Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

After reading this thread I was amazed to how good RAWC was, and how much trouble they had to go through. Its crazy how good they were, and how few newer members of FRC have heard of them.

I just wanted to start this thread to hear about dominant teams who are no longer as dominant.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

47 (now 51) - The best team never to win a Championship. Still a solid contender but nothing like their heyday.

71 - 4x Champs. Haven't won one since 2004. Missed CMP last year.

217 - 2x World Champs. 3rd Pick at MSC this year, missed CMP last year.


EDIT - Disclaimer, all of these teams are still GREAT teams. Just not nearly as dominant as they used to be.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

Sorry, but that title (though not the lack of dominance) has to go to 233. Consistently in the eliminations, deep in the eliminations, especially at the Championship. Never won Einstein gold. I looked, and saw something like 3 finalist showings and a couple of division wins other than those, but not the biggest of all. Like I said, though, they aren't showing any signs of a lack of dominance.

51 can be ruled out of that category due to the OTHER team that merged, 65. (47 alone can stay in. 51, nope.)


60 is one that really sticks out. Any Bionic Bulldogs machine before 2005 could just about win by showing up. After the 2004 season, though, they seemed to fall off the radar. Recently, they've been doing better, though. This, for reference, is the other half of 254's first collaboration--which sparked massive discussion in 2004 when they built identical robots.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

We on 45 are kinda facing this. In the past we were quite successful but now in days we face problems even getting into eliminations at regional events. Some of our students attribute this to the loss of some key experienced mentors the past few years.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

217 definitely is the major one from Michigan. Yes, they still have a strong bot but I remember 2005-2009. Back in those days, Thunder Chicken's were dominate. I was proud when we won one match against them. Now they are on the border of "average". I hope this changes in the next couple years. I love trying to compete with the best.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

I am also curious why a lot of these teams became less dominant? Did they lose major sponsors or key mentors? Or have they just been having bad luck?

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

60's 2002 robot was amazing.


Another Poof collaborator was team 22 in 2005. The team is now gone.

980 was a powerhouse team. i loved their 2003, 2004 and 2005 robots. 2003 was particular cool with it huge arm.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

Sometimes everything revolves around one or two mentors, and when they leave the operation falls apart. I'm not sure about other teams, but 1002 in their glory days won Chairmans award 3 times in a row from 04-06, and getting the honorable mention at championships in 04. From 07-'10, excluding '08, they won an EI award at their home regional. Before '09 started, they lost a valuable mentor and had another mentor get ill. All of the organization and planning went away with these mentors, and now the students of 1002 are left disorganized and trying to recuperate their losses.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

I want to say that this year's game allows for the "average FRC team" to be as good as some of the more traditional "powerhouse" teams.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

I'm going to say key mentors.

Sponsors and money are WAY easier to come by than key mentors. When teams lose those key mentors, everything can fall apart regardless of money/sponsors.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

47 will never win Einstein Gold. In their best days they were consistent contenders and in 97, if I my data is correct, they won a not insignificant percentage of all regionals. 233 is great, no doubt, but I don't think they can claim the level of dominance of the team that brought swerve drive to FRC.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

60 lost a great mentor in 2004-2005 I think. He was a major contributor to the start of the west coast drive.

22, not very dominant in winning regionals, but they were a chairmans powerhouse. They seemed to have taken socal robotics from the beginning, all due do Mentor Wendy Wooten. She is now, I believe, completely out of FIRST and as a FIRST community we will be lesser without having Dr. Wooten.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

47 can never. 233 has never. Slight difference. You could make the case that 47 won a significant percentage of regionals--but if there are only 6 regionals, and you win 2 of them, versus if there are 60 and you win 2 (that you attend), then you're dealing with a factor of 10 more events, so you can't even attend a significant percentage. 233 just iterates a lot during their first competition event.

But if we're going to go down the road of allowing non-competing teams to vie for the designation, we better throw 64 in there. The Gila Monsters tore it up in Arizona, SVR, and L.A. for quite some time until they split after their 2005 World Finalist campaign into two other teams.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

I think the team that the title of this thread fits perfectly is 177. 177 was incredible, making it to Einstein SIX consecutive years! Now, they haven't even qualified for Champs in 2012 or 2013. I'm not sure what changed, perhaps they lost a major mentor or something.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

I dunno, I've been told to "Never bet against the Beast" until they're eliminated.
Regardless of their recent history, I'm going to guess that still holds true...

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

I assert dominant is more a perception than anything. Winning 1/3 regionals vs 1/30th is significantly MORE dominant. At least the perception.


I still never bet against the BEAST. 11 years and I NEVER bet against them.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

So... 2056 or 1114. Wins 3x regionals/year, typically (if they don't it's an off year and they belong in this thread). 3/60 is 1/20.

