Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JVN
I feel strongly on this subject.
I guess, it all comes down to mentor quality. With good mentors, anything can be good for the kids.
John
|
Amen. The decision making process still weighs heavily for teams no matter what the choice. There are a lot of parts/systems to a robot. Buy a gearbox? Build a gearbox? Use a white paper design? Create your own? Adapt a readily availble gearbox for the kit motors? In all of these cases student learning and inspiration can still be high. In all of these cases student learning and inspiration can still be low. It's not the "WHAT you do" it's the "HOW you do" that makes a difference in our society. Every one of the above choices is accepted practice in today's global economy. Why create artificial boundaries that don't exist in today's world?
A team can choose or not choose to buy/use a stock gearbox. I won't argue over philosophical views on which one a team should do - that's up to the team and I respect all views/decisions that are well thought out.
I will tell you what inspires me about the selling of one awesome gearbox. A team is willing to take their own invention and share it with other teams at the risk of getting beaten with their own design. This elevates the level of competition and pushes all teams to "do it that much better" while encouraging teams to share more at the same time. I say horray for any team willing to make such a bold move. They've just increased their own workload, made it easier on others, and taken a step toward more highly functional machines at all regionals which will attract more sponsors and media. The end result is a huge win for FIRST and it's participants.
I'm quite sure Phil Jackson never took his coaching staff to other cities to teach the fabled triangle offense to help elevate the level of competition in the NBA. This is a culture changing activity we engage in for the betterment of society as a whole.
I guess I wasn't brief either ...... oops
