All-Star Amazing Level 2 Teams?

[aggie1983]

^^^^^^Yes, it is over in terms of the specific case mentioned. But not in the overall issue. It would appear a team has been successful at stacking a team in order to win jackets. If the cheer community just "moves on" then the message appears to be, okay we had our little snit, but now it's over- until the next gym sees that "yes, we'll get a little heat for a few weeks, but it will then die down and we'll still have our jackets, cool trade off.". And what is the point of asking our athletes to work hard and do their best if they have no chance of being recognized for their efforts because another team comprised of athletes that mastered those same skills two years ago can come in and virtually be guaranteed to beat your true level team. So now every gym starts thinking "well, in order to have my teams be competitive, I have to assume everyone else is stacking or dropping a level, so we have to as well.". The bigger issue is in maintaining the integrity of the sport and the integrity of the divisions. I admit this has been far from pretty, but if more gyms are called out and a stink is raised in the wider community, maybe gyms will think twice before following what looks like the easier road to a jacket.

 

[peytonnmariee]

That little boy is amazing had my attention the whole time by far one of the best junior 2 teams I have seen they are one talented group of kids

thank you! that means so much! tht little boy is amazing athlete he has double d
full & can stunt l l 5 too(:

 

[TheVipersMom]

thank you! that means so much! tht little boy is amazing athlete he has double d
full & can stunt l l 5 too(:

That video was great :) but

How many other level 5 cheerleaders do y'all have on your level 2 team?

Haha jk just thought I'd throw that out there considering out current discussion.

 

[aggie1983]

socratesofcheer. I certainly can't speak for every small gym, but I don't think your statement about 'just about every "small"' gym' does this very thing" is accurate. And why was small in quotes? If you are referring to crossovers than perhaps that is true, but not every small gym does that, we have never used crossovers in the years my cp has cheered. (except in cases of injury). And at least at NCA you can't cross levels, so the gym must choose which team to bring. If you are referring to the fact that a small gym typically won't have enough athletes to field, for example, both a true level 2 team and a true level 3 team and so must choose, that is a different scenario entirely. Been there, cp's third year we fielded a level 3 team of 18 with only 6 athletes with level 3 tumbling at the beginning of summer. The coach wanted to push the girls. And they rose to the challenge. They worked extremely hard and won every comp but one and brought home NCA and UCA jackets.
Perhaps I misunderstood, but there appeared to be some snarkiness in your post directed at small gyms. If I am wrong, I apologize.

 

[TheUltimateFan]

I think the biggest problem with these kind of situations is the message it sends. I have very obviously competed against a sandbagged team that has dropped an entire level. It even said their old level in their music. So my teammates who aren't as into cheer as I am even figured it out and after the second or third time they beat us were asking "Why can't we drop a level too?" my team isn't terrible by any means but if this team can drop a level and win, who's to say we can't do the same thing?
Now this team didn't exactly do that but I am a firm believer in pushing a team to its potential. If that means a not so great level 3 over an NCA winning level 2, so be it. Especially if it is a team formed for "the experience".

This is exactly what we are most concerned with. One team 'getting away' with this opens the door for others to do the same. Some will decide to take the high road and compete true to level. Others will drop levels for the sake of a jacket. And some of those cheerleaders will grow up and coach or open their own program, starting with an ethical basis taught to them by their own coaches that "it's OK to slither through a loophole to win".

 

[TheUltimateFan]

It's pretty pathetic that this is continuing this long. I would say stop worrying about what everyone else is doing and focus on making your CP perform the best to their ability. Because last time I check being clean and tight is not something that is only taught at the level 5 level. Grow up and move on. It's over.

You have the right to do exactly that. But just keep that in mind when it is your CP that loses his/her Cheersport/NCA jacket to a stacked team created to win those competitions. Most (if not all) of us fighting this battle don't have a CP impacted and many don't have a CP at all. We are fighting for the sake of YOUR sport and your child.

 

[kristenthegreat]

In terms of small gyms, I know automatically the majority have kids at a set level, and then there will be at least one or two who may be higher, usually in their tumbling ability. Usually, it's tumbling that's holding them back at the lower level, which was why we created 4.2 in the first place. I usually feel though that in most cases, eventually those higher level kids either need a team at that gym or will move elsewhere. Nothing to do about it, but that's how it is.

Is it wrong- not necessarily. I'd honestly rather see the teams with the least amount of crossovers possible, even if that means smaller teams, but I understand in a small-gym scenario they are doing the best they can with what they have. NOW- if the gym is small, yet has developed the athletes to go to a higher level and chooses to stay down so they can destroy their competition skill-wise, then no, that ain't kosher.

 

[Cheer_Explosion_Coach]

Jersey didn't have what I consider 2 hit routines at cheersport. As far as the girls are concerned, they lost because of that and not because of anything else.

