I'd just like to remind everyone that the only issue of 'where these kids will go', is if it's completely ELIMINATED. At which point, the 9 other gyms will have to make a youth 4 OR add another junior 5. If it's restricted, these kids CAN and probably WILL still be on a youth 5 team. They don't HAVE to go to a junior 5 team and they don't HAVE to compete the doubles they DO have. They can easily take their time perfecting skills because they've got plenty of time before they may need them, *or so people hope.* I still need an actual number of how many of these kids have doubles before I get all bent out of shape. If on a team of 36, the number is less than 10, I can't help but feel that restricting them isn't going to have this huge industry-changing dynamic that people expect.
Now, if youth 5 IS eliminated, that takes something else into play. The gym this will directly affect the MOST is a gym who already has filled up a junior 5 team in every division offered. That would be only CEA, as far as I know. And although I don't know the exact crossover model, perhaps she could use LESS, considering she would have more L5 kids to move around.
I think what a lot of the rule changes proposed boil down to is that the SCORE SHEETS are the issue. If Elaine or ANYONE is proposing things because the score sheets are contradicting what we think is best for the industry, change the score sheets? Make the Youth 5 score sheet not weigh so heavily on doubles and therefore eliminate the pressure to get them. If the conversation with parents isn't 'Well, youth 5 doesn't allow doubles' but 'Well, youth 5 doesn't weigh as heavily on having doubles but the execution of proper tumbling, like well-executed fulls', to me the second one sounds a lot more acceptable. Maybe I'm just not looking at things the right way..