Let me say this about that...
 

From the 2004 Manual:

Quote:

8.9.7 Chairman’s Award

Quote:

The Chairman’s Award ... ...remains the most prestigious team award FIRST presents. (emphasis added)

Quote:

8.9.10 Engineering Inspiration

Quote:

This award celebrates a team’s outstanding success in advancing respect and appreciation for engineering and engineers, both within their school, as well as their community. Criteria include: the extent and inventiveness of the team’s efforts to recruit students to engineering, the extent and effectiveness of the team’s community outreach efforts, and the measurable success of those efforts. This is the second highest FIRST award a team can garner. (emphasis added)

FIRST says the Chairman's Award is the most prestigious award but they do not really act that way in practice. Allowing Chairman's Award winners to attend the Championships is one of the few things that FIRST does that shows that they are walking the walk not just talking the talk.

As the Engineering Inspiration Award, read the description. There is nothing in there about a good robot. Beyond this, I did not argue for their inclusion based on robot excelence but on Chairman's Award excelences. Finally, by FIRST's own text it is the "second highest FIRST award a team can garner." If they don't get a ticket to the big dance who does?

Joe J.

Re: Let me say this about that...
 

This discussion facinates me. Just thought I'd say so. :)

Anyway, as I said earlier, the main logistical bottleneck in allowing teams to the Championship is the game play itself.

So, to build on the thought shift I proposed here, I propose the following:

1.) Use Dr Joe's schematic for allowing teams to compete for the National Champion award.
2.) Invite a small group from each team that won an award at a regional (3 students, 1 mentor...enough to fill up one hotel room) for a shot at winning the national award.
3.) Invite any other team that does not fall into the above two points to send a small group (3 students, 1 mentor) to experience the Championship in a various number of ways: volunteering, attending the workshops, etc.

This allows a number of things to occur:
-Every team has a personal attachment with the Championship every year. Either they're competing, or they know someone who is down there. This has huge effects, including team retention, increased webcast viewership, increasing security at events, as well as other things (that aren't coming to mind at the moment :) ).
-This would certainly solve our volunteer shortage. Plus, the workshops are still being utilized.
-Increased hotel usage. If we moved towards this, the hotel industry in Atlanta (or any city) would love us forever. On that note, why not work out a deal with one hotel in the area and have the workshops there? With FIRST taking such a heavy hand in the hotel's attendance that weekend, discounts would abound.
-The other awards still have importance. These 4 person team representatives would present to a group of judges as to why they deserve the national award for whatever award they won at the regional, just like Chairman's. This adds into the importance of students communicating what they've learned in FIRST. (Side note: Whether they would be allowed to bring the robot is still up in the air for me, because though it would be great for the teams competing for technical awards to actually have the robot there, not having it there would ease up on shipping/drayage issues as well as add to the communication challenge.)
-Allowing a small group to go to every Championship passes along the excitement of going to the Championship every single year ("Man, we had such a great time, we've got to get the entire team there next year!"). It's also much easier to send 4 people short notice than 40, thus decreasing the "We'd love to, but we can't fundraise enough in time" response, as well as most problems with school systems.

Thoughts?

$.02
-Jessica B

Re: Let me say this about that...
 

Joe, I do not disagree with a form of recognition for Chairmans Award winners. I do believe though that a team cannot live on it's laurels. I believe that there was a winner that left FIRST the very next year. If they should come back do they deserve a free pass to the Championships. The Chairmans Award should be seen as a continueing award. A team should not win and then have a free pass. That is like a hockey team (sorry I'm Canadian) winning the Stanley Cup and therefore getting an automatic by into the playoffs. Or a President (for the Americans) getting an automatic seat in the State he resides in for life. As I said before, a 4 year pass seems reasonable to me (I realize that I am 1 person only). As for the Engineering award I was not against it. My concern is that the part of the robot that wins the award, is a functioning part of the robot. The rest of the robot can be a dishwasher as long as the highlighted area works as stated.

These are my $0.02 CDN or $0.015 AM :)

Re: Your Thoughts on the 2005 Championship Eligibility Criteria!
 

The "Tier" thing is confusing. i dont get how they pick from that or whatever.

Re: Your Thoughts on the 2005 Championship Eligibility Criteria!
 

