some teams send out students, some send out adults (mentors, coaches, teachers, engineers - pick from the list).
If the rules were set up 10 years ago, that there wouldn't be any - we all wouldn't have had the opportunities to participate as coaches. I look at this as "The" challange this year - the game is a great game - very strategic - and I predict very much like a professional basketball game (if you want to see the game, tune in for the last few seconds)
Due to it being so strategic this year, the communication and planning and revising of plans at the end is going to be the critical skill needed to be successful. All FIRST has done, is make that challenge extremely difficult. Geez, ya think that might have been done on purpose?
The results of taking a coach away, creates a completely new set of dynamics that has to be dealt with - start planning now how to split up the responsibilities.
As to having 2 spots that adults could occupy on the playing field - well, I don't like it much either, but I can live with it as everyone else will also. Those that know me, know that I LOVE coaching and its been tough the last few years not being the coach on the field - but I have learned alot by observing from the sideline and sharing that with the adults that were coaching. I don't think FIRST changed this because they wanted to upset us adults - or to send a message that FIRST is suppose to be for students and this is how they will even things up. They did it as part of the problem to solve. I have faith that each team will indeed solve it in the best way that suits your team. Good luck this year - don't hurt your brains too much, and I hope everyones feeling are comforted by the time the competition starts.

[Kit Gerhart]

The purpose of my earlier post(s) to this thread was to point out that there are some people on FIRST teams who like being "where the action is." I am one of those people, and for adults, that means the "coach" position.

Regarding adults vs students, there are both adults and students who would be good, and bad in the coach/strategist/spotter role. Also, there are adults who would be good as drivers, operators, and human players, though I don't advocate that being allowed.

The bottom line is that there are enough adults who like "being out there" that FIRST is ultimately going to lose some engineers if there is to be only one possible position for adults on the playing field. Fortunately, there are a lot of adults who don't want to be coaches, and there are a lot of students who don't want to be drivers. Otherwise we WOULD have a problem.

As far as the NEED for 2 coaches vs 1 , all the teams are in the same boat, so that shouldn't be too much of an issue. The spotting and ball counting won't be as good as it would be with 2 additional people per alliance, if they are well organized, but it will be equal for both alliances.

This will probably be my last post to this thread. It's time to go find out how hard our robot will pull.

[Nicoleaqueen]

I don't have the talent to drive, so I only have experience "on the field" as human player and student coach. Even if I wasn't really doing anything, it was exciting to be back there. Seeing how our adult coaches act when they are back there, they are just as excited, and they were definately doing something.

I don't think anything is wrong with the adults wanting a reward or thrill. I don't mean to cheapen it by using that terminology either, it really is the way to feel the greatest achievement in the shortest amount of time. I think that it is definately something that is deserved. I look at the adults who have been with us for many years through many sponsors and consider them friends and mentors. Sometimes I cannot believe the amount of work they put in. They deserve to coach, especially since the ones that work the hardest are the best at it.

I do see the FIRST perspective of making it more about the kids. Sometimes the adults get more stressed than the students, and do not always take the 'gracious professionalism' attitude. Of course, this is very few times, but negative things are always magnified.

I don't think eliminating one person is a good solution. It is far more exciting for team members to be able to participate. For those of us who are more on the executive side of things and don't build the robot, being able to be human player is really cool. Making that opportunity available to less students isn't good. On our team, all members are considered equal. Engineers and students work side by side. I definately agree with the majority of the people in here when they feel that FIRST is about the mentorship. It isn't just about the students. If it were, the adults would be paid. Aren't coaches in sports? If the adults can't drive or be human player, there should be 2 coaching possitions available.

Nicole

[Mike Soukup]

Originally posted by team222badbrad
What coach are you guys talking about?? Whats a coach?? I don's see any coaches around here! What is there to compain about it should be 5 students and no coaches!! This year we are going to have 2 student drivers, 1 student human player, and 1 student spotter! The only case when we ever have adults is in emergencies!......
You're missing the point. A coach is not an adult mentor. A coach is a person in the box who doesn't drive or toss balls onto the field. The coach can be either a student or adult. So your statement that there should be 5 students means you're in favor of 2 coaches.

I dispise the fact that this debate has turned into a student vs adult coach battle. The real debate should be about 1 vs 2 coaches.

