QotW 09-29-03: Eligibility
 

I'm coming at ya live from Seattle, Washington this sunny afternoon -- but I'm not using my computer, so this is going to be a quick question.

I read over the e-mail blast from FIRST that was recently posted here on ChiefDelphi.com and was immediately struck by one thing. So, because of that, this week's question is going to be simple and straightforward.

Question of the Week 09-27-03: Should rookie teams be eligible to win the Regional or National Chairman's Award?

Discuss.

Yes, of course rookie teams should be included. Why on earth should you shut them out of it?

Everyone should have an equal opportunity. This is FIRST after all. Thats why everyone gets the same game, the same kit of parts, the same restrictions, to keep everything equal and fair, so everyone has a fair chance.

If a rookie represents the ideals of FIRST in their rookie year, I think they are more than deserving of a Chairmans award.

but thats just my opinion.

A rookie team should be eligible to win the Regional Chairman's Award, but let's face it... do most rookie teams have a chance?? Most probably don't even really know what FIRST is really about yet. This brings up another question - did a rookie team win Chairman's Award at a regional last year??.. just curious. It's just highly unlikely that a rookie team is going to win the Chairman's Award. Now, if they are this awesome ideal FIRST team right off the bat then more power to them, but most rookie teams take a year or even 2 years to really get going. Why FIRST made this new rule... I don't know, it seems kinda silly to me. But yes, Rookie teams should be eligible to win the Chairman's Award.

Yes, they should. Everyone who helps FIRST should be able to get recognition for it.

Yes, they should. If they work for it and earn it, why not recognize them for it too?
My team mentored 1151, and as rookies, they are talking about montoring lego leagues, and doing all of the chairman award activities. They also said they wanted to do it because of the spirit of FIRST, and the recognition of Chairmans Award was just a reward.

Thats how it should be. All the demos you do, all the Chairmans award stuff you do should be done just for the spirit of FIRST, not to recieve "the most prestigious award"

Should they be eligible? Yes. Would they likely win? No. I think that any team should be eligible for Chairman's, even if they are rookies. There's nothing to say that rookies couldn't have a program as good or better than many veterans. I think it should all be up to the judges, not a blanket rule like what has just been announced.

I totally agree. Everyone should be allowed to compete for the chairmans award, but in reality like Ryan said, they have no idea what to expect or what the competition is going to be like. A kid from a rookie team told me last year "Wow, when we got done with our robot I really thought we had a really good one and a winning robot..." (To some extent like that) "...but when we got here and see all of these veterans, it makes our robot look bad." I told him, not to compare yourself to another team, but just to go out and do what you can do. Being a rookie/2nd year team is a major learning experience. You really have no idea what to expect or what level the competition is at. That comes over time.

By allowing the rookie teams to compete in the chairmans award competition, they start to develop the experience and understand more of what they can do. With that experience and a little time, that could lead to a chairmans award for that team somewhere down the road.

Re: QotW 09-29-03: Eligibility
 

Yeah... that was the one thing I hated in that e-mail. I figure that if they really have something great for their chairman's award, then they do deserve to win it. Of course, that all depends on how you interperet the principles of the chairman's award, but nonetheless, all teams should be elegible. Like someone pointed out, it's very unlikely that a rookie team is going to win anyway. But they might as well try. If they know the ideals of FIRST, then by all means, let them submit something.

Look on the bright side: no more battery chargers out the wazoo. :D

Simple answer: of course.

True to what has already been said, most rookie teams don't stand much of a chance of winning the Chairman's - but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be able to.

Most rookie teams don't have time to contribute to outstanding community service, or to provide services to other teams in the name of FIRST. They are striving to get off the ground, to find their footing. If they can do something incredible that deserves the Chairman's Award, more power to them. Maybe then they are even more deserving of the award.

Ditto. Are the chances likely? As was previously stated, no. But if a rookie team is outstanding enough to have a shot at Chairman's, it is obviously an incredible team and it would be an injustice to shut them out of the running.

Should the rookies be eligible? No question. Do they truly pose a chance of winning is the real question. Excluding them from the opportunity would be an injustice in every way that I can see. I can find no adaquate reason for which a rookie team would become ineligable to participate. Excluding them would not be a fair thing to do, and there is no purpose for it.

i agree with all above said about rookies being eligible to win the chairman's award, but over the past couple of years, FIRST has been limiting what and how much we can submit for chairmans... perhaps they are trying to make the judging process easier?

Should rookies be eligible? YES. FIRST is all about opportunities and allowing access to everyone. Excluding those who are already involved would be against everything I've learned about FIRST. How would that be an act of gracious professionalism? Not letting them compete for Chairman's Award would be like not letting them compete in matches because they most likely won't win(although many rookies do extremely well and if not better than some veteran teams). Rookies should have equal shots at everything. Everyone should be on a level playing field no matter how long you've been there or on previous acts, in my opinion.

I disagree... :)
 

Seems like I'm the only one who agrees with it. As we hear every year, the Chairman's remains FIRST's most prestigious award, and, as said in the e-mail blast, "Since the Chairman's Award is based on sustained excellence and impact of the team's overall program, rookies will not be eligible for the Chairman's Award.(...)" .
That's what the award really is about. Sustained (keyword here) excellence, impact on the community and spreading of FIRST's values. Sorry, a rookie team can't have that, no matter how great they are. The Rookie-All-Star award is there to recognize that.
Looking at the past winners, you see that only the absolute best, the créme de la créme has a nice handmade clock in their trophy room. They sure earned it. :)
As for the "fair" status, think about it; Not every team is eligible to every award FIRST hands out. ;)

Manoel has it right. Because it is not just one year's effort, but sustained effort over a span of years that wins a Chairman's Award, rookies are excluded by definition. But that doesn't mean they can't be thinking about their "sophmore" or "junior" years even now.

They aren't excluded from the award forever, just their rookie year. Think of it like having to wait until you're old enough to get a driver's license. The only people who think that's unfair are the ones who are just a little bit too young.

Besides, rookies have enough to worry about without it.