[Paul Copioli]

Well, here goes my take ... I, too will probably be sticking my neck out.

I have been following this debate since before last year's forums. Last year's competition seemed to bring out the worst in all of us, students, coaches, etc. Now I know that not everyone acted like a ninny, BUT this debate really heated up after the bad experiences started piling up. I watched this discussion turn into a mentor vs. student debate. There are several students on this forum that have taken the stand that they don't need the engineers/mentors, etc. I also understand that there are several student run teams. If you think that you are doing just fine without any mentors, you have missed the entire point of FIRST. One thing FIRST is about is giving young adults people they can look up to, and be inspired by, other than professional athletes, racecar drivers, etc. Think of it as giving young people real life heros. The tone I have noticed in MANY student posts dating back to last year is that of "we really don't need the adults" and that saddens me. Like many other engineers on this forum, I give my heart and soul to our team and if our students had a "we don't need the engineers" attitude, I guarantee I would not be involved. FIRST is about inspiring students, FIRST is about getting students excited about engineering and the sciences, FIRST is NOT about pitting the students against the mentors.

My stands on this issue:

1. reducing the number to 4 is the biggest problem

2. Telling teams how many of the coaches have to be adults/students is detrimental

3. By FIRST reducing the number of adult mentors, they are saying that the adults are getting in the way ... wrong message.

-Paul