The Future of FRC Teams....

[fuzzwaz]

After a few years of FIRST robotics I really started thinking about the ways "dominant" teams survive from year to year. Why is it that some teams that have the reputation of being so good stay so good when new generations take over the spots of the old. There are a lot of answers to that question. People have told me that it was the mentors, the work place, and even the community support that keeps teams going. I however looked at sports to see if I could find the answer.

-Sports teams are similar to robotics teams right? You have coaches and a community that will stick behind you no matter what. So is a robotics team like a sports team? Can we call HOT 67 the New Orleans Saints of the FRC? A lot of people have told me that we can.

- So what does this mean? If robotics teams can be related to sports then how can we have teams that are always “dominant”? What happened to the Steelers this year in football? Why do the Pistons keep going from amazing to pretty bad (From MI, I can say that!). If we compare the HOT to the Patriots, will we start seeing a weaker HOT team? So does that mean that for the most part, robotics teams will change just like sports?

-Maybe a few years from now our younger generations will not speak of the HOTs, Chickens, Simbotics, of the FRC but some new teams that are the “new dominant”? What happens to the old ones? Do they go back and rebuild until they can finally reach their glory once again? Or maybe this sports stuff just doesn’t relate to robotics. Maybe 20 years from now these same strong teams will stay strong. What do you guys think? How will teams change over the years? If you think teams will get weaker, which ones and why? If you see some teams that are really starting to shine, tell me who they are and why you think people will be talking about them a few years down the road. I want to hear what you guys think!

[Basel A]

The difference between FIRST and many sports teams is that in most sports, the players are the major deciding factor in how good a team is, then the coach. Both of these are quite temporary. Dissimilarly, in most of what you call "dominant" teams, there's a foundation of dedicated mentors who don't move.

Though there are the fans and such that stay behind a sports team no matter what, they are not the deciding factor in how good a team will be. However, in FIRST, it is often the mentors that will determine how good a FIRST team is over the years (obviously a highly talented/highly dedicated/etc. student can have a major influence on a team, but in most cases they will move on to another team or just graduate after only 4 years).

As a note, this isn't saying those teams have dedicated mentors who build the robot, merely saying that those mentors do a great job in training students in such a way to be successful in FIRST, whether in decision-making skills or copious design "suggestions," those teams are more successful for it.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by fuzzwaz

Can we call HOT 67 the New Orleans Saints of the FRC? A lot of people have told me that we can.

Well now I'm not too sure 67'd like that.


I kid I kid, I was sorta rooting for the Saints

[fuzzwaz]

Originally Posted by Basel A

The difference between FIRST and many sports teams is that in most sports, the players are the major deciding factor in how good a team is, then the coach. Both of these are quite temporary. Dissimilarly, in most of what you call "dominant" teams, there's a foundation of dedicated mentors who don't move.

Though there are the fans and such that stay behind a sports team no matter what, they are not the deciding factor in how good a team will be. However, in FIRST, it is often the mentors that will determine how good a FIRST team is over the years (obviously a highly talented/highly dedicated/etc. student can have a major influence on a team, but in most cases they will move on to another team or just graduate after only 4 years).

As a note, this isn't saying those teams have dedicated mentors who build the robot, merely saying that those mentors do a great job in training students in such a way to be successful in FIRST, whether in decision-making skills or copious design "suggestions," those teams are more successful for it.

Maybe Sport teams and Robotic teams are not the same in some of those ways, but they are both groups of people coming together to achieve a certain goal. The success of each group is a combination of what they have around them. What truly sets apart a successful team (sport or not) is the mentality of the team itself. How are the students in this generation of Frog Force going to be different from the next generation and so on. A team with all the right mentors and tools to work is nothing without the right amount of motivation. This is why I believe no one team is invincible. This is where sports and robotics truly share similar components. So I think the real question turns out to be, Who are the teams who will become inspired within the next few years and who will lose their motivation to live up to the hype that their success has given them?

[familyguyfreak]

I kind of see 67 as the Lakers of FIRST, but I'm a HUGE basketball fan.

I believe you could be right but I see it as those teams will always be seen as "dominate" but as FIRST grows and more and more teams get better, the list of "dominate" teams will grow. Whenever you see 67, regardless of if they are having a bad year or not, you'll always see them as great team that you shouldn't take lightly.

