Is it fair to let Chairman's Award Winners go to Nats every year?

[Gope]

Originally posted by Jessica_166
Okay - so do you know all of the Chairman's award winners so that you can go up and ask them questions/advice??

Also, how can a team that has won it say 8 years ago give you advice if they didn't do it. The only people who might remember what they did would be the mentors, assuming, they are still helping out the team.

The other thing is, what that team did to win the award is outdated. It takes a lot more to win that what those teams did.

I'm not campaigning against the Chairmans award, I just don't agree with the way they're deciding to use it. The cool thing with Chairman's is each and every year you have to be really creative to get something that can compete with other teams. Just imagine what the judges have to go through to pick a winner.

-Jessica

My team won in 2000 and I am very offended by your statements, not because my team won but because of the x-cats. They are the ONLY team to win twice and will forever be the only team to win twice(it is soooo hard for a former chairmans award winning team to even be considered again because it is always in the back of the judges' minds). Go look at the x-cats, they won very long ago(92 and 94 I think) and tell me that they don't deserve to be there every year. They always build a robot that performs in the top 20, they always have a chairmans that considered and they along with the Bomb Squad(my team) and ChiefDelphi were selected to be ambassador teams. If you pull out a list and go look around you will find that all former chairman award winning teams are very similar to the x-cats and that they always bring a very high quality team that does very high quality work with them everywhere they go. So perhaps you should go research former Chairmans award winning teams and what they did and what they do before you go off and start saying that it is harder to win now that it was in years past.

[Adam Y.]

11 spots being "wasted" on the chairman's award winners leaving only say 270+ for everybody else.

Im confused are we talking about regional chairman's winners or championship??

[Koko Ed]

Originally posted by wysiswyg
Im confused are we talking about regional chairman's winners or championship??

Previous winners.

[AJ Quick]

I think they should make the robot competition worth more than Chairmans. They make a bigger fuss out of Chairmans than they do the winners of the national competition. I look at the eligibility, and teams that won last year should be able to attend this year. There is the points system, but there is no garentee that a championship winner meets the requirements.

[xavior06]

Originally posted by AJ Quick
I think they should make the robot competition worth more than Chairmans. They make a bigger fuss out of Chairmans than they do the winners of the national competition. I look at the eligibility, and teams that won last year should be able to attend this year. There is the points system, but there is no garentee that a championship winner meets the requirements.

winning isnt everything in life

[Adam Y.]

I think they should make the robot competition worth more than Chairmans. They make a bigger fuss out of Chairmans than they do the winners of the national competition. I look at the eligibility, and teams that won last year should be able to attend this year. There is the points system, but there is no garentee that a championship winner meets the requirements.

The same could be said for the Chairman's award winners using the points system.

[Koko Ed]

Originally posted by AJ Quick
I think they should make the robot competition worth more than Chairmans. They make a bigger fuss out of Chairmans than they do the winners of the national competition. I look at the eligibility, and teams that won last year should be able to attend this year. There is the points system, but there is no garentee that a championship winner meets the requirements.

The reason why FIRST make such a big deal about the Chairman's award is because FIRST is trying to prove to everyone that this is more than just a robotics competiton. If all it was about was winning regionals then FIRST wouldn't have even bothered giving out a Chairman's award and just made it some sort of fancy Battlebots competiton.

[rbayer]

Here's my take on the whole thing:


Teams that win Chairman's win it because of their team's philosophy and beliefs. These are things that are passed down from generation to generation of FIRSTers and are truly as much a part of a team as their name and number.

Teams that win Chairman's are more than a robotics team. They are good citizens. This is something that isn't rewarded enough in life, yet really should be. In my opinion, ANYTHING we can do to teach high-schoolers that being a good person is more important than winning at all costs is definately worth the cost--whatever that may be.

Teams that win Chairman's serve as a model of how other teams should try to behave. By bringing them to the championship each year, we can hope that some of their life philosophy will "rub off" on some of the newer teams.

Therefore, my vote is to allow Chairman's winners to come back as long as they want. Even 20 years from now, that will still only be 30 teams with guaranteed spots. Figure that about half of them will qualify in other ways each year, meaning that only leaves 15 spots taken because of Chairman's winners. Even once FIRST becomes so big that they can't continue with the even/odd thing and are forced to move to a more traditional qualifying system, I still believe Chairman's recipients should be allowed to go. It just makes sense.

--Rob

[Jessica_166]

Originally posted by Koko Ed
11 spots being "wasted" on the chairman's award winners leaving only say 270+ for everybody else.
I see your point.

Did I ever mention anything about there not being enough spots for other teams because of chairman's???
uh no...
My point, which a bunch of you are missing, is there are people benefitting from other people's hard work. And I know not every team is still persisting in chairman's because of the fact that THEY'VE ALREADY WON IT.

[Koko Ed]

Originally posted by Jessica_166
Did I ever mention anything about there not being enough spots for other teams because of chairman's???
uh no...
My point, which a bunch of you are missing, is there are people benefitting from other people's hard work. And I know not every team is still persisting in chairman's because of the fact that THEY'VE ALREADY WON IT.