Mike

[SharkBite]

Even though it may be nice to have as many people as possible participate, you dont want the driver box overcrowded. Hugs and pats on the back can always be shared off the feild right after the match. That second coach is being eliminated because they are not really essential to the success of the team. Whoever said that their team switched off adults coaches every round so they all get a chance, there are about 8 rounds at a typically regional so everyone can still have a chance, and if you have more than 8 adults who are very active on your team, then the students are probably not getting to do very much. I don't mean to offend you, and maybe you do have a team where theres lots of adults and the students do just as much work, im just saying in most cases its not like that.
I think another reason that FIRST may have made this rule is that in the past there have been some overly aggressive and emotional coaches. I have observed this quite a bit on other teams. Theres definitly just as many good coaches out there, but say you are the poor driver who gets stuck with two self nominated negative coaches. One is easy to deal with, but two?
I know these arent very good points Im just trying to provide some insight on why FIRST might have done this.
Anyway for those adults who got the shaft this year, dont be too dissapointed, theres a lot of scouting to do and that is just as important, and doesnt someone need to schmooze with the other teams and advertise your robot? Teach the kids how to do it right.

Becky

[JVN]

Now I know many teams try to keep the same coach for all matches to establish a sense of continuity for the drivers. However having two different coaches alternating who work closely together would allow for the extra adult role (people like raul would get their chance to coach) while it would also alleviate some of the pressure on the coach. If there is some dispute, if something goes wrong in a match, simply having a second coach around who stands unified with the first coach could help prevent blame being placed wrongly. The only way for this system to work well is for the coaches to work soooo closely together with each other, and with the drive team that there is no confusion between matches when the coaches switch. Both coaches need to be well versed in the strategy of the game, and both need to be able to perform the same (full) coaching roles effectively.

I dunno... It's kind of confusing, but I think it will work. Our team is going to try something like that this year.

JVN
Clarkson U - Team 229
Coach, and Strategy Head

[UCGL_Guy]

I've read most of the posts in this thread and basically agree with what is being said. Whether it is an adult or student does not matter there were times that the #5 slot could be filled by a non essential person. We did this last year in Houston with our Sponsoring Vice President as our #5 person --- we recieved an extra 5K funding and FIRST is now benefiting as he is willing to help get our company more involved in houston. Hey we won't have the opportunity to "turn someone else on to FIRST" 4 is a critical number, 5 gave you one that you could play with.
As always this years gave is quite diabolical.
KY

[Nathan Kroll]

I was a driver on a FIRST team for four years. I had my share of both what you would call good and bad coaches and good and bad matches. We tried several forms of coaching on our team including student coaches. There were several times when I felt that the coaches I had on the field with me were a nuisance and I would be better off without them. However, that feeling was usually generated out of the heat of the competition and my own stubborn attitude. Looking back I have realized just how important it is for adults to be out on the field as it is for students. This competition isn't about students trying to prove that they are just as good of strategists as adults or that they are smart enough to do it on their own. A major point of FiIRST is teamwork, not only between peers, but also between students and adults. Not many students I hung out with in high school were able to say that they have been treated as an equal by educated professionals twice their age (most of my friends at ccollege cant say that either). One of the most gratifying things I took out of the driving experience was feeling that the engineers and advisors I worked with (not only on my team but on most others as well) treated me as an equal, just as long as I didn't portray myself as a cocky do everything myself student.
I kinda got off subject, but the basic point is that FIRST is all about teamwork, and one of the most intense environments to show teamwork under is on the field. I feel FIRST is taking away from that experience a little by sending out a maximum of 1 adult. Just my opinion though....

[EStokely]

In hopes of NOT further charging what appears to be an emotional topic.

Reading thru the posts and my own feelings compel me to post.

1) At the Silicon Valley Forum this point was rasied and debated. We 'sorta' agreed (with dissention) that one adult may be a compromise.

2) As for adults putting in long hours and not being allowed on the field. Well seems to me there are more students in this situation than adults. 30-40 member teams (student members) understand not everyone gets to be on the field

3) Its part of this contest to change stuff every year. Limits on gears and supply and what electronics we can use. I hope FIRST sticks to its guns on this because its different. Change is good.

4) FIRST has always (in the four years I have been in this) told us who is allowed behind the glass. Two adults max in previous competitions. Only students driving...

5) As for students dismissing engineers at the end as no longer important. I doubt that its a general feeling in the FIRST community. Most teams adore thier engineers. Of course there are exceptions but overall I believe the students realise how important the adults are



6) And I do agree that this rule was created by last years 4 vs 0 when student coached teams *sometimes* were ignored by adult coaches.

So I'm not sure if I helped any but at least I feel better.

I bet it will still be fun this year

Eric Stokely