my thoughts
 

I haven’t read what everyone has said and this message is not on behalf of team 250, anyone else on 250, or anyone else that may be mentioned in this post, it is purely what I think of this whole thing.

What first puts out as automatic qualification is as follows;
"2. Teams automatically qualify for this year's Championship in the following ways:

-All former Championship Chairman’s Award winners (1992-2002)
-Prior year Championship winners
-Teams that have participated in every competition year (1992-2002)
-Current year Regional Event winners
-Current year Regional Chairman’s Award winners
-Current year Technical Award winners at Regional Events (Driving Tomorrow’s Technology, Industrial Design, Leadership in Controls, and Quality Awards) "


Now what I have to say is on the topic not only of the first point of All former Championship Chairman’s Award winners but also on the third point there too, Teams that have participated in every competition year.

The team I have been on since I joined first is team 250 the Dynamos, yes the name has changed and the number has also, along with who has sponsored them, but our team has been around since 1992. The person who has been here since the start is still here, and he’s active with our team. But what I am saying is the team has changed but since we have been around since the start (only 5 other teams are active too) that gives us a buy into nationals. Like what everyone else is saying about the Chairman’s award and if they should go to Nat’s cause they have won it in the past, do they really deserve it since they have changed or may change in the future? Definitely they do! This is because of my participation with team 250 I can see why any chairman’s winner or original team deserves to go. This is due to them exemplifying the FIRST spirit, the chairman’s award is what FIRST is all about, and original teams show the dedication and determination of the FIRST spirit also. I am not saying no one doesn’t deserve to go, but what I am saying is that if anyone truly deserves to go I couldn’t tell you whom. This may seem biased but I do believe that you all will understand what I am trying to say, is that teams may change but truth be told, take a look at everyone and you will see that no one stands out any more then your own self in the FIRST community.

~Michael Dessingue

I think that Chairmans is the soul of FIRST. Yet many people outside (and inside somewhat) recognize it's importance. They would rather win and get more outside attention than win the Chairmans award. Chairmans needs to be given all FIRST can give it in privalages for outsiders to see that changing the world is bigger than competition. My proposal is for Nats and Regional winners of the comp to go that year and next year compared to going forever if you win Nats. Yet Chairmans should be toned down. Regional Chairmans should be given 4 years opening, and Nats Chairmans gets it forever as long as the team is the same year to year.

I would like to have a place where the Chairman's award and the entries can be displayed for the general public can see what the award is all about and what it means to FIRST.

You mean, like an actual, physical Hall of Fame?

I'd assume at least a FIRST Chaiman's Hall of Fame. Currently, only the team name/number/sponsor list is displayed on the FIRST website. I would assume a place to view chaiman's entrys

Two, a traveling for regionals and nats, and a permement one at FIRST Place.

That's what I had in mind.
A kiosk that displays that video for the Chairman's award HOF, the award itself (which is kinda like the Stanley cup. THe winning team gets to keep it for a year then give it to the next winner. Unless you win it three times then you get to keep it) and have computer displays which allow you to view the finalists entries(Team 120 The Scarabian Knights don't even have a website so there wa no way anyone could have seen what they did).
They could set it up in that area in front of Curie where everyone got off of the escalator.

I must say that I am not usually one to post in controversial threads, or to really disagree or argue with anyone on these boards, but this conversation here strikes a very personal cord with me.
Reading this thread I am deeply saddened, as a 166 veteran and ex-teamleader. As a leader I tried to install gracious proffesionalism and understanding of other teams in the FIRST community to my peers on the team. I tried to make them understand that Chief Delphi was a great place to network and get informattion and share ideas with other teams. I am thrilled to see so many new Merrimack members cruising the boards and posting occasionally, this is a good thing. Attacking another team that has helped you get where you are today is not.
Jess, the way you started your thread was admirable, you had an idea and you wanted input from others in the community as to whether or not your thinking was valid. It was a well placed question and poll in which you stated your thoughts on why things were, what you thought would improve it and put forth feasible options in your poll. This sparked off an interesting discussion between many people in the community. In your next post you reflected on what another had said then went to add in an example to prove your point. This is where you went wrong
To say that another team is not good enough is ungracious and uncalled for. I know you may not have meant to personally attack this team but you need to be aware of what you are posting and be responsible for your words.
I know Merrimack and Nashua have had our problems but please do not forget the wonderful things they have done for us. They are very deserving of their free ride to nationals. BAE Systems is there sponsor and is very much a part of their team. Do not forget this, you cannot seperate the sponsor and the team.
Nashua is a first class team in the land of FIRST, they are a shining example of what it means to be a chairmans team and the responsibilitly that comes with it. From lending a hand in the pits at competitions, to lending programers to less experienced teams for hours on end, Nashua excells at showing the spirit of FIRST. They began lego teams in their city and eventually spurred enough teams to host a state tournament. This year they even hosted a FIRST regional competition. For years they have been getting out into their community at Holiday Strolls and Youth Rallies to spread a positive message to their city. They even so graciously invited Merrimack to share in the joy of these activities. Every year Merrimack has hosted a 4th of July Demo, which Nashua, whether with students, engineers (Thanks Bryan Lee!), or a robot has somehow shown their support for our team. Out of this comraderie BAE Systems picked us up as one of their own teams when we were in trouble of not competing due to lack of sponsor. Nashua very gracioulsy shared their budget, resources, and space with the Merrimack team. As if that was not enough, the BAE team picked up partially sponsorship for many of the dying New Hampshire teams. As I said before, the sponsor is the team, without students like Chris C., Aaron, Tyler, and many others BAE would not have been so generous with their money, our team owes Nashua alot, please try not to forget it.
I am sorry this post is so long, but things needed to be said. I for one think Nashua is an amazing team, lets not lose sight of the wonderful things they have done because of a few bad attitudes. I hope the FIRST community as a whole can forgive Jess for her comments, I know her enough that she didn't intend on hurting or offending anyone. I just hope that the gracious feelings between Merrimack and Nashua can continue on, I would hate to see the spirit of cooperation between those 2 teams die.

