All-Star Division I And Division Ii At Worlds - Big Gym Separation

[Bystander]

well if they are worried about the number of teams in those divisions then stop giving so many bids! But, that would affect money soo cant do that. After all thats what this is all about right? How about just being a governing body and NOT a competition company! Just lose Worlds altogether! After all, MANY times during the convos about athlete releases Andre has said its just one competition! So whats the big deal? Off subject but why if they have the money and can run their info meetings and rules meetings all over the country can they not find the money to get their own office?

 

[ASCheerMan]

Since the powers that be are discussing this proposal, does anyone know how us common folk can officially put our 2cents in??
After all membership means we get a voice right:rolleyes:

Hey Troy,
There was a session at the NACCC Regional Meetings this summer dedicated to this topic for all members. And it was a big discussion at the West Coast meetings specifically. Michael May, from your program was very vocal and made some very solid points. Shoot me an email if you want to chat about it. I think this is a VERY important topic that needs a lot of thoughtful research if it is to ever be rolled out. It's possible we see eye to eye on this USASF matter--which would be the first time in the history of ever! LOL

 

[Coach Troy]

I

Hey Troy,
There was a session at the NACCC Regional Meetings this summer dedicated to this topic for all members. And it was a big discussion at the West Coast meetings specifically. Michael May, from your program was very vocal and made some very solid points. Shoot me an email if you want to chat about it. I think this is a VERY important topic that needs a lot of thoughtful research if it is to ever be rolled out. It's possible we see eye to eye on this USASF matter--which would be the first time in the history of ever! LOL

:cheering:Yay, Yay, YAY!!!!! FINALLY:chestbump:

 

[gymcatmomx2]

The difference I see with all-star and college divisions though is that in college, your division is set by college size, where only a fraction of the population is cheerleaders vs. gym size, where everyone cheers. So yes, HPU is a D2 team that could be very competitive at the D1 level, but I don't think this is comparable to the proposed USASF divisions because HPU's competitiveness attracts strong athletes to go to HPU and try-out for the team; these additional hopefuls aren't enough to impact their college size or athletic program enough to change their division Conversely, if it were an all-star gym that did great in D2 and their competitiveness attracted more people to go to that gym and try-out for their Worlds team, any sizeable growth from their success would push them into DI.
I guess what I'm saying is that gym size and success would be a lot more elastic than college size and success. The limit on what divides a gym from being Division I from Division II would have to be very carefully determined.

That is making an assumption that every "small" gym has a desire to be a "mega" gym and that's just not the case. If the gym owner chooses to stay as a D2 competitor and due to their success they have a tremendous showing at tryouts, then they will have to make cuts.

 

[redshark]

That is making an assumption that every "small" gym has a desire to be a "mega" gym and that's just not the case. If the gym owner chooses to stay as a D2 competitor and due to their success they have a tremendous showing at tryouts, then they will have to make cuts.

Perhaps not "desire to be a mega gym," but yes, assuming that growth is manageable and that they are interested in maximizing their profit (which I understand may not apply to all programs, but certainly to most).
Among all other things, a gym is still a business, so I don't expect many gyms with the available resources to have more athletes would turn them down. And if they did just for the sake of staying at the top of Division II, then I think it would be a shame for all the kids who are turned away. I always loved all-star cheer cause I knew I'd make a team, I'd be heartbroken if I was cut from my program just so their level 5 team could avoid DI at Worlds.

 

[Mclovin]

Just a couple thoughts that I have on this subject...

There are only a handful of "mega" gyms in this country. If you are a small gym in Texas, GA, FL, NJ, NC or Cali, you might have a problem. But the vast majority of gyms don't have a "mega" gym anywhere near driving distance for their athletes. So staying at Gym A that only has 75-100 athletes is their only choice. And Gym A really isn't going to get much bigger. Not because they aren't good at what they do, but probably more so because they aren't located near a big city.

