All-Star From Courtney Pope - "the View From Backstage At The Naccc..."

[StarshipTrooper]

Ok...here is my take on this and please feel free to clarify any points I may be missing or are inaccurate because I am coming into this a little late in the game.

We have a new proposal coming from a big "NJ gym" and (to be fair maybe others as well but I would really like to know who the "other supporters are") that we eliminate Youth 5 because it is dangerous and taxing on young bodies to compete/practice at that skill level BUT it was not dangerous for years when their youth 5 team was dominating the field???. Now that a bigger gym with a huge talent pool has the potential to dominate "NJ gym" thinks it would be best to eliminate this level or maybe restrict youth 5???. Umm...no matter how you slice it this sounds a little self serving from a "person" who is actually powerful enough to maybe pull this off. Scary stuff, no one person in this industry should have that kind of influence.

Am I getting this right?

I think you are interpreting Courtney's words pretty well, a sort of to the point moment.

 

[StarshipTrooper]

There were gyms from NJ that proposed eliminating the division, but that big gym (WC) actually is in favor of restricting the division. There was then a post made by Courtney that basically said that WC was doing this because at NCA they were told on their scoresheet to "add more double fulls." And then the conspriacy theories started about them wanting it gone because they were being beat.

World Cup is not for eliminating the division but instead for keeping it safer on the young bodies throwing the passes. Debbie Love was actually (I am pretty sure) also in support of restricting the division as well as Roger from Stingrays.

Another way to look at the proposals is that the two gyms proposing elimination are trying to keep kids from leaving their gym and going to WC, and the WC proposals are trying to limit restrictions either due to the stated injury concerns or the attempt to throttle the competition. This is based on the post that says the NJ gyms in question have no affiliation.

 

[cheerKT]

Jeez I go away for a week and this is what I come back to?

I see I can't leave you crazy cheer folks alone again =)

 

[kristenthegreat]

Jeez I go away for a week and this is what I come back to?

I see I can't leave you crazy cheer folks alone again =)

We got up to quite a bit of mischief while you were gone. It's my avatar, I tell you. The regality is so handy at hiding all the deviousness..

 

[xtremeteal4life]

Under "Safe youth 5. I need a favor..." post, 9th post comment down was her comment. It is there still, was there yesterday, was there the day I posted it. I would never post something like that without it being factual. I would suggest more sleep or glasses ;)ha.

I know that's why I apologized

But honestly I have looked numerous times and have not found it the past couple of days or else I would have apologized like I did for the first statement...

but I still need sleep

 

[xtremeteal4life]

I can tell you from observation and being someone that sees injuries in the gym and at competitions that the Youth Level 5 division is NOT the source of serious fractures, joint and tendon injuries. But just as with my criticisim of those using safety to restrict skills in the division my OBSERVATIONS and CONCLUSIONS on this subject are completly without proof and just my impression. Post pubertal girls that are trying to get skills for a senior team that they did not quite perfect as youth and junior seem to occupy the dubious honor of serious ligament injuries, and post pubertal males seem to get a lot of fractures and Achilles injuries. My suggestion would be to concentrate on the 14 and above age kids that are trying to get skills after hormones have changed their body including their joints, ligaments, muscles and bones and then use the same rules concerning restriction and progression on everyone else. It would be easy enough to charge each competition with a panel to evaluate tumbling skills in warm up and restrict athletes deemed unsafe to drop their skill down or face serious penalty for the team. And then you could add evaluation of the methods of each gym if you want to impliment strict liscensing parameters on the instructors. I suspect a good PI lawyer will be glad to define the standard in court if one waits long enough for the right injury.

that sounds like a really good idea actually....

 

[xtremeteal4life]

Thank you for your post as my own daughter was on the Wilmington Allstars Youth Advanced, with some of the first youth age kids to have doubles. Several of those boys from our old gym, have cheered and even coach at CEA. One being Darnell Harris, who is with Louisville now. I have been in allstars for about 14 years. I have watched CEA grow and flourish through the years.....very impressive to boot!!! The kids are not "pulled", but who would want to be on a little small gym team, when you can be on a World Champion Team? I am just saying, I know of athletes that are on teams in Greenville, Raleigh, and Kernersville so is that really local??? I applaud CEA for what they have done to grow a business, this as stated was no way bashing. I just feel, maybe we should look at cross competing athletes, because I feel an athlete should belong to a location gym, not under a a huge umbrella named business. This is just my opinion.... Sorry to hi-jack thread!! BUT......I stand by, LONG LIVE Y5!!

I ABSOLUTELY LOVE HIM!!!! He's coaching for CEA at the moment and I'm not complaining!

 

[xtremeteal4life]

From reading these rule change proposals, I think it is safe to characterize the first two as recommending elimination of the Youth L5 division and the last 3 as restrictions on the skills thrown by the Youth L5 division but keeping the division. The first 2 are by NJ gyms who I have no idea whether or not they have some association with WC or they are acting totally independently and the last 3 by the WC staff themselves. They all appear to cite questions of safety and seem to imply from my reading that there is a perception that Youth aged athletes are more susceptable to injuries due to poor progression of skill development I assume making it more likely that they at risk for injury. So I have some questions.

