All-Star Cheer Athletics (questions/rumors)

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members can REMOVE the ads for FREE... join today!

This is absurd. I remember when I was itty bitty we would beg for some chicken fries after practice ... In my opinion, I think it's great they are promoting fast food. It is letting all of those girls who look up to the super star with ripped abs that they eat and don't starve themselves to look that way. Just my opinion, but I'd rather have them promoting fast food then promoting diet shakes and skinny meals.

ETA when you are young and as active as all-star cheerleaders are you are more than allowed to eat some chicken fries ... with french fries and a shake on the side :enjoyshow:
 
This is absurd. I remember when I was itty bitty we would beg for some chicken fries after practice ... In my opinion, I think it's great they are promoting fast food. It is letting all of those girls who look up to the super star with ripped abs that they eat and don't starve themselves to look that way. Just my opinion, but I'd rather have them promoting fast food then promoting diet shakes and skinny meals.

ETA when you are young and as active as all-star cheerleaders are you are more than allowed to eat some chicken fries ... with french fries and a shake on the side :enjoyshow:
Agree!!!! As a mother of a 14 year old who struggles with an eating disorder I am glad that these teenagers can act like teenagers and have an occasional meal of fast food because they also demonstrate good confidence with body image and exercise. We should complain if they were promoting diet aids. Plus honestly I remember being a teenager all too well and if someone asked me at that age to promote something I would have jumped at the chance, most teenagers would.
 
All of this is just completely beyond my comprehension. I am so upset about it!

I don't understand where you people are getting chicken fries from! I thought BK quit selling them!
 
I don't believe they would "fix" the results to make their TV show work. I have disagreed with many a result, even at NCA, but I never thought it was actually "rigged". If we discovered that attending UCA was required "politically" to win NCA - that wouldn't cause us to send a team to UCA, that would cause us to pull all of our teams from all Varsity events forever.

Even though it is kind of weird given the way the real "Triple Crown" works, I think they will still award a champion based on points - regardless of whether the same team has won all 3.
And this is why I respect you.
 
Hi @BlueCat, it's me again.

Reading another thread the 'stay and play' that is becoming more prevalent is not very favorably looked upon by the parents.

As a powerhouse in the industry would you consider passing on competitions that require it? If so would you consider getting the other big gyms involved?
 
Random commentary because I'm not BlueCat:

I'd imagine that this is one of those things where the money votes, if you will.

If parents started leaving gym XYZ over Stay to Play, I think a lot of gyms would re-evaluate.

However, it seems like no one is really willing to vote with their money. So they just continue to pay.
 
Random commentary because I'm not BlueCat:

I'd imagine that this is one of those things where the money votes, if you will.

If parents started leaving gym XYZ over Stay to Play, I think a lot of gyms would re-evaluate.

However, it seems like no one is really willing to vote with their money. So they just continue to pay.
But isnt it the gyms responsibility to proactively be the voice of the parent before they lose business?
 
Random commentary because I'm not BlueCat:

However, it seems like no one is really willing to vote with their money. So they just continue to pay.

It's really not that simple. It's not like there are so many local cheer gyms with quality instruction that you can just pick the one that doesn't use stay to play. You pretty much have to prioritize. And if money is your priority, you're probably doing 1/2 year team or all star prep or rec, NOT actively looking for a gym that refuses to go to stay to play competitions. And does such a gym even exist?

I get so tired to people blaming the consumer for gym choices because the consumer can take their money elsewhere. It's not a grocery store! There aren't unlimited safe, healthy options. And parents are trying to support an activity their child loves, usually in a place that child considers their second home, and most will do everything they can for that. So, gyms can pretty much call the shots and do almost whatever they want. Because there will not be a mass exodus from a quality program over stay to play.
 
Hi @BlueCat, it's me again.

Reading another thread the 'stay and play' that is becoming more prevalent is not very favorably looked upon by the parents.

As a powerhouse in the industry would you consider passing on competitions that require it? If so would you consider getting the other big gyms involved?
In my head I revised your opening sentence to "Are you there @BlueCat ? It's me, @Cheer Dad ". Carry on.
 
Hi @BlueCat, it's me again.

Reading another thread the 'stay and play' that is becoming more prevalent is not very favorably looked upon by the parents.

As a powerhouse in the industry would you consider passing on competitions that require it? If so would you consider getting the other big gyms involved?

I'd imagine that this is one of those things where the money votes, if you will.
If parents started leaving gym XYZ over Stay to Play, I think a lot of gyms would re-evaluate.
However, it seems like no one is really willing to vote with their money. So they just continue to pay.

Stay to play is absolutely a negative from our perspective. Reducing the choices that a gym/parent/athlete has is generally not a good thing. All else being equal, we would choose to go somewhere that did not limit where you can stay. Forcing athletes into stay to play is a mark against a competition.

However, it is only one factor to consider. The quality of the event, the judging, the traditional level of competition, location, cost, dates, venue quality, warmup quality, and many other factors play into where we decide to go. You typically can't simply automatically eliminate competitions based on a single factor. If a stay-to-play event is otherwise fantastic, we may still consider going there if it still represents a good overall value.

We absolutely "vote with our money". However, we aren't usually single-issue voters.
 
Stay to play is absolutely a negative from our perspective. Reducing the choices that a gym/parent/athlete has is generally not a good thing. All else being equal, we would choose to go somewhere that did not limit where you can stay. Forcing athletes into stay to play is a mark against a competition.

However, it is only one factor to consider. The quality of the event, the judging, the traditional level of competition, location, cost, dates, venue quality, warmup quality, and many other factors play into where we decide to go. You typically can't simply automatically eliminate competitions based on a single factor. If a stay-to-play event is otherwise fantastic, we may still consider going there if it still represents a good overall value.

We absolutely "vote with our money". However, we aren't usually single-issue voters.
What would happen if say you, TG, CA, CA, CEA, WC, ACE all went to @ascheerguy and said hey, we aren't coming to nca Dallas if it is stay to play? Would that not send the message how we feel?
 
What would happen if say you, TG, CA, CA, CEA, WC, ACE all went to @ascheerguy and said hey, we aren't coming to nca Dallas if it is stay to play? Would that not send the message how we feel?
I don't know. Stay to play is a negative, but it doesn't rise to call-for-a-boycott level, IMO.
 
Back