[dodar]

Originally Posted by EricH

Because as far as I can tell, this particular item was NOT initiated by FIRST. It was initiated by NASA offering to sponsor FRC teams who met a certain set of conditions, to a certain amount for a certain purpose. (IIRC, it was even MORE limited than "any U.S. team who wins EI" at one point--it was more like "A U.S. team who wins EI at X Regional(s)" for about a year IF I recall correctly.)

If you're going to say that it is then FIRST's job to look for funding for that purpose in that amount for teams that do NOT meet the conditions, then I have a suggestion for you. Ready?

--Please make the same suggestion regarding the Boeing grants. After all, not all teams have Boeing mentors, so teams with Boeing mentors have a distinct advantage in raising funds.
--Please suggest that FIRST ask that JCPenney help fund all teams. Currently, it's nowhere near that.
--Please ask FIRST to make it so that EVERY team gets a NASA grant or equivalent. After all, teams that do get those have an advantage over those that do by a few thousand dollars.

Do you see where I'm going with this? A sponsor has placed certain conditions on a portion of their gift. This gives an advantage to some teams that meet those conditions--less fundraising. You want FIRST to apply (read: apply for) a similar gift to teams that don't meet those conditions--so why not go all the way and apply that to all grants so all teams are on a more even footing? (I'm not even going to pretend it'll be an even footing--too many other variables involved.)

Now, if teams that are not getting this advantage (even if slight) want to do something about it, their best bet is to find their NASA equivalent (or other big sponsor or potential sponsor) and very politely ask if that sponsor/agency would be willing to meet or beat NASA's funding offer. (I do recall that at one point, there was some sort of grant aimed at Israeli qualifiers--don't remember who gave it, or for how much, or if it's still there.)

Of course, there's the other alternative--but do you really want to hear the howling that will rise if NASA starts pulling sponsorship out? EI winners' registration, webcasts, NASA Grants, NASA house teams, NASA employees who volunteer their time and effort... Anything pulled because it gives an advantage to teams who are able to use it, which is most of those, is an opportunity for mass complaining from those teams and teams that sympathize, along with counter-complaining from teams that think those teams had it too easy.

Does Boeing sponsor an award that anyone can win that gives a reward of the money needed to go to the World Championships? Does JCPenney? Im not saying that NASA should pull out funding for them disadvantaging other teams for not funding them but for FIRST to allow only American EI winners to receive funding from the same award that International EI winners cannot seems a little biased. if you look at it without a POV of being on either a US FIRST team or an International FIRST team, it looks pretty one-sided. I am just saying all this to be cautious of the possibility(or if it has already happened) that an EI winner from Canada, Israel, or Mexico cannot make it to World's to compete both with there robot and for the overall EI award because they didnt have the funds needed to go. Like I said before, just playing the Devil's Advocate here; no need to get really heated over this.