GP? I think not.

[GaryVoshol]

Is there Robot Envy? Certainly - everyone would love a slick-looking well-executing machine.

Is there Budget Envy? Who wouldn't want a $40,000+ budget that some teams have?

Is there Mentor Envy? Sure, but there are only so many Karthiks, Copiolis, Bakers and V-Neun's to go around.

But does this create despair? Not for me, and that's because of a very different mindset in FIRST - those that have help those that lack, those that can help those that can't. Rather than sink into despiration, we can choose to seek inspiration from those around us. And if we happen to beat a 33 or a 65 or a 47 in a match or two, that's icing on the cake.

As a parent, I'm very happy for the amount of hands-on activity my daughter and her teammates get. This team seems to have more direct student involvement than some other teams have. Yet we respect the contributions the mentors make. The students, and the non-engineering parents, realize that the ability to weild a screwdriver or power drill is important, but that doesn't drive the program. The ability to understand the engineering principles behind designs as explained by the mentors is worth even more. And as the students learn, they contribute their design ideas to the pool that becomes the robot. Not to mention the Chairmans, the fundraising, programming, and all the other sub-groups that make up a team.

It's my opinion that this team structure is the best for this team. Leav has his opinions. Other teams have their own opinions. The success of any of the programs cannot be determined by the robot performance on the field. The success will come much later, after inspired students go on to get degrees and they themselves begin designing or building or medicating or teaching or mentoring in their careers. The success of a now-17-year-old program will be felt many 17's of years later.

It may be a cliche, but inspiration comes in many flavors, and inspiring the students to change the culture is what this is all about.