Alright I was being nice about this but I take your thread as a personal swipe at the X-Cats and the people who are still on the team from '92 and 94 and worked hard not only to make the X-Cats the team they are today but helped FIRST get there as well. From Mr. Eugene Wicks and Mrs. Peggy Foos. These people worked hard to make the X-Cats the team they are today and FIRST as well and the virtues that won us the Chairman's award in the past are eagerly practiced to this day!
To say that we don't deserve to be there because our win was far in FIRSTs past is a insult!

[Jessica_166]

Originally posted by rbayer
Here's my take on the whole thing:

Teams that win Chairman's win it because of their team's philosophy and beliefs. These are things that are passed down from generation to generation of FIRSTers and are truly as much a part of a team as their name and number.

Teams that win Chairman's are more than a robotics team. They are good citizens. This is something that isn't rewarded enough in life, yet really should be. In my opinion, ANYTHING we can do to teach high-schoolers that being a good person is more important than winning at all costs is definately worth the cost--whatever that may be.
-Rob

Winning Chairman's doesn't necessarily make you a good citizen. And philosophies can change. I know firsthand that this is true.
Like I've mentioned in other posts, my team has always been the underdog. I know and am very close with a team who has won Chairman's before. This year their robot didn't come out as well as they had planned. (if anyone from that team is reading this I'm very sorry and don't wish to offend, but I need to make a point) However, we came out with a highly competitive robot. Some members of that team, not all, but some, decided that they were going to sulk about it. The team philosophy of "one team two bots" was completely lost. They no longer cheered us on during matches and it was a horrible mess. Yet they have won Chairman's in the past. Think about that.

[Jessica_166]

Originally posted by Koko Ed
Alright I was being nice about this but I take your thread as a personal swipe at the X-Cats and the people who are still on the team from '92 and 94 and worked hard not only to make the X-Cats the team they are today but helped FIRST get there as well. From Mr. Eugene Wicks and Mrs. Peggy Foos. These people worked hard to make the X-Cats the team they are today and FIRST as well and the virtues that won us the Chairman's award in the past are eagerly practiced to this day!
To say that we don't deserve to be there because our win was far in FIRSTs past is a insult!

Dude - I'm not saying that you don't deserve it. I'm not trying to offend anyone, I just want to see what other people think about it while trying to defend my own views. I never said anyone had to think what I think. But I am trying to explain what I think and why. You don't have to make this a personal issue.

[Koko Ed]

Originally posted by Jessica_166
Winning Chairman's doesn't necessarily make you a good citizen. And philosophies can change. I know firsthand that this is true.
Like I've mentioned in other posts, my team has always been the underdog. I know and am very close with a team who has won Chairman's before. This year their robot didn't come out as well as they had planned. (if anyone from that team is reading this I'm very sorry and don't wish to offend, but I need to make a point) However, we came out with a highly competitive robot. Some members of that team, not all, but some, decided that they were going to sulk about it. The team philosophy of "one team two bots" was completely lost. They no longer cheered us on during matches and it was a horrible mess. Yet they have won Chairman's in the past. Think about that.

So because of the poor attitiudes of some kids on the team all the good things that have been done in the past should be torn up and thrown away? If there is a presence on that team that was there when they won the Chairman's award then hopefully they will assert themselves and help them to remeber what got them that award in the first place.
We did not have a good robot last year but we still cheered enthusiactically and remianed a good citizen of FIRST and one of the main reasons is the mentors on the X-Cats who pass down those values to our kids and kids who readily embraced those values. Because we understood what we had to live up to and we had no intention of letting down those teams of the past.
Hopefully the team you are talking about remebers the same.

[Jessica_166]

Originally posted by Koko Ed
So because of the poor attitiudes of some kids on the team all the good things that have been done in the past should be torn up and thrown away? If there is a presence on that team that was there when they won the Chairman's award then hopefully they will assert themselves and help them to remeber what got them that award in the first place.
We did not have a good robot last year but we still cheered enthusiactically and remianed a good citizen of FIRST and one of the main reasons is the mentors on the X-Cats who pass down those values to our kids and kids who readily embraced those values. Because we understood what we had to live up to and we had no intention of letting down those teams of the past.
Hopefully the team you are talking about remebers the same.

I remember that last year, we cheered for them and they cheered for us. The feelings were great. We had a blast. Last year our robot was a hunk of metal that moved. Their robot was really good. Well this year the roles reversed, but instead of being optimistic about it, they pretty much wanted nothing to do with us. And it wasn't a few kids, it was MOST of the team.

[Keith Chester]

You think of Chairmans as an award.
Therein lies the mistake.
Winning Chairmans is, instead of a free ride to Nationals, a huge responsibility. What FIRST bestowed upon 103 this year was the responsibility of being a figurehead for other eastern seaboard teams, giving them the responsibility to lead teams to help FIRST grow.

103, 175, 47, and the other national chairman award winners DESERVE the right to go to nationals every year, as but a small payment to the leadership role that they have been given.
Re-read criteria about the Chairmans award, and ask if that doesn't deserve the highest recognition and award.

I'm disgusted this was ever asked. Rethink the FIRST community as you know it, for surely it's wrong because you are focussing on only the competition.