[Amanda Morrison]

Question posed: Why does the fact that some of the awards can't get you a ticket to Nats make them less prestigious?

Are teams going to complain and get angry? "If only we'd won that other award..." ? Because no matter what, you've got a ticket in... it just might not be good for a couple years.

I've seen teams in the past get awards and be excited over them, if only for the point value. It's a little unnerving to think that teams might begrudgingly take the awards presented to them, because they aren't a free chance to compete.

I think I like this system best simply because it gives everyone a chance, and mainly the people I see complaining about who gets a seat are the teams that would normally qualify to go anyway.

Maybe I'm only seeing this because of my tendency to like the non-competitive side of FIRST a lot more than the hard-driven competitive side. I think some people are overreacting to this. It's new, yes; but it's not permanent. Changes will occur, and systems will work themselves out. I'm sure it wasn't smooth sailing when the point system first debuted.

I also understand that a large part of the design process is criticism, but this is getting a little out of hand by some. I'm not asking for everyone to shut up and take the hand that FIRST is giving them, I'm asking for everyone to cut FIRST a little slack and let things smooth over, work out for themselves. Coming on a message board, saying that you don't represent your team, but still slamming FIRST is a little offensive... myself saying 'give FIRST a break, they're trying their hardest' is not.