I figured it out. I am going to take my 3rd graders to a 1st grade spelling bee. It'll be fair bc they are all spelling the same words. I'll have no advantage at all bc the rules are the same. Anyone else agree?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheUltimateFan]

I figured it out. I am going to take my 3rd graders to a 1st grade spelling bee. It'll be fair bc they are all spelling the same words. I'll have no advantage at all bc the rules are the same. Anyone else agree?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ROFLMAO

Seriously though, this is what people should be considering. Kids taught that it is OK to cheat don't just keep that lesson within the boundaries of cheerleading - it goes with them for life.

 

[ErinS]

Heres what I wonder. Suppose the two gyms in question (or any gym that sandbags like this) had opened the "opportunity" to compete in Dallas to the entire gym and created a senior 4.2. Would that have made a difference? The tumbling aspect would be the same...but they still would have met some challenges when it came to stunting. It would have been harder but not impossible.

 

[socratesofcheer]

socratesofcheer. I certainly can't speak for every small gym, but I don't think your statement about 'just about every "small"' gym' does this very thing" is accurate. And why was small in quotes? If you are referring to crossovers than perhaps that is true, but not every small gym does that, we have never used crossovers in the years my cp has cheered. (except in cases of injury). And at least at NCA you can't cross levels, so the gym must choose which team to bring. If you are referring to the fact that a small gym typically won't have enough athletes to field, for example, both a true level 2 team and a true level 3 team and so must choose, that is a different scenario entirely. Been there, cp's third year we fielded a level 3 team of 18 with only 6 athletes with level 3 tumbling at the beginning of summer. The coach wanted to push the girls. And they rose to the challenge. They worked extremely hard and won every comp but one and brought home NCA and UCA jackets.
Perhaps I misunderstood, but there appeared to be some snarkiness in your post directed at small gyms. If I am wrong, I apologize.

You did misunderstand. Apology accepted. I think your small gym situation is not the norm. Thus the reason I said "just about every". I've been to tons of usasf meetings where this was discussed from the perspective of a small gym.

Also, there is a person from a small gym bragging about how great their level 2 team is and saying that she and many others cross down because they like to be on two teams. She also says the boy on the team is level 5, has a double and stunts level 5. My question is: where is that outrage?

 

[quitthedrama]

I figured it out. I am going to take my 3rd graders to a 1st grade spelling bee. It'll be fair bc they are all spelling the same words. I'll have no advantage at all bc the rules are the same. Anyone else agree?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BINGO!!! Excellent analogy!

 

[TheUltimateFan]

You did misunderstand. Apology accepted. I think your small gym situation is not the norm. Thus the reason I said "just about every". I've been to tons of usasf meetings where this was discussed from the perspective of a small gym.

Also, there is a person from a small gym bragging about how great their level 2 team is and saying that she and many others cross down because they like to be on two teams. She also says the boy on the team is level 5, has a double and stunts level 5. My question is: where is that outrage?

It isn't right, but that team has been competing like that for the season. It wasn't created via a tryout in the weeks before Cheersport and NCA just for the purpose of competing for a jacket at those two events.

We are trying to formulate a process to prevent the main issue being addressed here. The assumption is that it would also address this second scenario - since these scenarios are part of the solutions being debated.

 

[CoachTamara]

You did misunderstand. Apology accepted. I think your small gym situation is not the norm. Thus the reason I said "just about every". I've been to tons of usasf meetings where this was discussed from the perspective of a small gym.

Also, there is a person from a small gym bragging about how great their level 2 team is and saying that she and many others cross down because they like to be on two teams. She also says the boy on the team is level 5, has a double and stunts level 5. My question is: where is that outrage?

This may be getting into something else all together, but I really DON'T think small gyms use crossovers as much as large gyms. Around here, most of the kids that are at small gyms cannot afford to crossover to multiple teams, where large gyms have the extra money to support a few more crossovers when needed. This is totally based on my area and the gyms around here, but I feel like there are significantly more crossovers from the larger gyms.
In the same aspect, small teams don't have the ability to "stack" teams, or develop teams solely for the purpose of winning a big competition. If I opened a try out to my entire gym to kids that wanted to travel to Dallas, I might have a few tucks but they would still be outnumbered by kids that were truly level 2, and offset by level 1 kids with no tumbling.
I said it earlier and I stand by this-crossovers are not killing the small gyms; situations like this are. And I'm starting to agree with some other statements saying that things like this are really going to begin impacting the sport in a major way. What happens when a true level 2 kid cannot compete in their division because they'll lose to kids that have been doing a BHS for 10 years? Keep them at level 1? Yeah right. There they go to another sport.

 

[TheUltimateFan]

Heres what I wonder. Suppose the two gyms in question (or any gym that sandbags like this) had opened the "opportunity" to compete in Dallas to the entire gym and created a senior 4.2. Would that have made a difference? The tumbling aspect would be the same...but they still would have met some challenges when it came to stunting. It would have been harder but not impossible.

That is a very good question, especially considering the very reasons 4.2 was created. I don't have enough knowledge about 4.2 to respond, but I hope someone else does. This will definitely be something to be considered while drafting a proposal for new rules.