Also, while I do see the point people are trying to make about other "club" sports not having divisions based on size of program, I don't think you can compare that to cheer. There is no other sport under the sun that is set up like cheer, where you need no less than 15-20 kids to be competitive in any division and you have ZERO alternates or second stringers sitting on the bench ready to go in when needed. In soccer, basketball, baseball, volleyball...you need 5-10 kids max to play a game. And if any one of those 5-10 is injured or sick, you have another set of kids sitting on the sidelines ready to take their place. Cheer doesn't offer that opportunity. You have to have the best 20-36 kids in your program to compete at worlds. When Gym A has to choose 20 out of 75 and Gym B gets to choose 20 out of 600, there is NO WAY you can tell me that is even remotely a fair playing field. I know my opinion may be in the minority, but I love the way school sports (high school and college) have divisions based on size of school. I think it's fair.

ETA - And I don't think winning Division 1A, 2A, 3A, 4A or 5A state championships in high school is any less honorable than winning 6A. They won against the best of the best for their size. All star cheer is no different.

 

[5-6-7-8]

Just a couple thoughts that I have on this subject...

There are only a handful of "mega" gyms in this country. If you are a small gym in Texas, GA, FL, NJ, NC or Cali, you might have a problem. But the vast majority of gyms don't have a "mega" gym anywhere near driving distance for their athletes. So staying at Gym A that only has 75-100 athletes is their only choice. And Gym A really isn't going to get much bigger. Not because they aren't good at what they do, but probably more so because they aren't located near a big city.

Also, while I do see the point people are trying to make about other "club" sports not having divisions based on size of program, I don't think you can compare that to cheer. There is no other sport under the sun that is set up like cheer, where you need no less than 15-20 kids to be competitive in any division and you have ZERO alternates or second stringers sitting on the bench ready to go in when needed. In soccer, basketball, baseball, volleyball...you need 5-10 kids max to play a game. And if any one of those 5-10 is injured or sick, you have another set of kids sitting on the sidelines ready to take their place. Cheer doesn't offer that opportunity. You have to have the best 20-36 kids in your program to compete at worlds. When Gym A has to choose 20 out of 75 and Gym B gets to choose 20 out of 600, there is NO WAY you can tell me that is even remotely a fair playing field. I know my opinion may be in the minority, but I love the way school sports (high school and college) have divisions based on size of school. I think it's fair.

ETA - And I don't think winning Division 1A, 2A, 3A, 4A or 5A state championships in high school is any less honorable than winning 6A. They won against the best of the best for their size. All star cheer is no different.

Exactly! And it works for both small gym in small area vs. small gym in larger area but 45 minutes away from mega gym...both instances have a smaller talent pool to draw from. I would almost say it might be worse being a small - med sized gym within an hour of a big / mega gym. I would assume that a small/med gym would lose the "better" athletes with Mega being nearby.

 

[BlueCat]

When Gym A has to choose 20 out of 75 and Gym B gets to choose 20 out of 600, there is NO WAY you can tell me that is even remotely a fair playing field.

I get your overall opinion, but to that one point - most "mega" gyms have multiple Worlds teams. A small-ish gym may have to put their best 20 out of 75, but the ratio is about the same at our gym. Last year, I think we had about 200 athletes out of 750 that were on Worlds teams.

 

[Mr May]

Hey Troy,
There was a session at the NACCC Regional Meetings this summer dedicated to this topic for all members. And it was a big discussion at the West Coast meetings specifically. Michael May, from your program was very vocal and made some very solid points. Shoot me an email if you want to chat about it. I think this is a VERY important topic that needs a lot of thoughtful research if it is to ever be rolled out. It's possible we see eye to eye on this USASF matter--which would be the first time in the history of ever! LOL

Who's that guy??

 

[5-6-7-8]

Who's that guy??

Now I am singing "Whooooo whoooo, who's that guy" from Grease 2.

 

[kristenthegreat]

Just a couple thoughts that I have on this subject...

ETA - And I don't think winning Division 1A, 2A, 3A, 4A or 5A state championships in high school is any less honorable than winning 6A. They won against the best of the best for their size. All star cheer is no different.

*deleted for space*
I can understand where you're coming from and agree in theory. HOWEVER- we make exceptions in every other division. Small gym divisions, size options, heck- you can almost choose your comps based on the type of competitors you'd like to face! But worlds is supposed to be the best of the best. And I've seen some smaller gyms do very well in a variety of divisions. Do we ignore them and say 'Well, you're doing something special but you're an outlier so you don't count?'