This is a topic about which I feel very strongly. At the risk of breaking one of the CD posting rules, I am going to repeat what I said on this topic a year ago. I feel the same way about the Chairman's Award winners, but will leave that to another post. To whit:

I have watched the various discussions on this topic for the last few weeks, and feel compelled to throw in my two cents.

There are a LOT of teams that have put forth tremendous efforts over many years, supporting and participating in the FIRST program. Somehow, they heard about a unique program that was exciting, inspirational, educational, and demanding, and they decided to give it a try. They investigated FIRST and formed a team - maybe they were inspired by a FIRST alumni from another team, or saw one of the video pieces, or went to a competition, or called Manchester got promotional material in the mail, or read about it in the newspaper. Then in return for their dedication, sweat, perseverance, and efforts they have received a set of experiences virtually impossible to duplicate elsewhere. They have produced students - and engineers - that have a better understanding of engineering, science and technology, and an appreciation of what it means to be a "professional" and a role in helping to change our society. For all that, they all deserve our congratulations and thanks.

But in 1992 there was no FIRST. The teams that became involved that year were not responding to a call to join in an existing program. They had no way of knowing if the FIRST program was real, or a pipe dream. All they had was Dean Kamen coming to them with infectious enthusiasm and an amazing vision of what society COULD be like if they decided to help him change the value system of an entire country.

Think about that for a while. You are sitting in your school or company and one day an unknown engineer shows up and tells you that your entire value system is upside-down, and he is going to fix it. And fix it not just for you, or for your school, or your company, or your state, but for the entire country.

At that point, almost everyone must have thought him a loonie, and thrown him out. But a small number of folks could see the beauty of the vision, and where it could lead. They had no data about the program, didn't know if it would succeed or fail, had no wonderful anecdotes or success stories to build upon, no structured organization to support them, no FIRST PLACE, or network of teams to mentor them through the process. Unlike every single team since then, they had nothing to rely on except faith in the vision described by Dean Kamen of what FIRST could become, and the impact on society that it might have one day.

With only that to go on, they were able to pull together a few companies and a few schools, and form the founding FIRST teams. They were willing to commit themselves to try something they had never seen, and actually get companies to kick in money to support a program that didn't really yet exist.

In short, they were willing to step into empty space, and take a risk that NONE of us have ever had to take since then. And for every year since 1992, they have kept the vision alive despite changes in team members, changes in sponsors, changes in structure, and changes in FIRST. If they had not accepted that risk, there would never have been a second year of FIRST. Or a third year. Or a tenth year. For that, they deserve our thanks, our gratitude, our respect, and our appreciation.

And I think that they deserve a lifetime pass to the Championship Competitions. It is the very least we can do.

-dave

Re: Your Thoughts on the 2005 Championship Eligibility Criteria!
 

OK! So I know that there is a large amount of self interest attached to this reply, but I do want to get everyone's opinion on my feelings.

I strongly feel that the 3 National Chairman's Award Honorable Mention teams (341, 342, & 1002) should be made eligible for the 2005 Championship. This is FIRST's highest honor and these 3 teams performed at a level that was so near to the top.

Recognizing National Honorable Mention teams each year would send a motivating message to all competing Chairman's teams and acknowledge that these finalists acheived at a level that was, at least slightly, above the regional level.

Also one year of eligibilty would clearly differentiate this prize from National Chairman's yet be just that little bit higher than Regional Chairman's.

I know that being mentioned was truly an honor in itself. However, I feel that sending the 3 finalists for any given year sends just the right message. It is an appropriate gesture that doesn't really cause FIRST any additional headaches or expense.

Please let me know your opinion of this?

Best of Luck to everyone in the off-season!!!

Al Ostrow
Coach, Team 341

Re: Your Thoughts on the 2005 Championship Eligibility Criteria!
 

Nationals should definitely be smaller!! 150 - 200 teams, tops! Get rid of the tier system (too confusing anyways). Have the teams selected as Joe said. Maybe add in the honorable mentions if you wish. Last year, we went to nationals (odd, even thing) and was agast at the pits in the astrodome. For the real guru engineering students on the team and the operators, they barely had enough down time to see all the teams in the pit, let alone competing. I'm still bummed that I never got to meet / talk to some inspiring teams, unless they're in our division (or in our pit row). Let Nationals be the best of the best - we'll find a way to get there. Set aside a National Traveling Expenses Fund - or just plan on going to watch if not to compete. Might this help bring down the cost of Nationals, too!

