What can FIRST do to increase FRC team sustainability?

[jgerstein]

Originally Posted by Ian Curtis

What years are FRC teams most likely to fail? I would guess something like years 2 & 5, but I'd love to know the actual answer. Can someone generate those numbers real quick?

I was curious about this too, so I pulled some data from TBA. A few teams show up a year or two before their rookie year because of off-seasons, but not enough to have a major effect on the numbers.

The last two tabs are the raw data I pulled from TBA and an expanded table showing which years each team was active in.

Team Survival

Sheet 1 (% of active teams by rookie year): Each row represents a rookie year (there were no 1993 rookies, so I left 1993 out). Each column is a year from 1992 through 2016. Each cell contains the percent of teams from that rookie year that were active in the given year. For example: Cell V12 indicates that in 2011, 45% of the teams that were founded in 2004 were still active.

Sheet 2 (# of active teams by rookie year): Each row represents a rookie year (there were no 1993 rookies, so I left 1993 out). Each column is a year from 1992 through 2016. Each cell contains the number of teams from that rookie year that were active in the given year. For example: Cell V12 indicates that in 2011, 75 of the 403 teams that were founded in 2004 were still active.

The other sheets are not particularly useful for looking at directly.

[rwodonnell]

Originally Posted by jgerstein

I was curious about this too, so I pulled some data from TBA. A few teams show up a year or two before their rookie year because of off-seasons, but not enough to have a major effect on the numbers.

The last two tabs are the raw data I pulled from TBA and an expanded table showing which years each team was active in.

Team Survival

This is great, thank you! (How do I read it?)

By the way, if I understood how to give the little green dots, I would give you some for this...

[jgerstein]

Originally Posted by rwodonnell

This is great, thank you! (How do I read it?)

I'm glad I can help!

Sheet 1 (% of active teams by rookie year): Each row represents a rookie year (there were no 1993 rookies, so I left 1993 out). Each column is a year from 1992 through 2016. Each cell contains the percent of teams from that rookie year that were active in the given year. For example: Cell V12 indicates that in 2011, 45% of the teams that were founded in 2004 were still active.

Sheet 2 (# of active teams by rookie year): Each row represents a rookie year (there were no 1993 rookies, so I left 1993 out). Each column is a year from 1992 through 2016. Each cell contains the number of teams from that rookie year that were active in the given year. For example: Cell V12 indicates that in 2011, 75 of the 403 teams that were founded in 2004 were still active.

The other sheets are not particularly useful for looking at directly.

Originally Posted by rwodonnell

By the way, if I understood how to give the little green dots, I would give you some for this...

Thank you! If you do want to, there is a scale icon next to the post number where you can do that.

[rwodonnell]

Originally Posted by jgerstein

I'm glad I can help!

Thanks for the explanation on the google sheet. I hope you don't mind, but I created a copy of the sheet and added a column in the "raw data" tab with this formula:

=if(D2 <> 2016, E2, "")

What I wanted to see was, for teams that were not active in 2016, how many years were they active.

Here's the histogram of that:

[marshall]

Originally Posted by rwodonnell

Thanks for the explanation on the google sheet. I hope you don't mind, but I created a copy of the sheet and added a column in the "raw data" tab with this formula:

=if(D2 <> 2016, E2, "")

What I wanted to see was, for teams that were not active in 2016, how many years were they active.

Here's the histogram of that:

Srsly? 600 teams have dropped out after 2 years?

[rwodonnell]

Originally Posted by marshall

Srsly? 600 teams have dropped out after 2 years?

The number was 599, but when you add in the 169 that dropped after 1 year, then you have 768 teams that lasted 2 years or less. When you add in years three (459) and four (304) dropouts, you have 1531 teams that have lasted only through one cycle of high school kids. That's roughly a quarter of all teams ever created.

[adammiller3122]

Originally Posted by rwodonnell

This is great, thank you! (How do I read it?)

By the way, if I understood how to give the little green dots, I would give you some for this...

Just click on the "balance" icon in the top right corner of the post.

[cbale2000]

Originally Posted by jgerstein

I was curious about this too, so I pulled some data from TBA. A few teams show up a year or two before their rookie year because of off-seasons, but not enough to have a major effect on the numbers.

The last two tabs are the raw data I pulled from TBA and an expanded table showing which years each team was active in.

Team Survival
...

Hope no one minds, but I took the liberty of making a copy of that spreadsheet and adding a few more tabs to compare rates of team loss, as well as some graphs for showing team retention by team age. Thought the results were interesting, so I figured I'd share it...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15ys5j6c2QXwaIhTeKTSLQ5TfnfIJy1ee-8FHf0RXUS4/edit?usp=sharing

Sheet Tabs underlined in Green are either new or have new content in them.