College Get Ready Tennessee Cheerleading If Dave Hart Is Hired As Ad!

[UKCheerdad]

Dave Hart has done more to harm cheerleading at Florida State and Alabama than you can imagine. He is anti-competition and anti-cheerleaders.

He ended Florida State's participation at UCA Nationals. Only when he left did they start competing again.
He was the main force behind denying Alabama their rings after this year's win at Nationals

Get ready to face opposition from your own Athletic Department if he is hired as your Athletic Director as is being reported!

 

[Kentucky Girl]

Luckily at UK, we got Mitch Barnhardt.

 

[ztaprincess]

Luckily at UK, we got Mitch Barnhardt.

I am sorry to point this out, but you always say "we" or "my" when talking about UK and it kind of confuses some of us when you are not part of the team or university. As someone else pointed out in another thread, be careful with that because it sometimes makes it look like you speak for the team or university.

As for the hiring of Hart, if he leaves Alabama then maybe the threat of doing away with competition for them will go away and they can continue the way they should.

 

[Kentucky Girl]

I am sorry to point this out, but you always say "we" or "my" when talking about UK and it kind of confuses some of us when you are not part of the team or university. As someone else pointed out in another thread, be careful with that because it sometimes makes it look like you speak for the team or university.

As for the hiring of Hart, if he leaves Alabama then maybe the threat of doing away with competition for them will go away and they can continue the way they should.

I'm talking about our athletic director at the University of Kentucky.

 

[AScheer]

Hopefully not! Joy is one tough cookie though. I don't see her backing down easily!

 

[UKCheerdad]

Hopefully not! Joy is one tough cookie though. I don't see her backing down easily!

Well, David McDowell was a pretty tough guy at Alabama. See where he is now? Not at Alabama. He got tried of the crap that Dave Hart was doing. When Dave Hart is the boss, Joy will be answering to him, not the other way around.

 

[MissBee]

I'm talking about our athletic director at the University of Kentucky.

Are you a representative of UK Cheerleading or the UK Athletic Department or of the University?

 

[UKCheerdad]

I am sorry to point this out, but you always say "we" or "my" when talking about UK and it kind of confuses some of us when you are not part of the team or university. As someone else pointed out in another thread, be careful with that because it sometimes makes it look like you speak for the team or university.

As for the hiring of Hart, if he leaves Alabama then maybe the threat of doing away with competition for them will go away and they can continue the way they should.

Can I say "our" or "we?" Just curious.

 

[Kentucky Girl]

Are you a representative of UK Cheerleading or the UK Athletic Department or of the University?

Nope, just a fan.

 

[MissBee]

Nope, just a fan.

Then you can't say "we" when referring to the UK Cheerleaders or UK Athletic Department. That's called false representation. You can say "the UK Cheerleaders" (not us or we) or "I'm a student at UK and the cheerleaders made an appearance at the student union today", but not "we cheered at the pep rally today at the student union".
When you say "we" you imply that you are a part of the organization and speaking on their behalf.

 

[ACEDAD]

I think y'all are being a bit picky on the use of "we". I've never attended Alabama (though my son went for a year) and I will say "we" beat Kent State yesterday or "we" won the UCA national championship last year.

I haven't worked for "my" firm in Lexington since 2002 or had any ownership since 2006, but I still say "we" just hired a new employee.

And I'm pretty sure 90% of the people (or more) on this board will say "we" in relation to their gym, but I doubt they have the authority to speak on behalf of the gym.

 

[coachrah]

Dave Hart has done more to harm cheerleading at Florida State and Alabama than you can imagine. He is anti-competition and anti-cheerleaders.

He ended Florida State's participation at UCA Nationals. Only when he left did they start competing again.
He was the main force behind denying Alabama their rings after this year's win at Nationals

Get ready to face opposition from your own Athletic Department if he is hired as your Athletic Director as is being reported!

Perhaps Mr. Hart is not necessarily anti-competition but rather pro-active when understanding liability for his department. As an Athletic Director, he too, answers to powers higher than his own position (President for one). It is possible, he understands many critical factors:

1. The NCAA DOES NOT insure sideline cheerleading to compete nor the practice of competition.
2. Because of the above stated perhaps he is aware that the bulk of practice's priority would be for the high level skill sets necessary to compete but not necessary on the sidelines where certain skills are restricted.
3. Perhaps he understands "catastrophic" injury and where the University would be liable if the unfortunate occurred.

I don't know how many Universities have good policies in place to oversee the health of their students involved in something deemed an ACTIVITY but some good questions are at hand:

1. Are the cheerleaders base-line concussion tested before the onset of their season? Is a medical history documented?You can remove the poms and signs but the skillsets at the collegiate level, in my opinion are "sport" and not "activity".
2. Is the cheerleading team given adequate practice facilities and at a time when they are not challenged academically and physically. So many college cheerleaders post on this board that they have to practice late ar night or at off-campus facilities (another topic) which might make an athletic director somehat hesitant.
3. Are the cheerleaders seen before, during and after practice by their Athletic Department trainers to relieve ongoing injuries AND oversee their future health?
4. Since many high level skills are not allowed at basketball games (2 and 1/2 high pyramids, basket tosses, certain release and twisting moves, and certain tumbling skills) ...are mats brought out for the games on the sideline and during time-outs? I have NEVER seen a blue foam strip on the sidelines where cheer and dance teams are situated at a college game. Do teams have mats during 45 second timeouts or tv timeouts? Game day, at least for basketball, is a "scripted" process with the clock ticking for timeouts. It would be difficult to get mats onto the floor from a facilitie's perspective and a time perspective. So if these skills are not feasible at games, the only reason to do them is for competition which is not insured.

