Short answer: YES.
Random thoughts answer: what if the HOF teams were offered the chance to automatically attend the Championships if they completed some annual “renewal” process of their HOF status? Something as simple as lead a conference, or bring a rookie team, or SOMETHING in a leadership role that showcases why they’re a HOF team?
But really, just yes.
That already happens with the waitlist. At least HoF teams earned their “free ride”.
Like stated before, 10 of those teams are in District models, and at least 1 that isn’t has a regional left.
Last years data (I think):
21 total Hall of Fame teams recognized by FIRST
19 HoF attended a championship
13 HoF teams also qualified by their performance in the 2017 season
6* HoF teams qualified based on their HoF status alone
*Could argue possibly 5 because one team declined District Championship
I’d say bad robots rather than bad teams. At the very least, all the teams attending champs are well-funded, so it is easy enough to think that they have local supporters that see value in the team.
I attended champs with a waitlisted team last season, 3172, and we ended up 1-9. So I definitely understand a little about being on that end of things and the motivations. For them, it was a local supporter that wanted to see them compete past their regular single regional season. They had punched above their belt in regionals the last two years finishing 8th, but with fairly simple robots. Mixing in with the championship division teams I think was a fantastic experience for them but I also think that being on the losing end of so many matches is deflating. The quality of teams is so much higher in the divisions over a regional. I don’t think all the students were ready for it.
My own team, 1108, has been in the situation of attending champs with a underperforming robot 1-2 times with RCAs and again it is really about a team’s expectations. Bad robot performance can sour the experience for some and I know some that would almost rather not attend champs if they didn’t think the robot would be competitive. I’m totally in the other camp, that the whole experience is worth it and it can be completely inspiring and awesome if you go in with the attitude of a celebration with a competitive tournament, rather than just a competition.
Back onto HoF teams. I don’t care so much about the performance at champs, but I do care about what is healthy and sustaining for the HoF teams. I want them to be recognized but also to continue to succeed in their mission. I don’t want being inducted into the HoF to be their peak. So I guess the question is whether an automatic invite is healthy for that. I can only really approach this question from the context of my own team, who was the champs GP team in 2012, arguably a runner-up to CCA. While it would have been totally amazing to be a HoF team I think that competing to make championships does make us work to build a better program each year.
With the smallest number of non-qualifying HoF teams, this isn’t that important from a numbers standpoint. The % of qualifying HoF teams shows how awesome these teams continue to be even after their CCA. And not just using the competitiveness of their robots to continue their mission, many find new inspiration using their HoF status to motivate them to continue to change their culture. Maybe that is the true mark of a HoF team, one inspired not by success but by the mission itself.
Yes, yes, yes. The EI Award has nothing to do with Chairman’s, so let’s keep squashing that misconception. The awards are entirely separate, judged by a separate team of judges, and have a different judging process. Plus, the criteria for the awards are distinct from one another. They are both non-tech “outreach” awards, but there are distinct differences.
Chairman’s is about “significant measurable impact,” while EI focuses on advancing respect and appreciation for engineering." While both “outreach” oriented, they have distinct meanings and criteria.
First of all, there is a rule about Chairman’s. Once you win Chairman’s at champs, you can’t earn chairman’s again for 5 years. But why should earning the Chairman’s Award have anything to do with the Engineering Inspiration Award?
I’m curious to learn more. I know it sounds like a conflict of interest coming from a representative of the other HoF team from 2017, but because the awards are different, and the kids still work just as hard, why not recognize them? We don’t get upset when the world champions from the previous year win a regional again the following year (and Einstein champions automatically get a ticket to champs the following year). I’m not discounting anyone’s position or opinions, I’m just curious to learn more about why this is upsetting or frustrating when a HoF team wins a different award the next year.
I was once a member of a rookie/new team with aspirations for EI and the Hall of Fame (and worked diligently for 10 more years to get there) and I saw other teams recognized time after time. But it just made us work even harder still to surpass it.
Anya,
If they truly earned the award, shouldn’t they be recognized? Why give it to a less-deserving team?
With Regionals instead of districts, which robot would you say is a stronger robot: the 8th alliance captain or the 2nd pick on the 1st seeded alliance?
Waitlists don’t just pick up low quality robots. They pick up higher quality robots that just didn’t happen to be on the right side of the bracket in elims. In many cases, you’re weakening the competition by not allowing them in.
I think you’re arguing theory and practice here. It this were true in practice, we’d see instances where the same team wins EI and Chairman’s at the same event. You do believe there are teams working in outreach that are working on the distinct criteria for both, do you not? I know for a fact MARS is one of these teams. If they’re not in a shared process at some point, how is it possible we don’t see the same team winning both from time to time?
I’m not sure I’d say it’s a conflict of interest, rather a different perspective. You bring up an interesting counterpoint. I imagine implementation is the key here. You’ll notice nobody is complaining that you’ve won two regionals this season. Can you think of a reasonable solution to prevent pre-qualified teams from winning regionals? You have to sit out after the semis and get a backup bot? How could we do this?
With awards, it’s much more trivial. It’s as simple as attaching the EI tag to the Chairmans five year limitation. Honestly, I’d prefer see a permanent limitation on Chairmans. I love getting to see what other teams are doing. This would provide an avenue that ensures new teams get recognized here. Why limit it to EI and not other awards? EI includes the championships invitation. There are plenty of awards that show just how amazing your team, and your robot, are. Why not set aside awards that come with an invitation for teams that can use the invitation if there’s an easy way to handle this?