Re: Your Thoughts on the 2005 Championship Eligibility Criteria!
 

Doug G has stated let the Championship be the best of the best. This has been debated a lot in the past. Who really are the best. If you were at a regional and the 3rd pick of the 8th place team and you happen to win the regional. Is your team the best of the best? Maybe Championships should be the top 8 teams from all regionals. Are they always the best? Maybe rankings can only come from your 1st regional to be fair to everyone. Or for the sake of those that are saying it costs too much to compete, make the 2nd regional you attend $7,000.00 and maybe $10,000.00 for the 3rd regional. This way teams that want to buy their way to Championship can help support those that can barely attend one.

If I sound a bit upset it is because FIRST is suppose to be different. As was stated earlier Nationals was changed to Championship because of international teams. I don't believe that the reason changed. It was there to celebrate the year!

Re: Your Thoughts on the 2005 Championship Eligibility Criteria!
 

I could go for something like this.

FYI. There were 926 teams that attended regionals last year (according to the data on regional results posted on FIRST's website).

• 72% (667) went to 1 regional
• 26% (238) went to 2 regionals
• 2% (20) went to 3 regionals
• 0% (1) went to 4 regionals (Team 141 in case you are interested)

This means that you will have to increase the fees by quite a lot if you want to subsidize the Championships to a significant extent.

To be honest, I think I would prefer that FIRST INCREASED the fees at the Championships by a lot more but then included more in the bargain. For example, suppose that FIRST charged $20K for the Championships but then included 15 rooms (Wed - Sat) at the official hotel and agreed to feed 50 people for that same time period.

I would even go farther, perhaps FIRST should increase the fees to the point that travel is covered (most of the teams would be provided a bus, those over a 20 hour bus ride would be chartered from major cities).

By the way, does anyone else think that the Las Vegas Regional is the camel's nose under the tent for Sin City hosting the Championships? Seriously, there are close to a dozen hotels in Las Vegas could host the Championships without breaking a sweat. Think about it. Everyone in ONE hotel, including the competition, pits, celebration events, and so on. Flights to LV are cheap and plentiful (and almost every city has a direct flight there as well). In many ways LV is perfect.

In my opinion, the only reason against using them is that I thought FIRST was a little afraid of being associated with a city where gambling & prostitution are legal. But... ...if LV is good enough to host a regional, isn't it good enough to host the Championships?


But I digress...

Back to the topic at hand. It may be in the best interest of FIRST to increase the fees for the 2nd & 3rd regional and perhaps even the Championships (provided more stuff is included in the package -- especially things that would allow for last minute qualifiering teams to attend, like hotel rooms, food, and transportation).

Joe J.

Re: Your Thoughts on the 2005 Championship Eligibility Criteria!
 

Or maybe that is just part of the experiement - to find out for sure IF Las vegas is the right place to hold a regional...

All the previous discussions about Las Vegas as a possible venue for a FIRST event have drawn upon the "Sin City/Family Town" reputation. But no one has had any real DATA to show how well a FIRST event might fit in if held in Las Vegas - just speculation. What better way to find out if it would work or not than to just try it and see what happens. As Grandma used to say, "empirical data is better than no data at all." (OK, she didn't really say that, but it sounded good... :) )

-dave

Re: Your Thoughts on the 2005 Championship Eligibility Criteria!
 

Don't get me wrong. I think the Sin City aspect of a LV competition is manageable. I am just putting it the idea out there as topic of discussion.

Perhaps I should not have put the "camel's nose" comment in my post because it was more or less asking for it. But I am like a broken record on this lately with regard to almost everything that comes up on these fori:

Question #1 Does it compromise the mission of FIRST?
Question #2 Does it help us change the culture faster?

if (Ans1==YES) {let's don't do it};
if (Ans1==NO && Ans2==YES) {let's do it};
if (Ans1==NO && Ans2==NO) {let's do it if another benefit justifies doing it};

From my point of view, the answers to #1 is "not if we manage things correctly" and #2 is "probably yes"

Dave's point is that we can try it and see. I can go with that.

Joe J.

Re: Your Thoughts on the 2005 Championship Eligibility Criteria!
 

I'm still confused. Does that mean 2004 Regional Chairman's award, 2004 regional engineering inspiration winners qualify?

Re: Your Thoughts on the 2005 Championship Eligibility Criteria!
 

I was under the impression that they were referring to the winners of those awards at nationals.

Cory