All-Star How Small Is A Typical D2 Gym Summit Bid Winner??

[luv2cheer92]

this is all i could find about D2 rules and eligibility on the varsity all star D2 summit page. I don't know why it says only single location in the begining then giving an exception at the bottom for multiple locations under the 125

"D2 Eligibility

NEW THIS YEAR- Single location D2 programs are the ONLY teams eligible for D2 Summit bids. Gyms must be of Division II size (125 athletes or less) when they receive a D2 Summit bid and MUST remain a D2 size gym when they arrive at the D2 Summit. Once a program goes above 125 athletes they will have to release their D2 bid, if they have one, and will not be eligible for D2 bids the remainder of the season.

Definition of multiple location

• Share a tax ID
• Share an owner
• Have a franchising/liscending agreement with another gym
• Have similar enough name OR branding it would confuse the consumer as to being part of a bigger gym
• Share family plan or use multiple locations to meet family plan
• If there is any possible confusion it is on the owners of the locations to prove to Varsity and the customers they are not a multi-location gym

Exception: The only multi location programs that are eligible to compete at the D2 Summit can not have more than 125 athletes total between all locations and meet the USASF requirement for a D2 program."

It's because in the past there have been smaller locations of mega programs (Stingrays and Rockstar come to mind) that have competed at D2 Summit. This was made to eliminate that. Those locations are able to compete D2 during the season still, just not at D2 summit.

 

[BlueCat]

Warning: Unsolicited suggestion ahead:

I have mentioned this before, but I believe the D1/D2 system is flawed and nearly impossible to enforce. My suggestion:

1. Let gyms/facilities declare their own classification at some point each season. (August 1?). That is their classification for the entire season, period. (no cherry-picking which division you compete)
2. Worlds Gyms - eligible for Worlds Bids.
3. National Gyms - not eligible for worlds bids
4. Set formula/criteria for when EPs split divisions into Worlds/National class at events. (? At least 2 of each type would be in the potentially split divisions?)

No counting enrollment, no searching through tax records, no searching for franchise information - you decide for yourself where you belong. Main justification: If you believe you should contend for a World Championship, you shouldn't need shielding from (theoretically) tough competition in your other divisions.

Names could change, but World/National seems pretty descriptive

 

[GreatWhite92]

Warning: Unsolicited suggestion ahead:

I have mentioned this before, but I believe the D1/D2 system is flawed and nearly impossible to enforce. My suggestion:

1. Let gyms/facilities declare their own classification at some point each season. (August 1?). That is their classification for the entire season, period. (no cherry-picking which division you compete)
2. Worlds Gyms - eligible for Worlds Bids.
3. National Gyms - not eligible for worlds bids
4. Set formula/criteria for when EPs split divisions into Worlds/National class at events. (? At least 2 of each type would be in the potentially split divisions?)

No counting enrollment, no searching through tax records, no searching for franchise information - you decide for yourself where you belong. Main justification: If you believe you should contend for a World Championship, you shouldn't need shielding from (theoretically) tough competition in your other divisions.

Names could change, but World/National seems pretty descriptive

Would this plan require multi-gym brands to all claim the same status?

I really like this concept.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Official OWECheer]

They are really sharp and clean, and their timing is usually impressive. Their choreography highlights it as well, so it stands out. Two of their bids are paid, and I think they have at least one or two chances at more bids.

This is why I love watching small teams.

@BlueCat you are just a fountain of great ideas.

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

Warning: Unsolicited suggestion ahead:

I have mentioned this before, but I believe the D1/D2 system is flawed and nearly impossible to enforce. My suggestion:

1. Let gyms/facilities declare their own classification at some point each season. (August 1?). That is their classification for the entire season, period. (no cherry-picking which division you compete)
2. Worlds Gyms - eligible for Worlds Bids.
3. National Gyms - not eligible for worlds bids
4. Set formula/criteria for when EPs split divisions into Worlds/National class at events. (? At least 2 of each type would be in the potentially split divisions?)

No counting enrollment, no searching through tax records, no searching for franchise information - you decide for yourself where you belong. Main justification: If you believe you should contend for a World Championship, you shouldn't need shielding from (theoretically) tough competition in your other divisions.

Names could change, but World/National seems pretty descriptive

In theory I agree with this concept, especially since there are so many potential nuances to enforcing the divisions as they stand. ( i.e Do you lose a D2 bid if you go over 125 at any point in the season? What happens if someone is injured, etc) But I fear that this plan favors large gyms that don't, or won't likely field World's teams, but still don't face the challenges of being a truly small gym ( like having fewer resources for choreography, music, uniforms, crossovers, etc.) In some ways it would allow gyms to develop niche marketing, I suppose. But it might also have an impact on the bottom line for Varsity...as I think there are a lot of programs willing to go to D2 summitt based on having the competition just appear to be more balanced. That being said, I'm not sure what kind of cutoff there should be. And I'll concede that a gym with 125 members still has significant advantages over one with 30, so it isn't like the above factors aren't at play anyway. And there's always the question of how much intervention we expect from our governing body... should it be there to enforce things that are basically non-enforceable?

