My $.02
I think FIRSTfan has a point and should be allowed to speak his/her mind.
I for one did not read FIRSTfans post as "47 bashing". I would never have known that some teams were allowed to compete in more than 3 events without this post so I think of it as useful information.
I'm interested in this because we raised funds to attend more than 3 events this year but were asked by FIRST to drop two in the name of Gracious Professionalism to allow other teams a chance to compete. We had no problem with that, since the rule applied to all, so we thought.
The problem is that along with other major rule reversals, FIRST never (to my knowledge) made it clear to all teams that you had the option to backfill those events that were under utilized.
This has nothing to do with 47, they just happened to get the word that this was a possibility. But in getting the chance to compete again, and given the new "points" rule, I do feel that these teams were given an advantage. Just another line item for the gripe list I'll send to FIRST later this year.
Thanks FIRSTfan for your comments, I read the true meaning in your post and see your point.
As for team 47, you guys are one of the big dogs in our world and will always be watched, analyzed, and respected. Please step back and look at this as though you were on the other side of the fence. What if you were denied this opportunity only because of a lack of communication. I'm sure you can understand the frustration.
I agree that FIRST is under a lot of pressure, but what happened this year is a little outside of correcting minor mistakes. We need to get together as a community and express our concerns to FIRST and simplify the process so this kind of stuff is not a problem in the future.
|