Just my 2 cents on the subject.

[Rion Atkinson]

I'll admit that I didn't read past the OP, so I apologize if I am restating anything.

I feel that one of the largest influences on dominate teams is the returning students. If a student that really helped the team one year returns after they graduate, I can see them doing well again. As knowledge gets past down and grows from year to you, you begin to realize that this is nothing like your typical sport. In football a player can not say "Hey, let me lend you my endurance," but in FIRST student can say "Hey, let me share my knowledge." It is that reason that dominate teams will most likely stay dominate.

Another reason is their connection. I feel pretty certain that strong teams make good connections. Not only with sponsors, but with other teams. Just look at 148 and 217. There are times when a team/business/person is only as good as their connections.

My $0.02, take it or leave it. (Feel free to throw it off a building after lighting it on fire. But if you do; I want a video. )

-Rion

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by fuzzwaz

A team with all the right mentors and tools to work is nothing without the right amount of motivation. This is why I believe no one team is invincible. This is where sports and robotics truly share similar components. So I think the real question turns out to be, Who are the teams who will become inspired within the next few years and who will lose their motivation to live up to the hype that their success has given them?

Perhaps what I'm trying to say is.. the right mentors will motivate. There is obviously quite a bit of fluctuation, but I don't think it's because a team is fading, rather random chance, bad design decision, or another unfortunate event. The only way I think a really "dominant" team could really fall from grace would be if they lost a main mentor, organizer, or motivator, or one who is all three (most likely).

[fuzzwaz]

Originally Posted by familyguyfreak

I kind of see 67 as the Lakers of FIRST, but I'm a HUGE basketball fan.

I believe you could be right but I see it as those teams will always be seen as "dominate" but as FIRST grows and more and more teams get better, the list of "dominate" teams will grow. Whenever you see 67, regardless of if they are having a bad year or not, you'll always see them as great team that you shouldn't take lightly.

Just my 2 cents on the subject.

I agree completely! Teams like HOT 67 will always be remembered even if something goes horribly wrong with the way they send out those HOTBOTS. These high caliber teams will never be forgotten or underestimated but do you think we will ever see a team become the new HOT? Or maybe you think that HOT will always be on top (or atleast near the top) no matter what happens through time.

-Maybe I said it wrong before. Teams will not get worse in Robotics (different then sports) , they keep moving forward, But if a team comes together inspired and motivated what is stopping them from heading to the top? And if many teams take this route, we wont have the Same Super All Star teams we are used to seeing all the time playing on the world stage.

[fuzzwaz]

Originally Posted by Basel A

Perhaps what I'm trying to say is.. the right mentors will motivate. There is obviously quite a bit of fluctuation, but I don't think it's because a team is fading, rather random chance, bad design decision, or another unfortunate event. The only way I think a really "dominant" team could really fall from grace would be if they lost a main mentor, organizer, or motivator, or one who is all three (most likely).

Yeah I see what your saying. One person can make the differnce in not only the design of a teams bot, but the motivation of the team as well. Maybe I should be asking not if a team will fall from grace, but rather which teams will rise from the ashes and make power house teams less powerful?

[JABot67]

I certainly hope that the HOT Team continues to do well, but my prediction is that it will have good years and bad years. The fact is that even very well built, solid teams make poor design choices. Take 254/968 last year (2009)... their robots were amazing, but they chose to make them long instead of wide, and that gave them a disadvantage they weren't able to overcome in Atlanta.

My first year on the HOT Team was 2007, and I definitely got the impression that we were just not the team we used to be. We had our year in 2005, and that was the best we could ever do. I heard from the upperclassmen and mentors that 2006 had been an absolutely terrible year for us... our robot didn't work and was always breaking on us. And in 2007, everybody said our robot was good but we were eliminated in the semis at Great Lakes (with 1114), in the quarters at West Michigan, and in the finals on Curie. I was kind of mad that we didn't get to be on the team when they won the Championship and Chairman's Award in the same year.