Me being a numbers gal, I'd like to see numbers: From the last 2-3 worlds (seeing as 2010 was almost a 'new era' of Worlds). I'd like to see mean median and mode for gym size for each division (based on both number of athletes and number of athletes at worlds). I'd like to see the average score for each division, how many teams are below that score, etc. Compare and contrast, as it were.

 

[Mclovin]

*deleted for space*
I can understand where you're coming from and agree in theory. HOWEVER- we make exceptions in every other division. Small gym divisions, size options, heck- you can almost choose your comps based on the type of competitors you'd like to face! But worlds is supposed to be the best of the best. And I've seen some smaller gyms do very well in a variety of divisions. Do we ignore them and say 'Well, you're doing something special but you're an outlier so you don't count?'

Me being a numbers gal, I'd like to see numbers: From the last 2-3 worlds (seeing as 2010 was almost a 'new era' of Worlds). I'd like to see mean median and mode for gym size for each division (based on both number of athletes and number of athletes at worlds). I'd like to see the average score for each division, how many teams are below that score, etc. Compare and contrast, as it were.

I love this idea! That would be awesome information to have.

Regarding your comment about being able to choose divisions, size options, etc....Sure a small gym can choose to compete in a small division, but so can mega gym with 600 athletes. I posted on Twitter that personally what I would love to see happen, is rather than make a Division 1 and 2, make gyms enter a division based on the size of their gym. Something like this:

Gym size = 1-150 athletes = 20 on team (small)
Gym size = 151-350 = 30 on team (medium)
Gym size = 351 + = 36 on team (large)

I could care less what the actual cut off numbers are, but something along those lines. And I'm not just talking about worlds divisions, I'm talking every level, every age, across the board. I know coming from a gym with 150-200 athletes and often times struggling to even fill a team of 20 without using crossovers, it's frustrating to watch gyms with hundreds of athletes compete not only in the small division, but at NCA, they drop to the 19 & under division. I will never cry foul on this because I teach my athletes that regardless of size, it's what you do on the floor that wins or loses the game. But behind closed doors, it does frustrate me.

 

[Mclovin]

I get your overall opinion, but to that one point - most "mega" gyms have multiple Worlds teams. A small-ish gym may have to put their best 20 out of 75, but the ratio is about the same at our gym. Last year, I think we had about 200 athletes out of 750 that were on Worlds teams.

I did think about that fact after I posted my comment. However, mega gyms have the OPTION to either spread their talent out into more teams, or stack just a couple. They are afforded that option. Gyms with only one worlds team most often are scraping the bottom of the barrel just to compete with that one.

 

[quitthedrama]

I did think about that fact after I posted my comment. However, mega gyms have the OPTION to either spread their talent out into more teams, or stack just a couple. They are afforded that option. Gyms with only one worlds team most often are scraping the bottom of the barrel just to compete with that one.

Completely agree, and mega gyms also have a Junior 5 or Restricted 5 team to pull subs from where as smaller gyms generally don't have that option and need to pulls subs from lower levels.
There are valid arguments on both sides, but I really think the time has come for two separate divisions. Given the overcrowding at Worlds, I think it would be beneficial to have Worlds be a 4 day event with each division competing 2 days -semi-finals and finals. I don't think limiting bids will ever be an option, so it seems the Division split would benefit many and solve some other problems that we always complain about regarding Worlds.

 

[Deleted member 15]

*deleted for space*
I can understand where you're coming from and agree in theory. HOWEVER- we make exceptions in every other division. Small gym divisions, size options, heck- you can almost choose your comps based on the type of competitors you'd like to face! But worlds is supposed to be the best of the best. And I've seen some smaller gyms do very well in a variety of divisions. Do we ignore them and say 'Well, you're doing something special but you're an outlier so you don't count?'

Me being a numbers gal, I'd like to see numbers: From the last 2-3 worlds (seeing as 2010 was almost a 'new era' of Worlds). I'd like to see mean median and mode for gym size for each division (based on both number of athletes and number of athletes at worlds). I'd like to see the average score for each division, how many teams are below that score, etc. Compare and contrast, as it were.

Email me and let me know what you'd want and I'll see if I can get it.

Andre@spiritcompany.com