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

[cupieqt]

I really feel like a Division II gym has 150-175 athletes or less. A DIII gym would have 75 or less.

I heartily agree with this too
ETA: I might have to cut athlete number 76 tho and put them in a rec class if we were going to Worlds :P


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

 

[King]

And we have 76. I thought it was bad when we had 85


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

Gyms that have less athletes do different things to be successful. They make more mish mash teams, move kids up age groups to fly or because they don't have levels for them, and generally are not having this one core concentrated group of kids per age group and level. I think the idea is that there are multi level of gyms as much as their are multi levels of kids. The more kids you have the more true to level you can be.

 

[cupieqt]

Gyms that have less athletes do different things to be successful. They make more mish mash teams, move kids up age groups to fly or because they don't have levels for them, and generally are not having this one core concentrated group of kids per age group and level. I think the idea is that there are multi level of gyms as much as their are multi levels of kids. The more kids you have the more true to level you can be.

We use crossovers to make teams more filled out (when I say filled out, I mean pushing 15). We are fielding 7 teams by the skin of our teeth in order to have kids placed on age and level appropriate teams


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

 

[notyourcheermom]

Could we not count tinys if it came to that in a count? Tiny teams are big around here. Old gym has two tiny teams.

 

[cupieqt]

Could we not count tinys if it came to that in a count? Tiny teams are big around here. Old gym has two tiny teams.

Please? There's 6 of my 76 right there.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

 

[King]

We use crossovers to make teams more filled out (when I say filled out, I mean pushing 15). We are fielding 7 teams by the skin of our teeth in order to have kids placed on age and level appropriate teams


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

So this is not where this conversation was meant to go, but, I what if we should have less division sizes (all teams should be 24) and more gyms competing against gyms their own size. I might start this later in another thread.

 

[cupieqt]

So this is not where this conversation was meant to go, but, I what if we should have less division sizes (all teams should be 24) and more gyms competing against gyms their own size. I might start this later in another thread.

Yea I don't want to hijack the D1/D2 convo at all. But gym size is definitely a huge factor here and worth discussion


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

 

[cupieqt]

So back to the topic at hand, would it be possible to designate D1/D2 based only on the number of total (worlds eligible) L5 athletes in the program?
I just don't see how the total number of athletes ages 4-18, levels 1-5 holds weight. The majority of my athletes are mini and youth aged L1-2


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

 

[kristenthegreat]

Its gonna take a lot to convince me, but I think its simplistic to say it should be in for 2014. There is SO much more that needs to be taken care of for worlds imo before we start messing with divisions.

The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

 

[King]

Its gonna take a lot to convince me, but I think its simplistic to say it should be in for 2014. There is SO much more that needs to be taken care of for worlds imo before we start messing with divisions.

The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

You are assuming if someone doesn't do this other stuff will be fixed. Presume this exists in a box. Nothing else will be done if this is not done. Should this still be done?

 

[MissCongeniality]

Hello Everyone,
If you clicked the link in the very first post of this thread, you will see that this is an idea that I have brought to the Board. I enjoy reading your opinions about this but I want to give you an update on where this currently is. I also want you to know that NO final decisions on this topic have been made and when final decisions are made; I give you my word that I will come here to the FierceBoards and let you know as soon as possible. By the way, if you here any "official" information about this topic from someone else, it's probably not accurate.
UPDATE: I have been given the green light from the Board to take this conversation to the Regional Meetings. I am looking to create a Div II at Worlds. Yes, I have my opinions about how it should be done but I will be listening to the coaches opinions at the Regional Meetings this Summer. The main idea is to give smaller gyms (the official number of athletes has not been set) an avenue to compete at Worlds. This is the same thing that happens in just about all sports. If you think about college football (it's just an example so don't go off on a college football rant), they have Div 1A, Div II, etc... and all of their divisions have championships. There are plenty of details to work out so stay tuned.

LES' RANT:
I watch over an over again as this industry fights itself over every issue. I hope this is something that this entire industry can get behind and support. I truly believe that this has the possibility to grow All Star cheerleading across the country. Instead of thinking this shouldn't happen; help me determine the best manner for it to happen so it becomes something positive for all of us. While I love all of the top, elite, large gyms as much as anyone else. Those are the gyms I would rather not hear from. (Sorry top gyms, I don't mean that as an insult.) OK - I have plenty more to say but this post is getting pretty long so I will wrap it up. I hope to see you this Summer.
Les Stella

See in my mind Worlds has always been The Super Bowl...not the College Championships.

 

[King]

See in my mind Worlds has always been The Super Bowl...not the College Championships.

Interesting. The Super Bowl has professional athletes who are paid to compete. Allstar is supposed to be amateur athletes like college.

 

[Ashley]

I don't agree with the "you are not good enough if you don't get a paid bid." Anyone watch episode 23 of Cheerleaders? They are the World Champions. I assume they got a paid bid somewhere else, but even if they went on at large. Also, remember all the comparative scoring examples and Google docs and time of day you performed and name of gym, on and on, how they hold something back for scoring, don't give out the best scores right away? Am I making this up? Maybe number of years you've had a level 5 team or if you are in the first three years of having a Worlds eligible team, but then that is kind of what R5 is for, if you have over three sr level 5 teams maybe compete division 1. I think the 175/200 is a good number gym size.

Some programs late in the season may accept an AL and not take that team to another bid comp if they have two level 5 teams so they're not in essence competing for the same bid. Has anyone won bids on an AL bid or only paid? If that's the argument, then don't even let any AL teams attend. I don't agree that the ones with the paid are necessarily the better team in every circumstance.

Those teams that go to worlds without a paid bid and do well are the exception, not the rule. It's my understanding (and I think @BlueCat has discussed this before) that no team, outside of level 6, has won on an at large bid. And very few have medaled.

And as the exception, should they be relegated to division 2? I don't think anyone's saying that it's a hard and fast rule that paid bid winners are absolutely better than the at-large bid winners, but it's definitely a pretty solid indicator.

 

[BamaCheerGuy]

As long as we have small team bids passed out, lets make those count. I like this idea of splitting between Div I and Div II. I think the split should be set depending on the number of Level 5 athletes. As a gym stated, they have between 75-86 athletes majority not level 5. That can't be large. I agree this will make it grow and for the majority of teams that are small most will remain small. It's not a matter of working harder at all. It's having more to work from. Often small gyms have to put an athlete on a worlds team without a skill just to fulfill the needs to compete. I think two biggest questions, does each ep with worlds bids have to have to split up bids accordingly and the need to increase number of what defines small gym.


This post is verified by Chad Mulkey!

 

[dream2beCOACH]

I worry gyms would "play" off the number cut-off. This could potentially cut kids from certain programs that want to remain in the D2 division. We have enough problems with sandbagging.

On the other hand, this could be really positive for an upcoming gym.

I'm on the fence


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!