All-Star Changing Levels Towards The End Of A Season.

[luv2cheer92]

Jumping in the middle of great convo, I recalled being at a gym that was known for only bringing level 4/5 teams to NCA and that 1 year this gym was forced to lower the level 4 team to level 3... I noticed that the young athletes were so demoralized and actually this move was worse for this team and when watching these athletes the fire in their eyes and swagger in their steps were gone... They lost and lost badly too!
Tbh,
I really think for the athletes' sake switching levels early in the season or better yet, before competition season start is best. Experience Coaches should be able to determine how competitive their team will be in a level before Oct/Nov isn't that their job to know... js

Imo, the true competitive athletes want to win fairly, against other athletes/teams with similar skills!

I agree with this. I would be in favor of them implementing a cutoff date to which you can't change levels. Like maybe January 1st or so. That allow teams who may take a little longer to start clicking and maybe get a couple locals under the belt, but before most of the bigger nationals. But then again, I see that affecting those teams that have a lot of injuries. Maybe if your roster changes X% you are allowed, idk, just thinking out loud here haha.

 

[NHcheermom]

So now I'm curious about another instance that popped up last night after the bid reveal....I started this convo about teams dropping levels but what about those that move up a level? What happens when a team had been competing as one level and earns a bid and then decides they want to push themselves and compete higher and also earns a bid in the higher level? Can they compete both levels at the Summit or does the lower bid go away?

 

[Lablover]

So now I'm curious about another instance that popped up last night after the bid reveal....I started this convo about teams dropping levels but what about those that move up a level? What happens when a team had been competing as one level and earns a bid and then decides they want to push themselves and compete higher and also earns a bid in the higher level? Can they compete both levels at the Summit or does the lower bid go away?

Is it pro athletics Hollywood? My understanding is they can compete in both divisions- small jr4 and small jr5R coed at summit.

 

[luv2cheer92]

Yea I don't think there is anything legally preventing them, unless there are crossover issues. As those 2 teams would be the only 2 teams any athlete could be on. Now morally/ethically is another thing and I think they'd get some pretty strong side eye if they did compete in both.

 

[cheermomforever]

Yea I don't think there is anything legally preventing them, unless there are crossover issues. As those 2 teams would be the only 2 teams any athlete could be on. Now morally/ethically is another thing and I think they'd get some pretty strong side eye if they did compete in both.

isn't there a rule for crossovers? If not there should be!

 

[luv2cheer92]

isn't there a rule for crossovers? If not there should be!

There's no restriction to the number of crossovers a team can have. Other than number of Worlds athletes. Hence why teams are competing both as international and non-international with the same roster.

 

[mamabear]

I have nothing but respect for a team if they earn a bid by competing up a level at the end of the season (assuming it was earned with the same athletes). All teams should strive to progress that much during the year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[luv2cheer92]

I have nothing but respect for a team if they earn a bid by competing up a level at the end of the season (assuming it was earned with the same athletes). All teams should strive to progress that much during the year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Totally agree with that. Just feel that if you are good enough to earn a bid at the higher level, you should not then go and compete at the lower level at Summit as well. Now I have no idea if they actually plan on doing that, but I wouldn't put it past some gyms.

 

[NHcheermom]

Totally agree with that. Just feel that if you are good enough to earn a bid at the higher level, you should not then go and compete at the lower level at Summit as well. Now I have no idea if they actually plan on doing that, but I wouldn't put it past some gyms.

So I guess this is another good debate that is going both ways.....if you've been competing at one level and not doing so well its ok to drop a level to be more competitive but if you've been competing a lower level and killing it and decide to go higher and do equally as well, is it considered sandbagging to then continue competing at that lower level?

 

[luv2cheer92]

So I guess this is another good debate that is going both ways.....if you've been competing at one level and not doing so well its ok to drop a level to be more competitive but if you've been competing a lower level and killing it and decide to go higher and do equally as well, is it considered sandbagging to then continue competing at that lower level?

I would say yes. If you go up to the higher level and then do awful, I would have no problem with a team dropping back down. If you prove you have the skills to succeed at the higher level, then why drop back down other than to win?

 

[cheermomforever]

So I guess this is another good debate that is going both ways.....if you've been competing at one level and not doing so well its ok to drop a level to be more competitive but if you've been competing a lower level and killing it and decide to go higher and do equally as well, is it considered sandbagging to then continue competing at that lower level?

