Team 3000!

[Pjohn1959]

Congratulations to BAE Systems & Jeffersontown High School on becoming the FIRST team 3000. :)

The highest number I have seen so far is team 3051.

[Nica F.]

I was looking through the NASA grant list and completely forget numbers were rising so high! It is always great to see that this great program is growing. Good luck to team 3000, and beyond!

[jax1488]

sheesh.. feels like only yesterday we barely got past 1000.. eh more like 4-5 years ago lol

[joshsmithers]

sheesh.. feels like only yesterday we barely got past 1000.. eh more like 4-5 years ago lol

Yeah, and it was only two years ago when we got past 2000. Just imagine: about 1700 teams with about 30 students per team. Thats pretty big. :yikes:

[jax1488]

Yeah, and it was only two years ago when we got past 2000. Just imagine: about 1700 teams with about 30 students per team. Thats pretty big. :yikes:

when i was on the robowizards, we had the max, 9 kids lol, until 06 out of no where about 18 or so

[CraigHickman]

...Wow, this program is getting big! If only there were as many resources for team longevity as there are for starting new teams...

[comphappy]

No kidding especially with the economy the way it is, we lost all but one of our sponsors. And we are going to have just enough money it looks like to pay for our entry fee, but no second regional for us this year...

[DCA Fan]

Please tell me they'll name themselves the Spartans.....

[GaryVoshol]

sheesh.. feels like only yesterday we barely got past 1000.. eh more like 4-5 years ago lol

Yeah, and it was only two years ago when we got past 2000. Just imagine: about 1700 teams with about 30 students per team. Thats pretty big. :yikes:

Team 1000 was a rookie in 2003.

Team 2000 was a rookie in 2007.

Part of the reason for getting to team 3000 so quickly is that FIRST issued only odd numbers between 2700 and 2826. About 75 potential numbers were skipped.

Also there is a gap between the highest number in 2007 and the lowest number in 2008, and again in 2008 to 2009. About 50 numbers were not used.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Please tell me they'll name themselves the Spartans.....

I'm hoping they call themselves MST3K :yikes:

[Elgin Clock]

Y3K? :cool:

[Katie_UPS]

Team 1000 was a rookie in 2003.

Team 2000 was a rookie in 2007.

Part of the reason for getting to team 3000 so quickly is that FIRST issued only odd numbers between 2700 and 2826. About 75 potential numbers were skipped.

Also there is a gap between the highest number in 2007 and the lowest number in 2008, and again in 2008 to 2009. About 50 numbers were not used.

Why only odd numbers?

[synth3tk]

I wonder if a certain internet meme will still be relevant once we hit 9000.... :D

[Nawaid Ladak]

over under 2012 season when we get to team 4000?

i say under

[vivek16]

Actually, I bet AndyB from 171 lunch at a regional that teams would get over 3000. Sucker! :P

-Vivek

p.s. they got over 3000 like a month ago

[ATannahill]

I say under, probably 2010.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

over under 2012 season when we get to team 4000?

i say under

I say 'under' as well.

[Tetraman]

any thoughts on what will happen the day they reach team 9999?

[Andrew Schreiber]

any thoughts on what will happen the day they reach team 9999?

Hexadecimal team numbers.

[ATannahill]

Maybe they will distribut those numbers that were not used?

[Joe Ross]

any thoughts on what will happen the day they reach team 9999?

The new control system supports over 25,000 team numbers, which is also approximately the number of high schools in the US.

[CraigHickman]

Maybe they will distribut those numbers that were not used?

I'd like this to happen before we get into the HUGE numbers. So rather than break 4 digits, let's recycle until we HAVE to break 4 digits, eh?

[hallk]

While I love all the new growth, it can be kinda tough to remember all the teams and where they are from.

[tanmaker]

Can anyone actually explain why team numbers have been skipped each year? To me, it just doesn't make sense to skip the numbers like FIRST has.

[Akash Rastogi]

Even if FIRST reaches the 4000 mark next year or w/e, it doesn't matter unless those teams below the landmark are sustained...having a team 3000 means nothing in an economy that might not even be able to support the 1500 teams we have...

Landmark numbers mean nothing when the other teams are falling.

[CraigHickman]

Even if FIRST reaches the 4000 mark next year or w/e, it doesn't matter unless those teams below the landmark are sustained...having a team 3000 means nothing in an economy that might not even be able to support the 1500 teams we have...

Landmark numbers mean nothing when the other teams are falling.

Exactly. Approximately 50% of all teams die off.

