What can FIRST do to increase FRC team sustainability?

[Kevin Kolodziej]

Originally Posted by Dan Petrovic

I doubt there are teams out there that say "well, we can't build a second robot, so let's just give up on FRC"

No, they say "Well, we built something that looks like a robot, then watched it do nothing in a bag for 4 weeks, and couldn't get it to work in 10 stressful hours on Thursday at the event away from our shop in a cramped 10x10 space, so let's just give up on FRC"

FIRST can say it's not about the robot all they want, but when you are rookies, it is exactly all about the robot. If you have a robot that never moves in your first year, it is hard to justify the time and money you spent on the program. A few teams experience that but become inspired by the rest of the teams and continue on, but that is by far the exception. It doesn't have to do well...it just has to do SOMETHING.

The first team I started while in college only lasted two years. Our first year had a robot that moved in 1 match at our first event and didn't do much better in our second event (we got a NASA grant and were able to go to 2 events). The second year, new kids were not interested in joining the team that seeded last (or nearly) at both events the previous year and we took 3 students to Midwest and once again had a robot that barely moved in any of our matches. The team died out due to a lack of interest. I am happy to say that several years later a new team formed at that school and the program is running very well these days, and the team I moved on to will be starting its 13th year next year.

Re: Bag Day, sure a few teams would still build 2 or 3 robots, but not all would, which also means many of those parts shortages would (hopefully) go away too. And you wouldn't have to pay for overnight shipping anymore!

[EricLeifermann]

Throw 2826 into the pool of teams that would only build 1 robot if bag day were removed. Our practice bOt is always better thay our comp bot because we get so much more test and run time on it. If we didn't have to redo everything that we changed on the practice bot on the comp bot talk about a financial and time save.

However bag day is not a leading factor in teams folding.

Team support is #1 I would say. Both from mentors but from FIRST HQ as a whole.
#2 is money, no way around it. There is 0 reason that the registration fee still needs to be as high as it is.

[Lil' Lavery]

Teams with the resources and dedication to build practice bots don't tend to be the ones that fold. Chipping in your $0.02 about practice bots probably doesn't mean much in this thread. With regards to mentor burnout and bag day, there are two competing schools of thought on that issue, and it likely wouldn't impact all individuals the same way. Let's save the bag day talk for the threads about bag day.

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann

#2 is money, no way around it. There is 0 reason that the registration fee still needs to be as high as it is.

This. Show us where our $5000 goes and why it needs to be that high still, especially since none of our registration fee goes to our local regional.

[Dan Petrovic]

Originally Posted by Kevin Kolodziej

No, they say "Well, we built something that looks like a robot, then watched it do nothing in a bag for 4 weeks, and couldn't get it to work in 10 stressful hours on Thursday at the event away from our shop in a cramped 10x10 space, so let's just give up on FRC"

You know what? I hadn't thought about it that way and what you (and others) are saying makes a lot of sense. I was purely thinking from a monetary point-of-view.

[gblake]

... Show us where our $5000 goes ...

I think a little CD searching will answer this question well for everyone who is interested.

Posting a few links to any especially good explanations could be useful.

[Gregor]

This post by Jim Zondag summarizes the history of bag day and why it's obsolete.

Continue reading down that thread for more relevant posts by Jim.

EDIT:
Also the obligatory:

[David Brinza]

Originally Posted by nlknauss

It takes a few years for a team to form reliable, on-going partnerships with corporate sponsors. It also takes about the same amount of time for teams to create their own structure for spending through the course of a competition year. Having a regional structure in place to work with teams as they develop their programs can be helpful with this whether it is a regional director, FIRST senior mentor, or team of volunteers.

The other side of this is team management and support. There are many ways to do this, but many teams do spend a lot of time in their second and third years thinking about how this should look. A similar support group can be a great deal of help for mentors, teachers, and students on young teams.

Basically, the rookie year isn't the only year a team needs assistance with its formation.

