Team of the Decade

[Nameo0]

Originally Posted by JVN

I think you'll find that most of the teams who excel in one, excel in the other.

-John

An example of one time for which it is not necessarily true is my team, 599. We have competitions in which we do GREAT, moderate, or barely hang in there, but we have educated elementary school kids about robotics, run the FIRST Aid Station (probably heard of it), and we do many other things. And we have only won Gracious Professionalism awards, Judges, and a couple of other ones but we have never won Championships or the Chairmans Award.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Nameo0

An example of one time for which it is not necessarily true is my team, 599. We have competitions in which we do GREAT, moderate, or barely hang in there, but we have educated elementary school kids about robotics, run the FIRST Aid Station (probably heard of it), and we do many other things. And we have only won Gracious Professionalism awards, Judges, and a couple of other ones but we have never won Championships or the Chairmans Award.

Lists like this are purely for fun. They are not intended to downplay the efforts of any team. I'm sure your team does a lot for FIRST. These teams we mentioned may have done more or at a significantly higher level though.

Read Carol's post as well if you feel this way. We are just making a list of teams who are dominant in the competition that takes place on the field but also off the field.

For example, just because my team wasn't mentioned does not mean I think any less of my team. This is just for fun. If you let it mean anything more than that to you, then I can't help you there.

Back to the list: 254 and 233 should be up there because they are two of the best teams in FIRST who have yet to win a CMP. Both are also very inspiring to every other team in FIRST.

[Nameo0]

Ya I know, but I just wanted to make sure that people are not overlooking the teams that have done a lot and tried very hard but they have not won anything big.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by Nameo0

Ya I know, but I just wanted to make sure that people are not overlooking the teams that have done a lot and tried very hard but they have not won anything big.

All well and good, but I have to disagree. There are hundreds of teams that meet the criterion of "tried very hard but they have not won anything big". If you're in search of a singular Team of the Decade, then (to me, at least) one has to look at the teams that have worked hard and met with some measurable degree of success.

[RoboMom]

What I'd be interested in finding out is what is the common thread with these teams? Consistent sponsorship (and what is that level?) Consistent mentorship/large number of mentors/diverse group of mentors? Student base-consistent/diverse? Team structure?
Of course I know of these teams, but don't know any of them well enough to even start an opinion. I just know little pieces.

[IKE]

Originally Posted by RoboMom

What I'd be interested in finding out is what is the common thread with these teams? Consistent sponsorship (and what is that level?) Consistent mentorship/large number of mentors/diverse group of mentors? Student base-consistent/diverse? Team structure?
Of course I know of these teams, but don't know any of them well enough to even start an opinion. I just know little pieces.

My guess would be at its core the mentorship. I have noticed that a lot of teams get a WFFA or WFA before winning a RCA or Chairman's. This means that team has a mentor gifted in spreading the infection of excellence to the students and other mentors. Afterall the WFA is a communication award. That is why I think the core of every great team is a great mentor (or mentors).

This isn't just true with FIRST. Look at any non-professional team sport (and many pro also), and you will find a coach or manager ... a leader that knows how to shape and mold a group of individuals into a team where the sum is greater than the parts.
*********************
One important thing to remember when making a list like this, is these really are teams to admire (not envy).

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by IKE

My guess would be at its core the mentorship. I have noticed that a lot of teams get a WFFA or WFA before winning a RCA or Chairman's. This means that team has a mentor gifted in spreading the infection of excellence to the students and other mentors. Afterall the WFA is a communication award. That is why I think the core of every great team is a great mentor (or mentors).

This isn't just true with FIRST. Look at any non-professional team sport (and many pro also), and you will find a coach or manager ... a leader that knows how to shape and mold a group of individuals into a team where the sum is greater than the parts.
*********************
One important thing to remember when making a list like this, is these really are teams to admire (not envy).

In addition, I think you'll find that every one of those highly successful teams have not just one, but several incredibly dedicated mentors that are experts in their field. There is simply no way a single mentor (no matter how dedicated), can provide enough expertise in every field that FIRST touches. The time requirement for a single mentor to even attempt to do that is staggering.

[Greg Needel]

Originally Posted by EricH

Sponsor of the Decade: IFI, Autodesk, and FedEx are easily the top 3.

I think that NASA should be the Sponsor of the Decade. Think of how many teams would not exist without their constant support. I would guess that FIRST would be 1/3 or 1/2 it's size without NASA.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

I think that NASA should be the Sponsor of the Decade. Think of how many teams would not exist without their constant support. I would guess that FIRST would be 1/3 or 1/2 it's size without NASA.

I think NASA would rate FIRST Hall of Fame status.

[OZ_341]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

I think that NASA should be the Sponsor of the Decade. Think of how many teams would not exist without their constant support. I would guess that FIRST would be 1/3 or 1/2 it's size without NASA.

Amen to that!
And its not just money. Its the mobile machine shops, volunteers, kick-off broadcasts, direct mentorship of teams, etc.
For our team its the delivery of a playing field each year for Ramp Riot. This not only helps our team, but also the 35 FRC and 20 FTC teams that attend.
Now multiply that impact by a ton of other events like Battle of Baltimore, Duel on the Delaware, Brunswick Eruption, Ra-Cha-Cha Ruckus, and the Virginia State Fair.
Quite honestly without NASA, I think the whole thing would unravel.

Ya gotta love NASA!

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

I think NASA would rate FIRST Hall of Fame status.

Aren't they? (At least the sponsor equivalent of)

Originally Posted by Previous Founder's Award Winners

1993 Motorola, Inc.
1994 Honeywell
1995 Walt Disney World’s Epcot
1996 City of Manchester, NH
1997 Francois Castaing
Chrysler Corp
1998 Johnson & Johnson
1999 NASA
2000 William Murphy, Founder
Cordis Corp & Small Parts,
Inc.
2001 Autodesk, Inc.
2002 John Doerr, Partner
Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield &
Byers
2003 Innovation First
2004 FedEx Corporation
2005 The Lego® Group
2006 United Technologies
Corporation
2007 General Motors
2008 BAE Systems
2009 National Instruments

I would like it noted, the only place I can find this information is in the Awards section of the manual. This sort of surprised me.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Tom Line

In addition, I think you'll find that every one of those highly successful teams have not just one, but several incredibly dedicated mentors that are experts in their field. There is simply no way a single mentor (no matter how dedicated), can provide enough expertise in every field that FIRST touches. The time requirement for a single mentor to even attempt to do that is staggering.

I think this is a key that is often overlooked on many teams. If one or two mentors try to hold the team together and pull the load, it limits the team's potential. It is also, quite possibly, one of the factors of burnout. FRC provides opportunities for adults to learn to share duties and expertise and, if it is lacking, to recruit through sponsors and/or the community that the team is a part of. This can be a difficult concept for strong leaders to comprehend and implement, but it can be very beneficial to the team as a whole.

111 is a great team to think about regarding Team Of The Decade. They walk the talk and are open to helping others and sharing information, knowledge, and expertise. I've been the recipient of wisdom shared by a few of the mentors and alumni of 111 and it has strengthened the skills that I bring to the table of FIRST, as an individual, and as a member of another team.

[JackN]

My vote is 71, three World Championships is pretty good from what I hear. I very much disagree with people who have said they aren't quite what they used to be. In my opinion they maintained their high status even after winning three out of four championships. Since I am lazy and don't want to look at regional performances, I will just use their championship performances.

2005-#3 pick (eliminated first round)
2006-#4 pick (barely beaten by 176/111/122)
2007-#2 pick (championship finalists, nearly won it)
2008-#1 pick (eliminated second round after robot malfunctions)
2009-#4 Captain (Eliminated first round)

It isn't like since they won the championship they have stopped showing up. They have lost some close matches and some heart breakers. They still show up with one of the best robots year in and year out. More importantly is that they haven't missed elims at championships over this decade. Something only a handful of teams can say.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by JackN

My vote is 71, three World Championships is pretty good from what I hear. I very much disagree with people who have said they aren't quite what they used to be. In my opinion they maintained their high status even after winning three out of four championships. Since I am lazy and don't want to look at regional performances, I will just use their championship performances.

2005-#3 pick (eliminated first round)
2006-#4 pick (barely beaten by 176/111/122)
2007-#2 pick (championship finalists, nearly won it)
2008-#1 pick (eliminated second round after robot malfunctions)
2009-#4 Captain (Eliminated first round)

It isn't like since they won the championship they have stopped showing up. They have lost some close matches and some heart breakers. They still show up with one of the best robots year in and year out. More importantly is that they haven't missed elims at championships over this decade. Something only a handful of teams can say.

I don't think anyone's saying they're "bad" or even "not awesome". But they haven't been at their 2001, 2002, "why even bother competing since Beatty's here" level in many peoples' opinions (They have "just" been amazing instead of completely no contest dominating). They haven't won the MWR since 2005, for example.

That all being said, I doubt there will ever be a year I would enjoy playing against 71, or not want to be their alliance partner. I don't mean to take anything away from them... They're still one of the top teams in FIRST.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

I don't think anyone's saying they're "bad" or even "not awesome". But they haven't been at their 2001, 2002, "why even bother competing since Beatty's here" level in many peoples' opinions (They have "just" been amazing instead of completely no contest dominating). They haven't won the MWR since 2005, for example.

That all being said, I doubt there will ever be a year I would enjoy playing against 71, or not want to be their alliance partner. I don't mean to take anything away from them... They're still one of the top teams in FIRST.

In the spirit of friendly discussion...

They may not have won MWR since 2005 but since then they have won St Louis (2006 AND 2009) and West Michigan (2008) As well as a slew of other awards that would be astonishing on any other team's resume. 3 Regional Chairmans 2, EI awards, and a handful of technical awards.

Let me tell you, as someone who has competed with and against 71 my whole career in FRC I NEVER enjoy playing against 71. For all I care 71 could put a KOP chassis out there and they would FIND a way to win. I can honestly say that, to paraphrase a famous saying, "There is nothing to fear but Team Hammond itself." I have very few teams that I assume will be great year to year, 71 is top of that list.