![]() |
2009 Regional Registration Progress
This is sort of a continuation of Richard's thread from last year.
This morning team registration broke the 1000 barrier. That's 10% ahead of last year at this same time. 5 resurrected veteran teams, so far. 107 new teams too with Texas and Oklahoma leading the recruiting. New teams are rookies as well as those not judged by FIRST to be true rookies, such as 2707, 2715, 2719, 2828, 2852, 2858, and 2860. Code:
TX 15Popular Regional destinations: Code:
Week 1 |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
The Hawaii regional list should increase on the 2nd go around for additional signups. Curious as to who from the mainland will be attending though. :confused:
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
wow i thought Florida would do better than that i know my team got a new team started #2797 what are the others
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
That's great to see all the growth from all the new Texas teams. :)
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
It is great to see the expansion of the FIRST community. Team 1261 would like to invite all new teams to attend the Peachtree Regional(which is literally 2 mins from our workshop) and the Palmetto Regional.
As for all of the returning teams, WELCOME BACK!!! |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
I believe that Team 1884 is going to Chesapeake Regional. :)
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Just a footnote on the regional list.
The Microsoft Seattle Regional is going to have room for more teams. We will have final numbers in a few days. See my post in the Regional Competition section. Kevin |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
I'd like to welcome all the rookie teams to FIRST. Hang on tight! It is a wild, crazy and fun ride that will impact your lives for decades to come. Sarah |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
It looks like FIRST has cleared a lot of the 1st regional waitlisted teams.
The published capacities jumped and a bunch of teams that I knew had registered, but didn't appear on the registered team list are now there and on the regional team lists. Getting ready for tomorrow's open registration I see. Just shy of 1300 teams, registration is almost 200 teams ahead of this time last year. including that rookie from Istanbul. |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
team 1018 will be at Boilermaker Regional
See ya there!!! |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
That was fast!
2nd event registration opened and vroom all available Championship slots were filled within 20 minutes. One new team snuck onto the list, but was soon pulled by FIRST. Many Regionals went quickly to their published max capacity too, although I'm sure many waitlisted teams will make it to the event of their choice. |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
wow 65 for for wahsington! how come they have so many?
florida is second but i know we will have more |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Dang, 51 teams for Connecticut - quite a one day explosion. Can't wait.
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
65 for DC??? I thought the official number was 58. Who are the 7 teams pending out of curiosity.
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Snapshot of registration as of 10/30/2008
As a side note, it looks like FIRST handled registration like they used to some years ago - first-signed up = first-registered in a second regional or at the Championships. For the past few years it had been first-paid = first-registered and you wouldn't show up on the team list until payment was received by FIRST, but this year you got on the registered list right away without having to pay beforehand. FIRST also did not accept pre-payment in advance of registering. 7 resurrected veteran teams. 4 took one year off and 3 took two years off. I didn’t look to see how many old teams were given new team numbers, but there are 5 new teams that are technically non-rookies. Where Teams are from in 2009 Code:
MI 122Capacity usually has more than these publicly listed slots available, but how many? Only the Regional Directors know for sure, and the waitlisted teams they may have spoken to. Code:
W eek 1 Code:
TX 39 |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
who are the 7 resuracted teams?
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
As of this morning, we've reached Team 3000!
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
Hall A: Field/Pits 204C: Event Office 206: Judges' Room 304-306: Volunteer Room(for volunteer food, etc) |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
We're halfway through the registration period, so I thought I'd look at who's missing.
Israel has the largest block of still unaccounted for teams, but on-the-whole they tend to always be late registering. Missing veteran teams: Code:
IS 28 |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Just saw that team 3011 from Germany has registered and is headed for Las Vegas.
So we have teams from ten countries: USA, Canada, United Kingdom, Israel, Brazil, Mexico, Turkey, Netherlands, Germany, and Chile. P.S. on a side note... New team 2715 has been renumbered 216 I suppose because it's a second team of existing team 288 at Granville high school |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
Columbus Area Career Connection High School They seem to be a small team http://www.c4robotics.com/ of 10 or so students, but with plenty of mentors about 45 miles or so from you. |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
nice ill contact them and see if our team can help in any way:cool:
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
team 38 is back and is 2836 :)
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
New non-rookie Grandville MI Second Team was reassigned to an unused number, 216.
