|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
| View Poll Results: Do you think it is fair to hold slots for the rookie teams | |||
| Yes |
|
50 | 76.92% |
| No |
|
12 | 18.46% |
| Maybe |
|
3 | 4.62% |
| Voters: 65. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
|
I did not say every rookie team was bad.
I am saying if a team wants to get into to this robotic game this year and have not signed up yet. They could raise the money now for next year. and they could go and watch the regional in there area and then they would be ready to do it next year. About the game. Lets look at it. I can teach kids year round about robotics. and do it in a way so everyone can have fun. This is a game. just like a sport game but better here you use your head. If My team does not do well I lose funding. It is hard to sponsor a losing team. If you win the kids do get more into it. You can go on and on about how FIRST is trying to help everybody and I can go on and on showing you how they are hurting the game. If the game fails so does FIRST. There are more games out there and cheaper to go to. Look I have always LOVE FIRST they have been doing a great job. I have gotten a lot of kids now into this field. I am just hoping they do not hurt themself ![]() |
|
#17
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Quote:
When I explain drive trains and gear ratios and classical physics to my students, I do so using tools graciously provided by veteran teams like Chief Delphi and the TechnoKats. We teach the kids the basics, and then draw upon the vast base of knowledge within this community to take them to the next level. Elitism is bad, and you're exhibiting quite a streak of it, it seems. Your sentiment that, somehow, schools and students interested in participating should be prevented from doing so solely because you have the benefit of experience, is both unfair and not within my understanding of the goals of this program. But, that's just me. We all have our own reasons for being here, and I'm fully aware that we're all not here for completely altruistic reasons. I'd be the first to admit that. But, there comes a time when we've got to step outside of ourselves for a moment and try to regain our focus and understand what the program is trying to do. |
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
|
Mike first of all CHILL !
You need to take a step back and think before you type. Sponsors really dont care about winning. Even though it might boost participation, winning isnt everything. I do not agree with FIRST if they are going to hold spots for rookies. This is because, if there are not enough spots then just tell the venue that you are moving. There are plenty of places to hold a regional. I know that it does take a long time to plan a regional, but FIRST should have figured for growth this year. But if the regional size cant be increased then rookies should get a spot automaticaly. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well...
Although I am not on a new rookie team, I imagine it must be tough for them. For instance, they have to decipher rules and a new competition, but they must also worry about gaining intrest from kids and adults, and also obtaining funding for participation.
As a matter of fact, I would like to congragulate all those hard workers on the brand new teams, for trying hard to get everything up and running. I do think it is fair for FIRST to hold spots for rookie-teams or young teams at regionals because this is giving them some slack that they may need and atleast is an attempt by FIRST to make sure they get to play. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
These are my thoughts hope they make sense to all, Mike Last edited by Mike S. : 18-10-2001 at 22:40. |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mixed signals.....
Nate Im a little confused by some of the things im reading, not only from you but others. You said.
"FIRST has always said that one of their goals is to eventually expand to the point where every school in the country has a FIRST team. If they don't give an opportunity to those first year teams who are struggling up until kickoff to get things put together to compete, it would be counterproductive. After all, how good would it be for FIRST to be working with a team to get started, only to tell them, "sorry, since you didn't start early enough, you can't compete this year - better luck next year." This makes little sense because we now know that this is impossible because if that dream came true where would the competition be held?. Florida is already full acording to FIRST thats why were limited this year to just over half of last years National total. FIRST cant handle 530 teams, how are they going to handle 10.000. not including overseas teams. Also The " sorry you cant play because you didnt start early enough" is already happening because if your one of the original teams from 1992 ( you get to go). Regardless of winning a regional. I voted NO because it should be FIRST come F.I.R.S.T. serve. If this is a competition and only 60% of all the teams registered in the Regionals are able to go to Florida due to the lack of space then the top 60% of the winners should go on their effort and merit. If a team who has won a place in the top % cant go to Florida for what ever reason then the next team in the lower 40% get to go and so on. Every one has an equal chance, veterans and rookies. Veterans can have bad luck and rookies can have good luck, this to me seems the fairest way for all. None of this even/odd stuff. Dont be mad at me folks, I just want to see the competition as even as possible. nick237 |
|
#21
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Clarification
Quote:
Hope this helps to clear up what I meant... |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Mixed signals.....
Quote:
-Nate |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ah, now I see what you were saying and it does seem to be fair but it should still be first come first served. Many teams will feel thier only chance for the Nationals is to play in as many regionals as possible. if there is no limiting rule then alls Fair.
I think a rule should aply that once a team has won the right to go to the Nationals then they cant win the right twice. If they win another award that would let them go again then that right would be passed on to the next team that would Qualify but has not won the right because of being second? This just gives hope to another team that might be having a run of bad luck or some mechanical problems. Only one team chairmans award can be submited at any regional, no team can submit more than one and their submission is judged at only the regional that is chosen by that team. no other regiols would alow another chairmans award to be submited. This should go for all the other awards that alow a winning team to go to Florida. Just my 2c but these ideas do make it fairer for all the teams. Nick237 |
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
FIRST has experienced a very strong response in registration for our events this year. However, we remain committed to welcoming new teams and returning teams, and encourage all those to register who would like to get involved. Please contact us at frcteams@usfirst.org, or call, if you would like more information.
I am wondering why they posted this. If all the regional are full with a waiting list. How on earth are they going to put more teams in. Or are they just trying to over fill to get more money? If a team can not go to a regional why build a robot? and once again why should a rookie team get in before a old team. I can see if they are in another regional. I am staying if a team has not got into a regional yet and is on the waiting list why should that team take a back seat to a rookie team. |
|
#25
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
They are probably planning to bring teams in from the wait-list. It is entirely possible that FIRST is purposely showing lower capacities for some regionals than they can actually hold. If so, this is most likely to allow rookies and veterans who haven't registered for a regional to attend at least one event. I cannot believe that FIRST would ever allow a rookie team registering for a second regional to get preference over a veteran team that is not signed up for any regionals. I don't think that would be "gracious professionalism" by any standard.
Also, are more regionals in the works? It is possible, though somewhat unlikely, that FIRST, after seeing the mad dash for regional spots, is planning to create more events to allow every team to register for one or two events. Finally, we may see some teams be asked to choose between regionals. If a team has more than three (or even two) events, they may be asked which ones they really want to attend, and then be limited to a certain number. It isn't the best solution, but when faced with some teams registered for four events, ond others not registered for any, FIRST may have no choice but to limit attendance. |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
We'll just have to wait and see. There's another month and a half before registration ends, and I'm sure FIRST is not getting as much credit as they deserve. Oh, BTW, I voted yes on the poll. I also think anything over 3 regionals is pushing it. Our team is going to 2 regionals and nationals. Last edited by Jay Lundy : 22-10-2001 at 19:56. |
|
#27
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Quote:
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| "Fixing" matches | Shawn60 | General Forum | 158 | 18-03-2003 18:41 |
| Hits, Misses, & Suggestions -- long message | archiver | 2000 | 17 | 23-06-2002 23:36 |
| The Case For 'Regionalizing' teams at the Nationals. | archiver | 2000 | 33 | 23-06-2002 23:35 |
| How do we view more teams? | archiver | 2000 | 0 | 23-06-2002 23:11 |
| How do teams hold their brainstorming meetings? | Anton Abaya | General Forum | 10 | 03-01-2002 18:02 |