If u can get a bid at level 4 then the same exact team shouldn't be able to also compete at 3 at Summit.

 

[catlady]

These are the two scenario's I hear:

1) Gym owner that has been around pre-Summit days says the only way they survive in high rent district is to put athletes on multiple teams to cover expenses. The gym is above D2 maximum athletes allowed, but need their X number of athletes to crossover to at least 5 teams to be profitable. Your cp at this gym, chooses to only be on level 3. Many athletes on her level 3 team crossover to levels 2 and 4. Levels 2, 3, and 4 all get a bid. Tighter crossover rules (say 5 athletes) would only allow for the level 4 team to go to the Summit. Bottom line, the gym owner says with tighter crossover rules they can only field two Summit teams. If they field 5 teams and only 2 are Summit teams, the gym owner is afraid once happy parents/athletes will leave to be on a Summit team elsewhere.

2) Your level 3 cp's team gets a bid. You put together $2,000+ to go to FL, take off work, kid(s) miss school only to find out 6 of the gyms in your division, where only 5 will go on to day 2, cross the majority of their level 3 and 4 athletes and they're competing both levels.

I understand both situations, but I feel the Summit needs to be for gyms that can field teams with tighter rules. IMO D2 already provides more lenient crossover rules and is the correct place to be more inclusive, if needed. A gym owner should not feel bound financially by one event, but parents shouldn't feel their money is being wasted at that event either.

 

[luv2cheer92]

These are the two scenario's I hear:

1) Gym owner that has been around pre-Summit days says the only way they survive in high rent district is to put athletes on multiple teams to cover expenses. The gym is above D2 maximum athletes allowed, but need their X number of athletes to crossover to at least 5 teams to be profitable. Your cp at this gym, chooses to only be on level 3. Many athletes on her level 3 team crossover to levels 2 and 4. Levels 2, 3, and 4 all get a bid. Tighter crossover rules (say 5 athletes) would only allow for the level 4 team to go to the Summit. Bottom line, the gym owner says with tighter crossover rules they can only field two Summit teams. If they field 5 teams and only 2 are Summit teams, the gym owner is afraid once happy parents/athletes will leave to be on a Summit team elsewhere.

2) Your level 3 cp's team gets a bid. You put together $2,000+ to go to FL, take off work, kid(s) miss school only to find out 6 of the gyms in your division, where only 5 will go on to day 2, cross the majority of their level 3 and 4 athletes and they're competing both levels.

I understand both situations, but I feel the Summit needs to be for gyms that can field teams with tighter rules. IMO D2 already provides more lenient crossover rules and is the correct place to be more inclusive, if needed. A gym owner should not feel bound financially by one event, but parents shouldn't feel their money is being wasted at that event either.

I agree. I would be fine with them keeping the current D1 crossover rules for D2 (no more than 2 teams, no more than one level up or down), then making D1 just like NCA rules. Same level, no more than 5 per team, still max 2 teams. And Worlds crossovers only to J5 for D1, but keeping current rules for D2. I believe the only difference between the 2 right now is that D1 you can only go up or down one level, where there's no limit for D2.

PS: Are there gyms that put athletes on 5 teams? The max is 3 at one comp, but I guess they could schedule different teams to go to different ones, but that seems insanely complicated.

 

[catlady]

PS: Are there gyms that put athletes on 5 teams? The max is 3 at one comp, but I guess they could schedule different teams to go to different ones, but that seems insanely complicated.

My wording was off, but when I said 5 teams that was my hypothetical number of total teams the gym needed financially to be profitable. My point only being that I can understand how let's say a business owner in California would need more teams than a business owner in Mississippi with the exact same number of athletes to be profitable. I've heard some gym owners say "I made it work without crossovers", but it's not really a fair comparison if their rent is one fourth of what another gym owner is paying with roughly the same amount of kids.

I would love NCA rules for Summit.

 

[luv2cheer92]

My wording was off, but when I said 5 teams that was my hypothetical number of total teams the gym needed financially to be profitable. My point only being that I can understand how let's say a business owner in California would need more teams than a business owner in Mississippi with the exact same number of athletes to be profitable. I've heard some gym owners say "I made it work without crossovers", but it's not really a fair comparison if their rent is one fourth of what another gym owner is paying with roughly the same amount of kids.

I would love NCA rules for Summit.

Gotcha, that makes sense.