This is exactly why I agree that Chairman's Award winners should have the privilege of going to nationals every year. FIRST looks so highly upon past award winners (as Gope pointed out as well), with good reason. These winners are in FIRST's mind, role models to every team. Certain traits and attitudes are passed down in FIRST teams, just as they are in families. Because of this I refuse to believe any team that won a Chairmans in the past could change their teams ideals so much that people would say they don't deserve that go to nationals anymore. If you look at any team that has won this award before you can see them still making a difference in their team, their community, and the entire FIRST community. Coming from one of these teams I know first hand how much responsibility and respect they are given. In my mind this whole debate shouldn't even be an issue.

I'm going to attempt to summarize both sides:

The argument for allowing all previous Chairman's Award winners into nationals is understandable and logical. Chairman's IS FIRST's highest honor, and teams must demonstrate unprescidented spirit, sportsmanship, and involvement in their communities. Therefore, the honor and dignity of a team number is and always will be associated with that award.


The argument against allowing previous winners is also understandable and logical. The basic concept is that teams change with time. I've experienced this firsthand- my first year involved with a team officially was in 2000. Back then, myself, and all team members cheered universally for all teams at the competition, regardless of whether they were an alliance partner, or an opposing alliance. We cheered for everyone simply because we had a great time. The next year, a number of the founding/core members of the team graduated and moved on, away from FIRST. There was still some level of spirit left at competitions, but it was more limited to cheering for our own team than other teams. By 2002, all founding/original members had graduated and moved on, leaving a handful of members from the previous 2 seasons, and a rush of new members. Cheering had become more scarce, and usually only when our robot was doing well in a match. This past season was the worst yet, where the cheering was limited to about 5 of the more experienced members, and only when our team name and number were announced prior to each match.

The point is, teams DO change with time, as members enter and graduate, mentors come and go. While some teams spirit, enthusiasm, and involvement increase with time, others decrease, and as the FIRST spirit torch is passed from generation to generation, I feel it sometimes looses some of it's warmth and glow, as the new members take it up, and are not quite sure what to do with it.

I remember in 2000, there was a match where one robot was flipped onto it's side. It wasn't their alliance partner who came to their aid though, it was an opposing robot who intentionally knocked them back on track. For me, that moment defined Gracious Professionalism, and I've not seen a match to date where opposing robots would help each other like that, despite the number of flippings that occured in this past year's competition.

In closing, I agree with previous Chairman's Winners attending nationals, but I more than understand Jessica's position on the subject. If a team changes, even just a little bit, from year to year, eventually the changes will drown out what a team once was, or where it came from. I realize this is not always the case, and there are many, many teams out there which are still tried and true to what they were founded on. However, it does pose the original question of the thread- are those teams (and at this point there may not be any, but 10, 20, 30 years from now) that aren't true to what their team had been upon winning the award still eligable to attend nationals year after year?

I would just like to mention, (again) that my posts in this thread were from a misconception of the qualifications of a team to go to the national competition. I do like Chairman's just thought that past year robot winners didn't go to the nats the next year. My teammate Rob pointed that I was wrong.

I do like Chairman's and am going to do everything to get my team motivated to do more than we have in the past and be better contenders.

I think you are forgetting the amazing teachers, sponsors, engineers, and all others that made the chairmans award possible... Chances are they'll still be on the team in four years. Don't they deserve to go to the championship event for all of their work? It's the team, not the people that count..


And now, a famous quote- There is no I in team.

I know AJ, that is why I said I didn't want to single ya out :)

I just knew there are others out there thinking the same thing as what you didn't mean... if that makes any sense what-so-ever :confused: :yikes: :rolleyes:

Ben... I'm glad we managed to just let this die down, and keep everything calm. This just seems to be causing trouble for trouble's sake.

Re: Re: Is it fair to let Chairman's Award Winners go to Nats every year?
 

It's only the end of a task if competing at the Championship event is your primary goal.

If you work hard and win the Chairman's Award to ensure your team a place on that roster each year, you probably didn't deserve to win the Chairman's Award.