Their are many Athletic Directors who might be aware of the NCAA's guidelines, and maybe they are not anti-competition but proactive when it comes to litigation. Just my opinion.

 

[UKCheerdad]

Perhaps Mr. Hart is not necessarily anti-competition but rather pro-active when understanding liability for his department. As an Athletic Director, he too, answers to powers higher than his own position (President for one). It is possible, he understands many critical factors:

1. The NCAA DOES NOT insure sideline cheerleading to compete nor the practice of competition.
2. Because of the above stated perhaps he is aware that the bulk of practice's priority would be for the high level skill sets necessary to compete but not necessary on the sidelines where certain skills are restricted.
3. Perhaps he understands "catastrophic" injury and where the University would be liable if the unfortunate occurred.

I don't know how many Universities have good policies in place to oversee the health of their students involved in something deemed an ACTIVITY but some good questions are at hand:

1. Are the cheerleaders base-line concussion tested before the onset of their season? Is a medical history documented?You can remove the poms and signs but the skillsets at the collegiate level, in my opinion are "sport" and not "activity".
2. Is the cheerleading team given adequate practice facilities and at a time when they are not challenged academically and physically. So many college cheerleaders post on this board that they have to practice late ar night or at off-campus facilities (another topic) which might make an athletic director somehat hesitant.
3. Are the cheerleaders seen before, during and after practice by their Athletic Department trainers to relieve ongoing injuries AND oversee their future health?
4. Since many high level skills are not allowed at basketball games (2 and 1/2 high pyramids, basket tosses, certain release and twisting moves, and certain tumbling skills) ...are mats brought out for the games on the sideline and during time-outs? I have NEVER seen a blue foam strip on the sidelines where cheer and dance teams are situated at a college game. Do teams have mats during 45 second timeouts or tv timeouts? Game day, at least for basketball, is a "scripted" process with the clock ticking for timeouts. It would be difficult to get mats onto the floor from a facilitie's perspective and a time perspective. So if these skills are not feasible at games, the only reason to do them is for competition which is not insured.

Their are many Athletic Directors who might be aware of the NCAA's guidelines, and maybe they are not anti-competition but proactive when it comes to litigation. Just my opinion.

So if I understand your point, because we live a litigious culture folks like Mr Hary are afraid of lawsuits and thus his "pro active" stance on squads not competing? So all the squads at UCA nationals do not share Mr Hart's pro-active stance towards competiton. In other words, he is right and everyone else is wrong - is that what you are saying? Or are you simply defending the guy?

Certainly each University is responsible for the liability insurance and takes that into consideration before they let thier athletes compete or practice elite stunts. If they don't aren't they taking a pretty big risk? I would think an umbrella policy would cover just about anything the cheerleaders did. Once again, how is Mr. Hart is the right here and everyone else is in the wrong letting their squads compete?

At UK, the faculty sponsor of the squad is part of the general legal counsel for the entire univeristy. I would assume that T Lynn Williamson understands a thing or two about liability and lawsuits. And yet, UK finds a way to stress sideline excellence as well as competitive excellence. All the while adhering to USASF guidelines for safety. But then again, UK is the gold standard of college cheerleading and they treat their cheerleaders as athletes in the Athletic Department. They do things the "right" way from what I have experienced.

 

[coachrah]

So if I understand your point, because we live a litigious culture folks like Mr Hary are afraid of lawsuits and thus his "pro active" stance on squads not competing? So all the squads at UCA nationals do not share Mr Hart's pro-active stance towards competiton. In other words, he is right and everyone else is wrong - is that what you are saying? Or are you simply defending the guy?

Certainly each University is responsible for the liability insurance and takes that into consideration before they let thier athletes compete or practice elite stunts. If they don't aren't they taking a pretty big risk? I would think an umbrella policy would cover just about anything the cheerleaders did. Once again, how is Mr. Hart is the right here and everyone else is in the wrong letting their squads compete?

At UK, the faculty sponsor of the squad is part of the general legal counsel for the entire univeristy. I would assume that T Lynn Williamson understands a thing or two about liability and lawsuits. And yet, UK finds a way to stress sideline excellence as well as competitive excellence. All the while adhering to USASF guidelines for safety. But then again, UK is the gold standard of college cheerleading and they treat their cheerleaders as athletes in the Athletic Department. They do things the "right" way from what I have experienced.

I prefaced all I said with the word "perhaps". Defending a man I don't know would be a bit presumptious, but what I do know is that the NCAA's insurance is not fully understood by many team's (whether coach or AD). What I said, was that perhaps he understands that catastrophic insurance for competition or practicing to compete was not part of NCAA's policy. The responsibility, therefore, to purchase liability insurance is obviously just a part of the equation, and as you have stated UK does it right all the way across the board for their team. In essence, they treat their team like athletes. With such treatment,(trainers, proper equipment, proper practice space and time, base-line concussion testing, drug testing, qualified coaching staff) etc. is in place to ensure the team's success. Maybe some AD's (unlike Kentucky's) are not equipped to fully support the elite skills at the collegiate level. Perhaps it is not in their budget. That was my point. I am sure that there is many teams who receive the benefit of sport like Kentucky, but as often stated on this board, others do not.

 

[MissBee]

I think y'all are being a bit picky on the use of "we". I've never attended Alabama (though my son went for a year) and I will say "we" beat Kent State yesterday or "we" won the UCA national championship last year.

I haven't worked for "my" firm in Lexington since 2002 or had any ownership since 2006, but I still say "we" just hired a new employee.

And I'm pretty sure 90% of the people (or more) on this board will say "we" in relation to their gym, but I doubt they have the authority to speak on behalf of the gym.

That particular poster uses the term "we" whenever she's referring to the UK Cheer team, as if she were a member of the team-which she is not. At least when people are talking about their gym, they are on the team there.