Now, this might be misinterpreted by many as being harsh and accusative. Bear in mind I mean no such thing. I'm simply musing here.

I believe that the job FIRST is doing to promote new teams is awesome, but a little misguided. Very low number, high experience teams will be motivated for the awards, contest, and recognition that stems from this push for more teams, be it selfish and intentional or totally benign. These teams will then strive to start as many teams at as many nearby schools as possible. This is a GOOD THING. However, the reams are a little irresponsible. Rather than follow up, and make sure the program is well supported and healthy, they're too buy dashing on to found the next team.

Now, this IS a generalization. There are other teams that strive to help others survive, and work on program continuation. This number pales when put next to the number that go for starting teams.

So yes, team 3000+ does herald a good thing, that being growth. The 1500 or so active teams inside of 3000+ number slots, however, signal a lack of attention to program lifetime. This isn't good. Something ought to be done about this. Be it in depth training at events, "team rescue kit in a box," or what have you, something ought to happen. So who's up to have a grant writing lesson happen on Thursdays of regionals? Heck, for all the money FIRST throws at events, there has to be a little bit left over to entice some english professors to come and speak about grant and proposal writing...

[Andrew Schreiber]

Exactly. Approximately 50% of all teams die off.

I agree with your main point but I do have to point out that this just isn't true. FIRST skipped a lot of numbers in between the Juggernauts (Team 1) and Team 3000. In addition I am sure there are teams that merged with other teams. I wouldn't say that 50% of FRC teams die off, I might put the number as high as 1/3.

That being said the support structure does not exist for these teams. I know that many of the teams in my area, while financially we can scrape by, we simply do not have the mentor force needed to inspire students. I recall Tom Bottiglieri asking me what I did on the team once, I could only respond by telling him what I DONT do. We have a grand total of 2 engineers, the rest of us are college students. Yeah, we are dedicated, but I feel we are letting our students down. FIRST was supposed to be about the engineers becoming role models for students. I mean, we are supposed to be able to sell a jersey with Karthik on the back (his last name wouldnt FIT!) just the same way we can sell a Yzerman jersey here in Hockeytown. 70 years from now we should hear stories about how Andy Baker could point to a gear box and tell you where it would fail. I feel our team is failing in that, we dont have those role models. Yea our two engineers are amazing (John, Dung, you guys are awesome!) But FIRST needs to stop making it so easy to START new teams and focus on retention.

So here is my challenge to the FIRST community, STOP starting new teams. If you are stable and have the mentors you need think of ways to help out teams that are struggling. I can't promise you that it will win you a Chairman's award, but I can tell you that by helping one team survive instead of starting another to replace them you are changing the world.

[Akash Rastogi]

So here is my challenge to the FIRST community, STOP starting new teams. If you are stable and have the mentors you need think of ways to help out teams that are struggling. I can't promise you that it will win you a Chairman's award, but I can tell you that by helping one team survive instead of starting another to replace them you are changing the world.

Emphasis mine.

I wouldn't necessarily put it like that but yes, I do agree to some extent.

Rather than starting a new team then letting them frolic around their 2nd year, analyze which teams in your area need the most help and when you are starting a team, analyze whether or not their area (local sponsors, shops) would allow them to be a sustainable program (IM me for an example of such a team and how we select which areas to start or support teams in). Who cares about getting chairman's???. That should not be your team's priority, although helping a struggling team would help win a chairman's. But I do believe that veteran or just strong teams need to hold back on just starting new teams for a while and take a good hard look around them and find teams that need some help. Sure its great to start a new team and have those students experience the delight that is FIRST, but I think our goal as a community should be to support those in need rather than starting another team that may not even be able to survive past their first season.

Btw, my intention was not to say that around 50% of the old teams have died out. Just a large number of them.

+$0.02

If anyone disagrees feel free to IM me to discuss an example of such a team tragedy. Perhaps this topic could use a new thread?

[SWIM]

Another thing that makes the team numbers inflated is the fact that some schools have had multiple teams. The school I'm working as an assistant coach and mentor for just got back into FIRST after a three year hiatus, and we had to "start" a rookie team since all the kids that were on the old FIRST team have graduated. Originally, we were team 1489, but this year we got assigned the number 3060. I'm sure there are all kinds of other circumstances where schools have gotten multiple team numbers over the years, and as was previously mentioned, numbers are skipped every year.

So, I'm sure that the team retention problem isn't nearly as bad as it looks based on looking at the ratio of active teams to total team numbers.

[Akash Rastogi]

Figured this should be looked at to support my earlier post.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=777637&postcount=39

its quite sad if those veteran teams don't register this season :(