|
Although we all like that...
If your not playing to win, why are you playing? The idea behind FIRST is that a superior machine (engineering) will inspire people to better their own robots, much like imporvments to modern technology.
What are the benefits of having an awesome team and robot if the Nationals, the highlight of the season, are open to anybody?
I think the Nationals should be a priviledge for the teams that proved they have excellent machines, and have their act together. Having lots of rookies is great, but in my experiance, they just dont have, through no fault of their own, the experiance that veteran teams do, and on average (AVERAGE) their designs are more modes, and their dont exactly...sweep the competition off its feet.
The nationals, I feel, would be more exciting if the matches were among equals, that is, the top tier of teams (the nats could be multi-tiered to include everyone).
Of course, everyone is a winner in FIRST, but what's the point of putting so much time and effort into a winning team if anyone can walk into the National Championships?
--Im truly, honestly, not trying to bash rookies out there, but from experiance, poor-preforming robots drag other teams down, and that, i feel, is the worst sort of punishment a team could go through--all that work, all the $$$, and nothing to show for it except 30-something place out of 80 teams, when a team preformed excellently at a regional.
Sorry, but once again, is FIRST that "everyone is a winner"
or is FIRST teaching them to constantly strive to better themselves, and to work hard to make it in the world?
I think the message is the latter. Utopian philosophy does'nt work outside of a classroom.
--Ben Mitchell
|