1. Do we have valid data about injury rates in cheerleading, especially in the all star division since this is where the rules are to be implemented?
2. Have we catergorized the injury types and calculated the actual rates? Are the injuries more likely to be due to tumbling, building or dance (you never know with how kids dance these days)
3. What are these injury rates as compared to a similar activity such as competitive gymnastics? Do they have data for safety concerning progression, teaching accredidation, etc that we can extrapoate some assumptions from?
4. What injury occured, at what age, at what level, and specifically what was the activity occuring with the injury.
5. Where and when do the injuries occur? What type of gyms, competitions, exhibitions? Are there certain gyms that have rates of injury out of the range, specifically low or high?

Instead of passing rules restrictling athletes in any particular division or level based on conjecture and assumption, how about collecting some data and make decisions based on the tried and true method of analysis. IF we can agree that cheerleading seems to have a high level of injury, why are we assuming that it is the Youth division that is the most vulnerable? And, if the rules need to be changed without any objective data, why not make the same proposed changes concerning safety for all divisions? My suspicion is that some of this is available, as insurance companies do write policies for gyms and I'll bet they have data to base their rates on for the customer. BUT, I strongly suspect that no one has done anywhere near the research to single out one specific division for these type of changes. I would charge those pushing for the changes to back their assumptions up with some objective proof that their observations or valid, and their changes will help alleviate the problem. Otherwise, it looks to me like a random act for unknown purposes, AND IT IS POSSIBLE THEY ARE WHAT THEY APPEAR TO BE ON THE SURFACE FOR SAFETY, but apparently Courtney feels differently and has expressed that opinion here, or facebook, or wherever.

Table the thing and study it and change the industry incrementally using sound analysis with appropriate time to give everyone a chance to adapt.

This is absolutely one of the best things I've heard regarding the citing of safety issues being the main reason for eliminating or restricting....

 

[notimeforthat]

Another way to look at the proposals is that the two gyms proposing elimination are trying to keep kids from leaving their gym and going to WC, and the WC proposals are trying to limit restrictions either due to the stated injury concerns or the attempt to throttle the competition. This is based on the post that says the NJ gyms in question have no affiliation.

I'm glad someone figured it out!! :) In NJ WC is not "loved".... It is perhaps the same situation that CEA faces. Talented kids leave programs to pursue a Y5. In turn smaller gyms that have bred that young talent are not happy!​

​

 

[Level5Mom]

I can tell you from observation and being someone that sees injuries in the gym and at competitions that the Youth Level 5 division is NOT the source of serious fractures, joint and tendon injuries. But just as with my criticisim of those using safety to restrict skills in the division my OBSERVATIONS and CONCLUSIONS on this subject are completly without proof and just my impression. Post pubertal girls that are trying to get skills for a senior team that they did not quite perfect as youth and junior seem to occupy the dubious honor of serious ligament injuries, and post pubertal males seem to get a lot of fractures and Achilles injuries. My suggestion would be to concentrate on the 14 and above age kids that are trying to get skills after hormones have changed their body including their joints, ligaments, muscles and bones .

Excellent observation. I agree with you and this has been my observation as well. A great reason to keep youth 5.

 

[cheercurl]

I'm glad someone figured it out!! :) In NJ WC is not "loved".... It is perhaps the same situation that CEA faces. Talented kids leave programs to pursue a Y5. In turn smaller gyms that have bred that young talent are not happy!​

​

This is true...

 

[SharkDad]

No one should be allowed to cheer level 5 at any age unless they tumble in gymnastics first

 

[CharlotteASMom]

Then perhaps, you need to brush up on your mastery of the open debate. You have been told by more than one poster that your original post came off as biased. Could that be true? Or do your above credentials prelude you from being fallible? If you truly want to speak knowledgeably about CEA, and sound credible, you know where to find the coaches, and the gym is always open for visits.

I was told I am biased by two people....one at CEA and one that said they might have been CEA if they hadn't relocated. My original post was "shimmied" by 14.

On a complete different note...I keep asking this hoping that someone will discuss. What does everyone think about the multitude of gyms that "endorsed" each of the rule proposals? The rule proposals inply many major gyms in the country want to restrict in some way. To me that means one of two things....

1. Many major gyms are in on a "conspiracy".
or
2. Many major gyms believe that there's something to the point of safety and progression.

Thoughts?

 

[SharkDad]

I don't think you're biased but this has turned into an emotional discussion from all sides and it's too bad anyone felt attacked.

I think either 1 or 2 are possible, I just wish everyone would base their opinions on facts, not assume the intent of certain statements.

CheermomRN is the only poster I've seen that actually based her safety discussion from real medical information.

 

[CharlotteASMom]

No one should be allowed to cheer level 5 at any age unless they tumble in gymnastics first

Was this sarcastic or serious because there seems to be some real merit to that? I hope when and if specific studies are done on tumbling injuries they also compare gymnastic trained versus cheer trained athletes.