Lessons Learned - The Negative

[Brandon Holley]

Originally Posted by Steve_Alaniz

Brandon,
I'm not arguing with Eric, he has made quite a few points that have made me think about what I've been saying so I'd say we are discussing or perhaps, at worse, debating... (oops... that thing I have about wording again! Could be a programming thing... you have to get the syntax right or else.)
In the presentation of the All Star Rookie Award, Woodie mentioned 3091's fantastic work in supporting FLL and FTC over the summer. My point is that they were not yet a rookie team and that that work should place them in contention for a judges award. Not that they don't deserve the rookie award too but that Woodie cited the wrong criteria for the award. So the question was at what point in time do you become a rookie and shouldn't it be that time frame that counts towards a rookie award?
FIRST defines the season as starting at kickoff. If Woodie had cited 3091's work over the last 3 months I would never have mentioned this. Clearly, FIRST can define it anyway they want to, but they probably should tell someone.
Bottom line for me is that I think FIRST need to clearly define this period or Woodie needs to get a better speech writer.

I disagree with your argument. Why should when the support of this team was given, matter in the giving of an award? Teams are not judged on chairman's awards and etc from just the previous year.

The argument I was trying to make in my earlier post was that some teams take a considerable amount of time to come to fruition. They are a team, maybe just without a team number yet, or without a sponsor yet, but theyre still a team. If they are reaching out and supporting the community before they have even competed, that stuff should definitely count....regardless of when it was, summer, winter, months, or even years before they became a "team".