At the judging level, they are not in a shared process, but the judges will not give both awards to the same team. This is also true with other awards. Teams typically do not earn multiple technical awards. At a regional, the judges for the Chairman’s Award are entirely separate, and the content in the Chairman’s Award cannot be used and shared with other judges. Chairman’s judges do not even interview teams in the pits. However, once the Chairman’s judges decide on their winner, that team is taken off the list for other judged awards. We have very rarely earned multiple awards at the same event where we won Chairman’s. The only awards we have won alongside Chairman’s at the same event are awards judged separately. I.e. Entreprenuership is judged partially before the event by a separate team of judges, Dean’s List/Woodie Flowers, GP that is nominated by other teams, etc.
The Chairman’s and EI awards are entirely separate, with separate judging processes, judges, and criteria. However, being at the top of the Chairman’s Judges’ list will knock you off for other awards, not just the Chairman’s Award.
Just to correct some of this…
Judges typically “spread the wealth” and will not give the same team multiple awards at an event. The primary exception to this is Safety because it is decided in an entirely separate process. Doing this also simplifies the process of the awards - if a team wins an award they can be taken out of deliberation from other awards. Since CA is the highest award winning it pulls you from contention from other awards, EI is typically next because it’s a qualifying award. RAS similar deal (though, truthfully this has less of an impact on awards typically). After that, I usually try to prioritize awards that will make other awards “drop out” or that have large numbers of teams on the board so we can send folks back out if we need to.
Entrepreneurship and GP are decided during this process the same as other awards by judges same as everything else. Entrepreneurship has additional restrictions based on submission criteria, and GP allows teams to submit content for consideration but ultimately the judges decide that award. However, when Regionals had Fri/Sat awards we couldn’t decide on awards entirely at once and as such teams could win awards during ceremonies on Friday and Saturday. Now that they are all handed out at once multiple team awards (again, outside of safety) are less likely.
Individual awards (VOTY, WFFA, DL) are obviously entirely distinct and don’t follow these rules at all.
However, your statement that we cannot use information from Chairman’s submissions in other judging is at least partially incorrect, there’s nothing stopping it but practically it’s difficult since CA judges tend to be off on their own. I’ve seen occasions when they came back and looked at other awards and asked to add teams for consideration. Chairman’s judges may also, time permitting, do pit interviews but that is far less common (and I don’t think it’s done at CMP, ok, I know it hasn’t been done since I’ve judged at CMP) . Judge teams all work together to celebrate the teams according to award criteria. They can use any information their fellow judges gathered at that event to make decisions.
Source: FRC Judge 2012 - 2017 (I took 2018 off from volunteering), CMP Judge 2014-2016 (skipped CMP the last 2 years), Judge Advisor Boston - 2015/2016 (I moved out of the area and trained a replacement whom I think is doing pretty well)
Thank you for the clarification. I have never been an FRC judge, but I’m just going off of what my friends and relatives that ARE judged have told me, so I apologize for any misinformation.
The point still stands that EI and Chairman’s are different and separate, and I firmly believe that earning a Chairman’s Award should have no bearing on the ability to earn an EI Award in the future. The students deserve just as much of a chance for recognition whether they’re on a HoF team or not.
There is a large misconception that EI is basically “second place Chairman’s.”
And that is simply not true. The awards have different criteria. Just like how the different tech awards are all different. The Innovation in Control Award is different than the Industrial Design Award, etc.
No apologies needed man, you were like 95% there which is more than most people get. 
And some of that stuff has changed recently (the Fri/Sat award stuff most notably)
EI and CA are distinct awards that are judged as independently as any other two awards are. The awards may have similar criteria but others do as well. In fact, as a summary:
Machine Attributes (outside of Creativity) - How well does the team articulate their process to achieve the end result that’s MFD.
Team Attributes (outside of Entrepreneurship but including CA) - How well does the team celebrate and spread FIRST’s mission.
Nobody would dare say Industrial Design is runner up Engineering Excellence right? Similar deal. VERY similar criteria (at a high level) but distinct awards.
Ninja: I’m completely agreeing with Alex, distinct awards. Just adding a new way to look at it for folks.
FIRST could do a lot to correct this idea if they did a better job of clearly defining EI
They could also not make the medals look like the finalist ones.
Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
I’d love to see the data on how many EI winners have won without submitting for Chairman’s. I’m sure it happens but I doubt it’s common.
My team did it 3 times are in the past. And that is just one team.
I agree and it doesn’t help that at many events, the team that wins is up for Chairman’s so the award is almost a disappointment to them, because now they know they didn’t Chairman’s.
Yes. Hall of Fame teams should automatically go to the Championship.
From the manual:
Engineering Inspiration Award
Updated
February 7, 2018
Events Where It Is Awarded
District Events
Regional Competitions
District Championships**
FIRST Championship Division
Description
Celebrates outstanding success in advancing respect and appreciation for engineering within a team’s school or organization and community.
Guidelines
Extent and inventiveness of the team’s efforts to recruit students to engineering with particular emphasis on the most recent year’s efforts. Measurable success of those efforts.
Extent and effectiveness of the team’s community outreach efforts with particular emphasis on the most recent year’s efforts. Measurable success of those efforts.
A commitment to science and technology education among the team, school, and community.
Achievement of the FIRST mission and ability to communicate that at the competition and away from it.
Efforts are ongoing, not strictly concentrated on the build and competition season.
Eligibility
Teams* are eligible for the Engineering Inspiration Award at each Regional or District event. Teams will be restricted to earning this award once at each level of competition. In other words, once a team has earned Engineering Inspiration Award at a Regional or District event, they may not earn it again that season at a later Regional or District Event. At District Championship, only District teams that have won Engineering Inspiration Award at a District event during the current season are eligible.
*District Teams who participate at Regionals or inter-district events are not eligible for the Engineering Inspiration Award at those events.
**An interview room may be used for this award at the District Championships. Please consult your district leadership with any questions.