3 Year FRC Cycle? - The CON's

[J@GMFlint]

Originally Posted by Dancin103

I'm not a fan of this. I think having students on the team for 4 years experiencing 4 different games is great because they have the opportunity to work with the many different obstacles that are presented over those different games and time period.

Just my $0.02.

Cass

Agreed!

Also, under a 3 year game cycle, the intensity and focus of the build season would likely be diminished reducing the challenge and benefit of them being exposed to the entire "high speed-high stress-high performance" aspect of the process. Now, we only get one season to get things right & are pressed to do so. Knowing there's a couple more seasons to get better or "copy" concepts... seems likely to dull the edge that can otherwise be developed in the face of the challenge as we do now.

Why even have a "build" season at all after the 1st year?

Would they then limit off-season work, or allow it and become an official year-round activity? It already is for many teams so limiting work could shut some teams down.

What about rookie teams who enter in the 3rd year when everyone could be theoretically already at max. potential. Level playing field?? Not likely.