Compared to 47, winning 1/3 of regionals (but only winning 2 regionals).

Which is more dominant?



There is a way to make a stronger case for 47 being the best team to never win Championships. Actually, two, but one involves Pink winning the event. 47 was dominant in the 90s, which featured a slightly different type of game than these days. 1v1v1, to be exact. When you factor that in, then you have a much stronger case, because every national or world champion since 1999 has had at least one partner, and usually two. Makes it easier... and harder.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

As an alum of Team Hammond I would like to say thank you....but it is true we have been in a slump but all slumps end plus we've been getting better this year and are back at the championship I for one say any team that qualifies is doing great.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that it doesn't take a big change in team personnel for a once-dominant team to become less dominant. As FRC ages, the top tier of teams is becoming bigger and better. I'm not saying that 71 is building the same caliber of robot that they were in the early 2000s (they could be building better or worse), but you can be sure that today's FRC teams would have given 71 a run for their money during their Championship years had they existed as they do today.

It's easy to look at this lack of dominance as the withering of once-great teams, but in many cases, I don't think it's that at all. One must consider the immense yet steady improvement of FRC as a whole, which I see as great in a better way than won-3-championships-in-4-years great. I'm sorry if I'm interrupting a thread intended for nostalgia, but I hope you find this interjection insightful.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

Team 100 used to be quite the powerhouse and seem to be in a small slump. They appear to have worked at bouncing back at SVR though and I can't wait to see what they do next year. :)

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

Here's what happened to us:
In 2010, we had a ton of really experienced seniors, which greatly contributed to our success that year. However, they all graduated, and we had 0 seniors the next year as part of the core technical team. So, in 2011, it was a few juniors, a few sophomores, and one or two freshmen, and some of those juniors were actually first year FIRSTers. Then in 2012, we only had 2 technical seniors with more than one year behind them, and only one started as a freshman. Essentially, we had no juniors in 2010 to replace our graduating seniors, so much of the knowledge of those graduates was lost. We were left with a 1-2 year experience gap.

Because of our team dynamic, a lack of student experience generally results in subpar robots. Our mentors make almost no robot related decisions and instead give us their opinions, so ultimately, decisions are left to the students. This has its pros and cons, as I've described, but it seems to me that our students graduate with more experience than they may get on other teams.

This year, we had solid experience, but for reasons I will not discuss publicly, our first robot turned out... poorly. During eliminations and closing ceremonies of Sacramento, two other lead mechanical people, our captain, and I decided to spend our spring break redoing the robot. We spent one day on conceptual design, two days on CAD, one day on water jetting at TechShop, two on manufacturing, and one on testing. Given our performance at SVR, I'm happy with our comeback. I'm conflicted about staying up until 6am CADing so we could use the water jet at 9am though...

Right now, the robot has some flaws, but they're mainly either left over from the old robot (AKA the weird and poorly driving drivetrain). Hopefully that'll get redone over the summer, but regardless, this was a good finish to the year (and my last season).

701 seems to be a rising power too. Can't wait to see you next year!

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

We haven't lost any mentors in recent years (I believe we have actually gained a few). We actually have not won a regional since 2006. Every year since we either got in off the waitlist or qualified from winning the previous year (2008, 2011). Since waitlist invites have declined in recent years, we have not gotten the chance to go. Hopefully our luck turns around in districts :D

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

Yes, you guys always have top notch robots. Your luck on the other hand, is not so great. Another year because of the regional rules, a powerhouse team doesn't get to go to worlds. I can't wait until all regionals turn into districts. Worlds will finally be like IRI. :)

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

I would be more interested in hearing the story of middle of the pack teams who have grown to become dominant.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

IMO this thread is in bad taste.

I am fine with pointing out teams who have ok performances in the past and really stepped up in the past few years. However, going the other direction seems rude and a bit unnecessary.

Teams peak and valley for numerous reasons. I'm sure any team who may fit into this category is aware of their current performance versus their legacy.


Just my $.02 on the matter.


-Brando

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

I see your point but there are lessons to be learned from teams following both trajectories.

If this thread offers the opportunity for teams to offer up their stories of why robot competitiveness has decreased, then the community can benefit from this information.

However "nominating" teams that others perceive have declined is definitely too disrespectful for my tastes.

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

I totally agree. I'm thinking there is probably another way to discuss this without having to pick apart specific teams from a distance.

-Brando

Re: Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be
 

Look no further than the World Champion alliance this year.

Also, I may be biased, but I think in a couple of years, people will be talking about Kansas City area teams as much as Michigan, Ontario, and Texas teams.