Actually, there is an organization to help with team management and support: FIRST NEMO, the Non-Engineering Mentor Organization for FIRST teams.

FRC teams certainly have business-like components: staffing (students and mentors), finance (fundraising and expenses), facilities (build site, tools, IT, etc.), marketing (PR), and other logistics (transportation, communications, etc.). NEMO's purpose is to provide team with resources to do these things without having to re-invent the wheel.

I strongly recommend teams intending to sustain (or grow) their operations check out NEMO!

[AdamHeard]

Allow regionals to run their own lights and sound, and find a way to pass that savings on to teams. This doesn't have to be in terms of reduced registration for all, but could in grants, etc...

Considering most of CA is running regionals in district venues, it's a bummer that they are forced to raise the additional funds required to pay Show Ready Productions to run the event.

The savings could also be used to build up the fund for the eventual switch to districts (which I would assume is years off due to the difficulty the houston champs date puts on a District champs).

[Michael Corsetto]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

Allow regionals to run their own lights and sound, and find a way to pass that savings on to teams. This doesn't have to be in terms of reduced registration for all, but could in grants, etc...

Considering most of CA is running regionals in district venues, it's a bummer that they are forced to raise the additional funds required to pay Show Ready Productions to run the event.

But Adam, we want FRC to be like all the other local high school sports that pay $40k to bring in 30 union workers to run unnecessary lighting and sound for 2 day tournament! Wait...

[marshall]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Let's save the bag day talk for the threads about bag day.

While the point has most certainly been beaten to death, I think there are a lot of us that feel it is relevant to the sustainability of FRC teams and that is what this thread is about.

[nuclearnerd]

Originally Posted by GreyingJay

Remove bag day? Sure, that increases the rookie team's chances of fielding something, but that also gives powerhouse teams more time to build something that will wipe the floor with everyone else. It will increase the perceived divide.

Honestly, the powerhouse teams all build two robots anyway, so they're already spending the time building more. As it is, I don't think the 30lb withholding allowance is really much of a hindrance to them. I think giving rookie teams a better shot at fielding something (and the rest of us a break on our budget) is more than reason enough to drop bag day.

The other thing FRC needs more of is off-season competitions, and practice fields. Robotics will never be sustainable unless we can have the equivalent of "pick-up" games. Our team is hoping to host more of these next year.

[Knufire]

You can't solve a problem you don't understand. Before you can address the issue of sustainability, we need to figure out (in more certain terms than just a logical debate) why teams are folding.

I know IndianaFIRST surveyed teams that have folded over the past few years. The results were presented at a statewide mentor meeting, and can be found below. I hope that other regions within FRC can implement a similar survey.



Now two of the top three reasons have been discussed here. The one that hasn't, which seems to be the most prevalent among teams in Indiana, is lack of school support.

What can we do to make FRC more appealing for schools to integrate into their programs? There has been talk recently of forming an FRC curriculum; based on this data that would go a long way in improving sustainability.

[Mark Sheridan]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

Allow regionals to run their own lights and sound, and find a way to pass that savings on to teams. This doesn't have to be in terms of reduced registration for all, but could in grants, etc...

Considering most of CA is running regionals in district venues, it's a bummer that they are forced to raise the additional funds required to pay Show Ready Productions to run the event.

The savings could also be used to build up the fund for the eventual switch to districts (which I would assume is years off due to the difficulty the houston champs date puts on a District champs).

Ditto, so much money wasted. Plus it would be much easier to add more regionals. There are so many venues that can't host regionals because the lighting exceeds the building safety standards in cali.

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Knufire

I know IndianaFIRST surveyed teams ...

Do you have a more detailed breakdown of the numbers that would show if the teams were 10-year veterans that hit a major rough patch, or were 2-year hot-house orchids that wilted on the first sunny day because they didn't have a good root system?

There is a heck of a big difference in those two extremes of that spectrum (and I realize that the crudely defined spectrum I have in mind is only one method among the many ways to categorize teams).