[DELurker]

OK. With the week 1 competitions about 1 week away, I wanted to ask the CD community-at-large for their opinion on something that has been bothering me. Please note that I know what the FRC rules on the topic are. I'm more interested in the popular view of what the rules should be (after all, it is an ethics question)...

Question 1:
How "Rookie" does a rookie team need to be to be eligible for Rookie All-Star, Highest Rookie Seed, and Rookie Inspiration Award?

Question 2:
Should a team that is rookie in name only bow out of accepting rookie awards?

Details:
Situation 1:
A large well-established team (A) forms a second team (B) for all of their first-year members. They collaborate and mentor the new team, but each team is responsible ultimately for their own designs, fundraising, sponsorship, community involvement, etc. Is (B) a true rookie team? Should they decline consideration for rookie awards?

Situation 2:
A team (C) has a rift (the reason is unimportant) and a number of very experienced members and mentors leave to form a new team (D). The two teams operate independently in all ways. Is (D) a true rookie team? Should they decline consideration for rookie awards?

Situation 3:
A new team (E) is formed in a town with no previous FRC experience. They collaborate via Skype with a more experienced team (F) 200+ miles away. Is (E) a true rookie team? Should they decline consideration for rookie awards?

I know that all three of these situations have occurred either in 2013 or 2014, so the scenarios are not unreasonable. However, at what point should a team graciously bow out of consideration for the rookie awards?