[FRC Blog] Helping Rookie Teams

[MrTechCenter]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

Maybe rookie registration is low this year because we're running out of schools to bomb with a few thousand dollars and then leave alone until they either survive or crumble?

You know what's hard? Starting a rookie FRC team.
You know what's harder? Keeping an FRC team alive for 4 years.
You know what's seemingly impossible? Trying to restart an FRC team somewhere where it failed but should not have, years after it folded.

Agreed. We started a rookie team in 2013 that won RAS and went to St. Louis to compete and they couldn't survive for a second year.

[SenorZ]

My first team, 3677, survived two years due to financial issues. It is hard, especially in lower income areas to secure recurring funding. Folks that make big donations want to see big results. If all you have is a "box on wheels" they're unlikely to continue financial support.

There is also the issue of teacher support if the team is housed in a school. If the teacher can't put in the hours, the team can't compete on the same level as veteran teams.

[lynca]

I didn't want this to turn into a FRC horror story thread.
Please try to keep the questions positive and not scare teams away from STEM activities.

There are many STEM alternatives for teams to approach if FRC is not the right match.

Let's keep the questions for potential teams positive and we will definitely get the highest quality rookies into FRC.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by lynca

I didn't want this to turn into a FRC horror story thread.
Please try to keep the questions positive and not scare teams away from STEM activities.

There are many STEM alternatives for teams to approach if FRC is not the right match.

Let's keep the questions for potential teams positive and we will definitely get the highest quality rookies into FRC.

Not telling rookie teams what to expect in FRC hasn't worked for the last decade.

On 422 we're about 80% there to keeping the ship sailing by itself, and that's after 15 years and an RCA. Not to toot our own horns, but we have managed to survive and begin to thrive in an environment where we shouldn't be successful (inner city "Governor's" magnet school of <750 focused in international studies, government, and social sciences), but the Math and Science High School in my hometown can barely field an FTC team after bowing out of FRC after 3 years. The Health and Applied Sciences School? Same thing. The Leadership development school? Lost its FRC team to a wrestling room. It really sucks.

There is a map I had over my desk (I took it down while I clean out my stuff before build season) with a lot of red dots for folded teams in Virginia. It's really depressing to think about. We pitched in a little bit to help turn one of those dots back to green and restart a team at the Regional Governor's School for Arts and Technology (yes, the Technology school did not have a robotics program for 11 years after FRC folded).

I know FRC can really thrive in my commonwealth if the right people at the state level do the right things and the strong teams get down in the trenches and develop some really strong rookies. We're trying, but it's not going to be done the way it was 10 years ago. It's destructive.

[magnets]

Is it really a big deal that the rate at which teams are joining is decreasing? It has to decrease eventually, as it's higher than the rate at which new high schools are being founded.

Considering the concerns expressed in the New England and Texas registration threads, I'd say a smaller set of rookie teams this year isn't a bad thing. I like that FIRST is trying to expand the program, but I don't know that there are enough potential high schools out their to join. We want to be able to sell FRC to school boards by citing statistics that prove that FRC teams won't be single-year activities that die out and cost too much money.