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Registration is at 1500 this morning, almost a month ahead of last year.
Every team from here on (less 1) is pure growth. Still missing a little more than 17% of last year's veterans though. So far, more new teams(250) than in 2006 (234), but not yet as many as in 2007 (264) or 2008 (320). (For new teams I'm counting 248 FIRST defined rookies, including the reconstituted team 38, plus two new non-rookies--216 & 2828 ) Projecting the registration trend outward it seems we'll have ~170 more teams this year, so I conservatively predict 1670 total teams for the 2009 season. An 11-12% growth over last year represents a small decline from the roughly 14-15+% growth experienced during the past three years. 2005 growth was only half this year's though. Some economic impact, but not as much as feared so far. |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
An update on registration progress.
1557 teams-to-date 269 new teams (including 2 new non-rookies & what used to be team 38) - better than '07, not yet as good as '08 3.7% growth so far 15% of 2008 veterans are still missing (225) 12 veteran teams on hiatus that have come back (about the same as last year's 13)from: -- (6) one year off -- (5) two year's off -- (1) four year's off (There could be other teams out more than two year's. I just haven't taken the time to go through the rookies exhaustively) New non-rookie team 2828 has been renumbered team 1729, so now team 2702 and higher are all considered 2009 rookies. Sort on the net gain/(loss) of teams (# new 2009 teams -minus- missing teams from 2008): Country Codes are back...:) Indiana has every veteran registered now. Code:
Location # Missing # new teams Net gain/loss |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
1600 teams right now and still growing...
Missing veteran teams are in the single digits in all areas except for: California 19 and Israel 16 |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
But now it's on to BAE as 1729 ... and that means no rookies at BAE at all :ahh: Looks like a fun event :D |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Currently at 1619.
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Good luck to all of the new and upcoming and old teams at the Pittsburgh regional including my old team 1708. :0 good luck guys:D
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
We're past the 10% growth mark with 1652 teams as of this morning.
That's about a third off the average growth for the past three years. The number of rookie teams (305) is off by 5% from last year, but still 15% better than in the 2007 season. 169 veteran teams from last year, however, are still missing and that's much higher than average, but maybe not as a percentage. Since registration isn't yet over and done with I expect more vets to register. Right now we're missing a little over 11%. The average loss of veteran teams over the past three seasons has been 9.3%, but average loss over the past decade has been closer (10.4%). We have at least 17 veterans return after not playing for a year or more. Only a few days of registration remaining. |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
You sound like you could do some ESPN-like segments for FIRST.
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
General Registration is closed but there are always teams appearing and disappearing from the rolls as the dust settings and payments come due. Last year we ended up with a dozen more teams after registration closed.
Michigan also has an extra day (12/2) of registration so rookies are still showing up there. 1681 teams are registered (vs. 1501 in 2008) 314 new teams (vs. 320 in 2008) - includes a couple of non-rookies and a couple of resurrected vet teams. 180 team net gain (vs. 200 in 2008) 12% growth (vs. 15.4% in 2008) Teams from 10 countries 23 prior vets returned who sat out a year or more (vs. 13 returnees in 2008) A big Welcome Back to these teams: Code:
Yrs outThe good news is about 1% (like those teams above) return after a year or two off. These are the areas where we may need to work on retaining and supporting faltering veteran teams, although some attrition should be expected: Code:
Missing vetsHere is the net gain and loss for each area with the loss of veterans offset by the gain of new teams (or recovery of previously lost vets): Code:
Location # Missing # new teams Net gain/(loss)Code:
CA 146(1) Oklahoma City (1) Florida (7) Arizona (10) Bayou (18) St. Louis (1) Waterloo (7) Hawaii (1) Minnesota Don't know about Michigan District events though. |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
I have nothing to add. :)
Thanks, Mark, for making the 2009 version of this thread informative and entertaining. |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
At least I've entertained a few people.
It was hard to tell sometimes if I was just talking to myself or not, but I had fun sifting the data. It'll be nice to have this stuff to look back on next year. |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Good stuff Mark. Great to see Kentucky finally see some growth.
