Originally Posted by The_ShamWOW88 (Post 1476881)

Push districts....

Originally Posted by momter (Post 1476836)

Very discouraged by teams who believe that being the winner is the goal of the program. Especially coming from Mentors.

Originally Posted by momter (Post 1476836)

In reality, many teams will still not qualify for the championships due to the lack of resources that are available to them. Maybe we should be more concerned about this than where we will be competing or how many trophys we can collect. In addition, I've lived near Detroit and have spent time in Detroit. It will be a fantastic venue!

Originally Posted by Justin Montois (Post 1476894)

*snip*
To me, this issue has a very strong connection with the previous one. Some teams, not all, but some teams struggle to find additional sponsors, mentors, recruit students ETC because they don't pay attention to the results on the field. I'm sorry but few people want to be apart of a team that struggles year after year.


The pyramid below outlines the book in a sense. The top of the Pyramid is 'Inattention to Results'. Success matters.

Originally Posted by wilsonmw04 (Post 1476901)

Your outcome is dictated by your worldview. You feel that success comes from the field of play. I disagree with that entirely. I measure success, and in turn my team does as well, by how many students we get excited about STEM. How many students we graduate to college. How many students come back to mentor as Alums. If a team is "struggling" it probably has nothing at all to do with the ranking of the robot on any given field, but rather another issue all together. You are correct that success matters. How each team measures their success is different. One is no better than the other. However, my "successes" are a lot more under my control. Your's is dependent on the chaotic nature of an FRC game field.

Originally Posted by momter (Post 1476836)

Very discouraged by teams who believe that being the winner is the goal of the program. Especially coming from Mentors. Of course we all would love to win. That is not the core of FIRST as one speaker at the town hall mistakenly stated. It's time for teams to reevaluate the core goals of FIRST. You're sliding down the slippery slope to where athletics has landed. I have witnessed mentors explode over the results of a match. What message does that send? It breaks my heart to see this. In reality, many teams will still not qualify for the championships due to the lack of resources that are available to them. Maybe we should be more concerned about this than where we will be competing or how many trophys we can collect. In addition, I've lived near Detroit and have spent time in Detroit. It will be a fantastic venue!

Originally Posted by smistthegreat (Post 1476915)

Before cmp, I was very against 2champz. Now, I'm still against it, but at least a little conflicted. I was in attendance at the town hall meeting, and my opinions were definitely impacted by the response I saw there. I'll try to explain as best I can.

My team is a very young team. My team is not motivated by trying to be world champions, since right now it is not a realistic goal. We qualified for cmp this year by winning a regional as the 23rd pick, and missed division elims. Was it worth it? Yes. My students absolutely loved it. They went to the innovation fair, talked to college reps, met their heroes (Grant Imahara, Dean, Woodie), and made friends from around the world. They were inspired by the championship experience, and I believe that other students on other teams should be able to experience this. My students had a wonderful, inspiring time at this cmp, and as a mentor I consider this a success.


BUT

Not at the expense of the competition. As a student on another team, I was able to compete on the Einstein field. I still consider this a defining moment in my life. It's easy to talk about how the program is more than the robot, and the teams that would benefit from an expanded cmp far outnumber those who feel disenchanted or alienated by this dilution of the competition. But the relatively few teams that are driven by the desire to be world champions make this program what it is, and I don't believe FRC could be the same without them. These are not teams that are made up of intimidating, win-at-any-expense people. These teams that are so vehemently opposed to this change are literally the teams that make FRC what it is. They are teams that run off season events, start other teams, win prestigious awards, and volunteer their time and resources to inspire others.

I love this program. This program has shaped me into the engineering student and mentor I am today. I have been inspired by winning events. I have been inspired by talking to elite teams. I have been inspired by the championship experience. And I believe that this program will not be the same without all of the above.

Originally Posted by cadandcookies (Post 1476777)

I could also point out longwinded and not particularly constructive comments likening this separation to a divorce, as well as the tendency of many of the questioners to preface a two sentence question with a minute of story time.

Many of the community members could have taken a lesson in gracious professionalism from the people on stage. The panel never failed to answer questions respectfully, even when those questions were only partially veiled personal attacks.

The valid points made by many of the community members present were overshadowed by their combatative phrasing. I find it unfortunate that the community seems to have used this meeting more as a time to vent at the higher ups in FIRST than to engage in a constructive dialogue about the future of this program that we all hold so dear.

I love this program, and I'm not a fan of the two championships concept, but watching this meeting was incredibly frustrating for me, watching people that I hold in incredibly high esteem behaving in ways that remind me more of bickering children than of people out to change our world. The entire world is not your team, and we all have distinct challenges and advantages. It's very important in my opinion to look at the championship split in the greater context of a growing FRC program and FIRST's stated goals-- districts in the US (and probably eventually elsewhere), the desire to keep the current feel of championships as more than just the FRC World Championship, and the likelihood of an eventual three-tiered model similar to FTC. From a road-map perspective, this is the inevitably awkward transition stage as we move FRC from a widely-spread but still mostly unknown competition to a fixture both in the USA and the world. A few years of dual championships is a price I'm willing to pay while we wait for our state, national, and global programs to mature to a point where can truly say that our championship is the superbowl of smarts.

Originally Posted by RonnieS (Post 1476917)

I have had multiple teams come to me after winning a district and express how much this means to them and the inspiration their students received after the previous day of competition and them loosing hope.Who FIRST is trying to bring in are people who are used to the mindset of working towards a goal of winning, rather it be directly or indirectly.
What do resources have to do with advancing? It is our job as the FIRST community to inspire these kids and there are many of us who feel the best way is by winning. They then justify the trails and tribulations that they went through as a team and will be way more excited to come back the next year to compete and strive to do better. Rather a teams goal is to win the district or make finals, it is still winning. They reached that goal; they have to continue to expand that goal which will/should involve winning a regional or district.
This year we encountered a rookie team that did not have the mentors to help them succeed. We invited them to build with us for the season as they learned TONS. Mind you, they barely had screwdrivers to assemble the KoP chassis and they had zero way to meet as their "mentor" thought an hour meeting a week would suffice. With inspiration from our team, they strive to win. That was their mind set and ambitions as a rookie. They went on to qualify for the Michigan state championship and had a very successful season winning multiple awards. I am super proud of what they did. Bottom line, winning was their goal and that inspired them more throughout the season than many teams I have seen. There knowledge has grown tremendously and I am confident that they will be a force to recon with.

-Ronnie

Originally Posted by smistthegreat (Post 1476915)

My students absolutely loved it. They went to the innovation fair, talked to college reps, met their heroes (Grant Imahara, Dean, Woodie), and made friends from around the world.

Originally Posted by momter (Post 1476928)

Resources do make a difference in robot performance, especially in MI. We all strive to win. That said, situations like what you describe in really helping struggling teams can inspire students more in the long run. We have witnessed this year after year with teams we worked with. Changing the culture is the key.