Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

I don't think this is about taking away a CMP spot from anyone. I think this is providing teams newer members with the same experience it's previous members had. Once a team becomes apart of the HOF, then the members on the team years following are missing a step in the FIRST process. That's just how I see it. lol

Cass

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

At the moment it isn't, Ed was merely remarking that a team could rest on its past accomplishments. FIRST is young, how many HoF teams are there (17?) Right now I am sure those teams are still tremendous role models, 2 decades from now what happens? Perhaps 254's school closed down and they lost their sponsors, should a team that builds the kit hoverbot and barely manages to do any community outreach still be a role model just because 2 decades ago they were? (I chose 254 because they were the CCA award winners my freshman year more than any other reason)

Making an analogy to the nonFRC world, should a singer who had a hit 20 years ago still be considered a modern sensation?

Ed does make a good point that HoF teams having a lifetime invite to Championships is a recipe for disaster. Yes these teams are amazing, yes I want to be one of them someday, but 20 years from now they shouldnt be able to say, "I won that award back in 2004 and I'm going to Championships based on that" Perhaps FIRST could have HoF teams reevaluated every 10 years or so and decide their HoF status. I don't mean to cheapen the HoF at all, just to make sure that teams are maintaining the moementum I don't think any teams now wouldn't demonstrate that they are not sustaining but I do believe that having the requirement on them to sustain would be a good thing. And 20 years from now, if we have to give up 37 slots at Championship because every single HoF team is sustaining, well I will be one happy guy.

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

An email our team just received had the following answers to some questions:

- HOF teams who resubmit at the regional level and win are eligible to win at the Championship level that year
- HOF teams will always retain their automatic Championship eligibility regardless.
- HOF teams can set up a HOF booth even if they reapply
- A HOF team who re-wins the Championship CA doesn't earn any additional benefits other than getting to keep the Chairman's trophy for another year

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

I think the major concern is how we see the Hall of Fame. We don't really put any context to it. We think that the teams that started in 1992 or 1998 or 2000 are the exact same team coming into 2010. They aren't the same team at all. They have the same number, some of the same mentors and maybe a similar winning strategy, but that in no way makes them the same team.

Think of it like this: The Yankees have won 23 world series titles, but Derek Jeter doesn't have 23 World series rings. He's a part of the team that has won that many, but thats team history. Therefore it makes perfect sense, that a FIRST team Hall of Fame team be remembered in context of the year they won it in, and not just consider every year after that team has the same caliber as it did years past. (sorry for using a yankees example for all you yankee haters out there.)

Instead of saying "this Hall of Fame winning team, Team 000!" we should stop and pause and remember that it was actually the 1990 Team 000 won that right to be called HoF, so the 2010 is not actually a HoF winning team. It's History calls it a Hall of Fame team, but itself isn't.

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

The point from Jon about fixing something that didnt need fixing was good.
However, as a non-HOF member, we welcome it. If a HOF team is better than a non-HOF team or vice versa, then so be it.

I really dont think that its about ensuring HOF teams continuing what they did to get there.

I'd like to believe that FIRST, in its decision to elect 1 team to win the CCA, did so because they knew year in an year out, they would always be outstanding.

Personally, there is no secret that we have tried for the CA every year since 2006 (only applied once prior and won in 2003 at SVR). But we do the things we do, not because we're trying to win an award first and foremost,....its because its our team mission and goals.
More effort has been put in recent years only because we have a Hawaii regional and there are over 300+ organized Robotics teams now in the State of Hawaii, us being the first in 1999.

I'd like to think that the respective teams in their area are making the same impact and in doing so, can be recognized for their efforts in their RCA entry.

The field just got tougher and everyone has certainly stepped up their game.
I can think of a few teams off the top of my head from the mainland US that have a crack at it in the next 5 years, and I bet, I'll be right, with or without this new rule.:D

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

I assume you mean the field got tougher as a result of this decision... if that's what you meant then I might disagree.

The field only got tougher IF some of the HOF teams choose to reapply (and that's assuming they will still have quality entries). I don't know that it's a given that any will reapply. Personally (not speaking for my team), I'd rather not compete for the CA again and instead see someone else win it (I'm not assuming that we'd win again if we applied, but if we don't apply then I know we won't win, so I figure the odds of someone else winning if we don't apply are as good as or higher than if we do).

If our team ever re-won the CA, I know we'd be excited. But I think that, honestly, a team who never won it before would be more excited and more inspired, and I'd rather see that. It's just human nature that the first time you reach a milestone it's much sweeter.

Personally, I just don't see a problem here that needs fixing, but if there really is a problem, then I agree with a previous suggestion that creating a separate award that only HOF teams can compete for would be a better solution.

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

They've actually won 26.

Given the clarification posted a few posts ago by Dave, I agree with Al's idea. It seems like it's basically just to allow the HoF teams to keep attempting to put new hardware on their shelves (and hopefully causing them to "step up" their game since winning the trophy), so why have it come at the expense of other teams attempting to win the award? I second the thought of having a HoF recognition award.

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

Dave,
actually I meant that since the time some of the HOF teams have won, the field now is actually tougher. Hence, I agree with some of your points.
I'd bet that many of the non-HOF teams are doing just as much if not more based on the fact that HOF teams in the past provided a benchmark of success and layed the framework for other teams to follow and exceed.

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

Hey Cass! I'm with you 100% with the experience for new team members as I stated above. I'm sure you were probably in the same room at the same time when I talked about this years ago. I'm thrilled that 103 team members will once again have this opportunity.

However, if HofF teams remain pre-qualified and one wins RCA, there will indeed be one less team qualfied for the Championship than qualified under the previous set of rules. That being said, you can say the same thing for multiple regional winners, HofF teams that win on the field, etc. So I'm not sure how much weight that little thought should have, it was just one of the questions that came to my mind.

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

zero. With the exception of those who no longer exist.

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

Thanks for sharing.

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

Maybe instead of Hall of Fame it should be more like a 5 Year Alcove of Fame ?

;)

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

I speak for myself and not for the entire HOT Team, but I really like the new rule. It gives the "option" of resubmitting if the HOF team desires. It is not a requirement. I like it when teams have choices.

The HOT Team has taken the position, since winning the CCA in 2005, that they would help other teams to have the feeling of winning the CCA. Yes, all of the students from that team are gone...in fact they are now out of college and working. But we try to keep the dream alive by hanging our CCA banner in the middle of the machine shop, displaying the CCA trophies at the workplace and in the schools, and talking about the experience at meetings. I still remember the excitement of winning...from waking up at 4am to actually holding the Clock that evening. The team also relives that feeling by having the honor of creating a HOF display.

I would like to see every team have that experience. Even though the students on our team have not seen that excitement, as a team they get to experience some of it. Our team continues to perform as a HOF team. We are, in my opinion, still doing great things. Are we doing things greater than other teams? I don't know. I see some great things from other teams.

This year we are not eligable to compete as the new rule allows. I don't know how the team as a whole feels, but I don't want to submit again. I want to help other teams to win this award. In my opion, we need more diversity in the HOF. Adding the Ticks this year will be great. I have watched their activities for some time, and they have done great things. Adding another team of this caliber will be great. The HOF teams already display what they do, let's see what others are doing. I can think of about a dozen teams that I believe really deserve to be in the HOF. I don't want the HOT Team from preventing them from being a part of the HOF. The experience of submitting and standing before the judges would be good for the kids, but I don't want to take the trophy and HOF status from them.

As to another way of keeping the HOF teams working, I have talked to FIRST about having a separate competion and trophy just for the HOF teams...having the presentations to the judges done in a public meeting so others could watch and learn. No bites, yet.

From the HOT Team, good luck to all teams that submit for the CCA. Keep up the good work...and may the best team win in Atlanta.

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

Just as a thought...

What if a HoF team who opted to submit for an RCA used it to plug another deserving team that was submitting at the same event? I don't see anything against this, either in the 2009 rules or in the info we have now on this. Sort of the ultimate example--"We already have the CCA, so here's who we think would make a good addition to the HoF and why."

Re: New Chairman's Award Eligibility
 

I really like this idea. Very similar to a conversation I had with another team leader when we seriously considered delivering each other's presentation ... and had we had more time to get the presentation groups prepared, we probably would have done it.