Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KenWittlief
If your team equates winning a regional with team-success then FIRST is standing on the wrong foot.
.....
When teams feel like losers because they go home without a plastic trophy then we have failed to make them understand what this is all about.
|
First, good points Ken, especially about remaining focused on the goal - inspiration. "It's still not about the robots".
But nobody said anything about "winning".
Our team placed 61st out of 65 teams in 2005, but came home feeling like HUGE
winners, as Rookie All-Stars. Not for the award (just a hunk of plastic!), but for WHY: We were a rookie team, but we reached out to at least half a dozen teams and helped them with their robots, including rewiring & replumbing the robot from the (also rookie) team next to us in the pits. This was unplanned, and not initiated by the adults. The KIDS did this on their own, because they knew that helping others is the right thing to do. The award made it official, but the THANKS from those teams was what made us into winners.
In 2006, we moved up: 34 out of 65 or so at NJ. We still came home BIG winners: Judge's award for "Building Traditions" - the kids went and did the same thing (helping other teams), again. On their own, again. The other teams' gratitude, again.
Turns out, the kids like building robots, and they don't really care whose it is. Who'da thunk it?
That Finalist thing in Palmetto: Honestly, it wasn't from our stellar performance on the field. Our scouting team finally
Got It and gave us great strategy, which we followed. Team 16 must have seen us as consistent (we hardly scored, but we seemed to to the right thing a lot), or maybe 16 had temporary insanity (more likely) but they picked us. We rode their coattails, along with 95 with their innovative and awesome
shooter.
The point is, I guess, that JVN's comment is something i really believe in, but perhaps the "on the field" part can be taken out without changing its validity. I guess
'teams that are proud of their accomplishment are more sustainable than ones that do not' might be a better statement.
Regarding the 'discouraged' team - well said from a 'good' team. It suchs to think of yourselves as losers, and whether you and I like it or not, they do. Those hypothetical teams you mention sometimes never improve, because the best players put their energies into something else, and (sadly) so does the Administration. I completely agree, it is wrong, and we
have failed, but it's still true in some cases. I, for one, am going to help correct that for next year: They also have a need for more, higher-quality mentors. (Anyone in the north-central NJ area thinking about it, PM me.)
Don