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
In the future, this could sort of be used for statistics in podcasts and whatnot, make it sound official, like ESPN does with sports. :P Thanks for the hard work, Mark! :) |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Mark McLeod again."
This is great stuff, Mark. Thank you for putting in the work for the rest of us. Andy B. |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
You guys say the nicest things.:)
I guess I'll post some more later when registration finally settles down around March... |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Okay, maybe I'll post sooner...
The Phillipines just added a team yesterday. They'll be attending Hawai'i. FRC: 3105 |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Can anyone see something wrong with team 3116? Maybe that their rookie year is 2008?
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Quote:
Are these put in by people? or is it some database error? |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
They are not entered as having attended a 2008 event, there was another team, number unknown, that was put as rookie in 2006 but didn't attend a 2006 event.
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
1679 teams are now registered.
Net gain of 178 teams or 11.9% (My projection halfway through registration was off by 9 teams, which only demonstrates how predicable this all is if you collect data.) Lost 163 teams or 10.86% but gained 322 new teams, 319 of them are considered rookies. (Teams 216, 1729, and 3116 are not rookies by FIRST's definition and got fake starting years based not on when the team first played, but when their member's first played on other teams). The rookie team numbers for this year are 2702 to 3122. The registration chart for 1992 through 2009 is posted in the CD gallery. With events starting registration is still settling down though. One team just dropped out. These are the final random statistics. Code:
Location # Missing # new teams Net gain/(loss) Total21 Resurrected teams
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
I suppose it never ends.
Team registration lost a rookie, and then there were 1678 teams. Here's that registration chart: ![]() It's also buried in the CD photos: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/33124 I'll post the spreadsheet as a white paper when I get time. |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
And then there were 1677 teams...
|
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Mark,
Is the spreadsheet that supports the plot available somewhere, and would you be willing to share it? My team is presenting at the CHP forums on team continuity planning, and this data would help them. Maybe just data for the last few years of - "Starting Number" "New Teams" "Lost Teams" "Net Gain" |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
Is this the kind of summary data you're looking for?
The original spreadsheet(s) are too large to upload here. If you need data further back or different just let me know and I'll get you what I've got. "New teams" include both rookies and those that FIRST doesn't consider rookies, but are newly formed teams none the less. P.S. See if this summary that DarkJedi613 produced last year is of any use. It's a page with # of rookies for each year and retention rates. The row is the year you're looking at (i.e. the row 2006 refers to the 2006 season). Then each column is the number of teams (out of the original # of teams) that participated in that season. So for row 2006, column 2000: then 271 of the 372 teams from the 2000 season also participated in the 2006 season for a rentention rate of 72.849%. http://www.team358.org/files/team_lo..._teams.php.htm |
Re: 2009 Regional Registration Progress
2 Attachment(s)
I made a pass going through and cleaning up this summary data from how many teams drop out, how many come back, etc.
I liked Chris's approach to charting that data, so I've done the same with some variation. I correlated team lists from 1992 onwards (early years from the Team 45 TechnoKats history project) and treated the teams as returned if the same high school or equivalent was involved. There are cases of teams splitting off into different team numbers that I haven't decided how to account for, so right now a new team number is treated as a new team, even for those few teams that just had their number changed for unknown reasons from one year to the next, e.g., Bay Shore HS in 1998, and 1999. I also haven't walked the early teams all the way up to the present to catch those that returned 10 years later. I'm hopeful we'll soon have the full spreadsheets posted on our website for others (all eight of you ;) ) to play with, use, and improve upon. P.S. You'll see that the total teams for several years are one or two off from FIRST's published totals. I decided to use totals supported by corresponding team lists to avoid counting teams that dropped out before actually competing. Some of FIRST's team totals appear to be propagated from tally's taken before team registration settled out, e.g., for 2009 FIRST listed 1686 teams because the count was from early January, but only 1677 teams were around for actual competition. I also plan to update the pre-1998 team rookie year's. The current one's listed for the early year's are incomplete, possibly because FIRST had different early rules that defined when a team was "new." I'm just going to go by if the same educational institution (or equivalent) was involved. Originally FIRST identified teams and team continuity by the corporation or business that sponsored them, so my approach will yield different results for the 1990's. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:27. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi