[Rich Kressly]

I don't have a lot new to add, however I will most likely write a lot here as I usually do. I've been carrying a similar torch for a long while now (I'm sure you can find at least a dozen similar posts of mine on these boards if you'd like) and I'm glad it's still a conversation.

The issue isn't about 1114 here at all. 1114 is fine, is going to be fine, and will inspire the thousands they always inspire and win a lot of hardware while doing it. It's unfortunate they are targets here, but clearly they're not the only targets. In recent years I've seen this type of situation first-hand and it's anything but acceptable. This singular situation is an example of a growing culture problem (I think I called it "Kressly's Mainstreamers Theory" at one point).

Early in my FIRST years I remember viewing certain teams as "cheaters" too. Thankfully, I was well-mentored, listened to the right voices (both inside and well beyond my own team) until I had a better understanding. Bottom line is that once I REALLY got to know those teams, I was more amazed than anything.

For those of you who think it's demoralizing to a team to "lose" year after year to the same team, I'd bluntly state that I believe team leadership needs to refocus all of those team members with a consistent message about real meanings in FIRST and about the stark difference between the "full effort to win" vs. the actual winning itself. Besides, these powerhouses all need alliance partners, don't they?

I also find it sadly, and highly amusing, that many teams out there look at this situation as a "better robot because they have more access to goodies" situation. It takes ZERO DOLLARS AND ZERO EQUIPMENT to develop a sound game strategy and then scout (paper and pencil forms, maybe?) voraciously at events. If you match a sound strategy with a robot that can even play part of the game well (for example this year a box on wheels that plays defense and deploys a consistent minibot would certainly have a shot at the elims) and couple that with REAL scouting data from what you observe on the field of play you'll have yourself "in the mix" on the field and you'll build credibility with others. This isn't just about working hard, it's about working smart - knowing your strengths, timelines, and capabilities. If you don't have the infrastructure of an 1114 or 148 then trying to do as much as they do, the same way is planning for disaster. Also don't forget the other, equally wonderful award entry submissions that help you mark the culture change in your community.

I for one will raise my hand as a mentor that has NEVER helped to build an elite robot, but I have been able to, through my efforts, effectively bring about positive culture change in two communities (working on the third, now) and have contributed positively to many lives in the process. My teams, for the most part, have been competitive on the field, too. What more could I ever ask for? And much of the learning I've/we've done has been from the "powerhouse" teams because they've been so willing to share.

Quite frankly, those mentors/leaders/students/teams focused on solely extrinsic motivators (trophies) who are not EQUALLY espousing intrinsic motivators are missing the point altogether and pretty much haven't REALLY CLOSELY listened to Woodie and others. In my experience the more we focus in the intrinsic, the more the extrinsic happen anyway.

Like I said, I'm glad this is still a conversation, but I long for the day we will no longer need to have it. As Sean says, it's not a short, nor easy road.