2007 was the last year we had a robot that did everything we wanted to do, on ship date. Every year since then, I was afraid we were going to have a repeat of 2006.
On ship day in 2008, we had a robot with a non-functional arm and no autonomous mode. I thought we were screwed with all the catapults/shooters out there that could elegantly toss the ball over the overpass.
On ship day in 2009, we had a turreted shooter that could not stop jamming. It shredded balls in the process.
On ship day in 2010, our roller repelled balls, we didn't know how we were going to hang, and we had a lot of programming to do that I was afraid would freak out and kill us at competition. Plus we all knew of the cycle... One year we make Einstein, the next we win it all, and the one after that we absolutely suck. We wanted to break the curse.

I guess what I'm saying is... teams are going to have good and bad years. While sports teams generally stay the same for a couple of years, FRC teams can go from being great to being crap, and back again, because they have to make new robots every year. 469 had a bad robot last year, though they are normally excellent, and this year they made an absolutely outstanding robot. 2337 broke out their rookie year with a crazy-good robot, but their 2009 robot was a disappointment. 25 and 330 this year were many times better than they were last year. I will go out on a limb and say that 1114 might have a bad year sometime. And yes, newer teams will end up being dominant... teams like 2753 and 3138 will build killer machines. Also, teams that have been around for a while will suddenly burst out with great machines, like 1918 did in 2009.

How well a team does depends a whole lot on luck, and a whole lot on the talents of the students and mentors. One of those changes very much from year to year, and one of those only moderately changes.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by JABot67

469 had a bad robot last year, though they are normally excellent, and this year they made an absolutely outstanding robot.

Bad robots win IRI?

Everything else aside, I agree with your post.

[Arefin Bari]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

Bad robots win IRI?

Everything else aside, I agree with your post.

Adding to what Chris had to say, I look forward to seeing what 469 produced every year. They come up with one of the best robots possible. They just don't get enough mentions.

[Josh Drake]

A lot of references have been made to professional sports. I think if this thread needs to compare FRC to a sport, it should be more like high-school sports. The school I went to has a football dynasty. Other schools around the country are known for certain sports. That's sort of how I see the successful FRC teams. They have the mentors (coaches), recruit the students (players), and have facilities and support. Some teams are going to be oriented toward building the best robot they can and will have a great plan and team to do so. I also see the point of since we build a new robot every year; there are good years and not so good ones.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is there are teams that will always be competitive and teams that struggle to get something on the field.
My $0.02

[bassoondude]

Originally Posted by DRAKE343

A lot of references have been made to professional sports. I think if this thread needs to compare FRC to a sport, it should be more like high-school sports. The school I went to has a football dynasty. Other schools around the country are known for certain sports. That's sort of how I see the successful FRC teams. They have the mentors (coaches), recruit the students (players), and have facilities and support. Some teams are going to be oriented toward building the best robot they can and will have a great plan and team to do so. I also see the point of since we build a new robot every year; there are good years and not so good ones.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is there are teams that will always be competitive and teams that struggle to get something on the field.
My $0.02

The biggest difference between High School sports and Robotics is talent. In sports, great players aren't made, they are born. In Robotics, a team member can come in knowing absolutly nothing, and end up being a team's MVP. I guess this goes back to the mentors point, but you also factor in how much time that person spends working on the robot, and how willing they are to figure out how stuff works.

P.S As a fellow South Carolinian, I am very interested what school your talking about.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

There is a real equation to success that includes various amounts of returning students, retuning mentors, dedicated teachers, a certain size team and a drive to do the best you can. For Wildstang one of the original Lead teachers, the original Lead mechanical, long time mentor Lead, co-electrical Lead and a team mom are all still with the team. We currently have six mentors that have been here all 15 years. We have four engineering mentors who were students and three who were on another team in high school. We have all but one engineering mentor that have been with the team more than seven years. We have active participation from nearly sixty students in four schools of seven in the district. We have incredible support from not only the administration but from the school board many of whom attend team events and the Midwest Regional. We have support from the local governments in the towns where our schools are located. We have regular press coverage of our successes and we perform fundraising, community awareness and volunteer work that makes people recognize us. (it helps to have tie dye shirts) We freely copy ideas that work for other teams and we regularly accept ideas from our students. And like our video from 2006, we feel we are "never done".