Rookie Awards Ethics Question

[Orion.DeYoe]

I don't see a problem with any of the "rookie" teams in any of those cases winning awards.
2056 is the best example of a "rookie" team that started out with all the experience of a veteran team.
Unfortunately "rookie team" is usually synonymous with "crappy team". More teams should learn from the example of 2056 (and other teams like 4334) and seek the help of a veteran team in their first few years. A group also shouldn't start a team unless they know they have the resources to be successful.

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by Orion.DeYoe

A group also shouldn't start a team unless they know they have the resources to be successful.

So you're saying that a prospective team should deny themselves the inspiration and all the other benefits FIRST can bring, just because they may lack some resources?

[BigJ]

Originally Posted by bduddy

So you're saying that a prospective team should deny themselves the inspiration and all the other benefits FIRST can bring, just because they may lack some resources?

A prospective team should do some research ahead of time to determine the resources, time commitment, etc. a FRC team requires to reach a level of success they find acceptable (whether that be complete a season, contend for RAS, play in elims, etc.). If they can't reach those amounts of resources, time, etc., there is probably another program that will better serve their needs.

Just my 2 cents.