 

[ryann3794]

How does that work? Does Vizion in MI have less than 100 kids? Or are they completely separate programs?

Not sure on the numbers or the ownership logistics as I'm alumni of the program for 5 years now but vizion Michigan is also technically a small gym they just choose to compete d1. Vizion Ohio competes under vizion athletix and vizion mi, vizion all stars. But I can assure whatever the logistics are, they're following all the rules.

 

[BlueCat]

Would this plan require multi-gym brands to all claim the same status?

Not necessarily. I understand wanting to put all multi-facility situations into the same box and keeping them away from competing against the "true" small gyms. However, I just don't see how to realistically legislate/enforce that.

I do think the lack of Worlds bids would keep most of the scary big gyms away from the "National" classification.

 

[ChicagoCheerDad]

It's because in the past there have been smaller locations of mega programs (Stingrays and Rockstar come to mind) that have competed at D2 Summit. This was made to eliminate that. Those locations are able to compete D2 during the season still, just not at D2 summit.

Justin Carrier says that loophole is being closed in the 2017-2018 USASF rules so those gyms will sub-locations of large gyms won't be able to cherry pick opportunities to win jackets/championships.

 

[cheer25mom]

Not necessarily. I understand wanting to put all multi-facility situations into the same box and keeping them away from competing against the "true" small gyms. However, I just don't see how to realistically legislate/enforce that.

I do think the lack of Worlds bids would keep most of the scary big gyms away from the "National" classification.

But, that leaves programs with the ability to designate certain locations "nationals gyms", concentrate their worlds athletes elsewhere, and do exactly what they did the first year of d2. I think it should be all or nothing. If you are going to compete for worlds bids, you shouldn't be allowed to double dip.

Our small gym got hosed as far as divisions this year. We have 2 locations and just enough kids between them to push us into D1, no worlds team, no crossovers of personnel or athletes. We had to compete with the big boys at Cheersport this year. It sucks, but it's where to rules landed us. I like the idea of a system where that wouldn't happen.

 

[BlueCat]

But, that leaves programs with the ability to designate certain locations "nationals gyms", concentrate their worlds athletes elsewhere, and do exactly what they did the first year of d2. I think it should be all or nothing. If you are going to compete for worlds bids, you shouldn't be allowed to double dip.

Our small gym got hosed as far as divisions this year. We have 2 locations and just enough kids between them to push us into D1, no worlds team, no crossovers of personnel or athletes. We had to compete with the big boys at Cheersport this year. It sucks, but it's where to rules landed us. I like the idea of a system where that wouldn't happen.

Under my proposed system, both of your gyms could be "national".

If you are looking for a loophole-free system that keeps gyms from ever having to compete against one of the big, bad, evil mega-gyms, I just don't see how that is possible.

My opinion is similar in the opposition to double-dipping, but from my perspective, gyms can now just cherry-pick when they want to be D2 or D1 - even within the same competition. That is double-dipping to me. Does your gym need to be protected from big gyms or not? I don't think you should be able to jump back and forth. I don't see how people could complain about big programs picking and choosing which of their facilities will spend the year in a particular classification, but will believe it OK for a gym to cherry-pick which division their teams will compete in at a single event.

I am also curious why gyms who seem to be so anti-consolidation among gyms will consistently go to Varsity events instead of smaller, independent event producers.

 

[cheer25mom]

Under my proposed system, both of your gyms could be "national".

If you are looking for a loophole-free system that keeps gyms from ever having to compete against one of the big, bad, evil mega-gyms, I just don't see how that is possible.

My opinion is similar in the opposition to double-dipping, but from my perspective, gyms can now just cherry-pick when they want to be D2 or D1 - even within the same competition. That is double-dipping to me. Does your gym need to be protected from big gyms or not? I don't think you should be able to jump back and forth. I don't see how people could complain about big programs picking and choosing which of their facilities will spend the year in a particular classification, but will believe it OK for a gym to cherry-pick which division their teams will compete in at a single event.

I am also curious why gyms who seem to be so anti-consolidation among gyms will consistently go to Varsity events instead of smaller, independent event producers.

I agree about double dipping going both ways. You should have to declare for an entire season at a time. For us, we attend Varsity events because it is where all the other gyms of similar size and talent are competing. Independent events in our area tend to draw truly tiny gyms. It would be easy to go in and take over, but not really fair. One local gym with multiple location does go to those events, run unopposed in many divisions, dominates in others , and brags about winning everything. They are a 200 kid gym wiping the floor with gyms of 20 kids. Our gym chooses not to do that.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[BlueCat]

I agree about double dipping going both ways. You should have to declare for an entire season at a time. For us, we attend Varsity events because it is where all the other gyms of similar size and talent are competing. Independent events in our area tend to draw truly tiny gyms. It would be easy to go in and take over, but not really fair. One local gym with multiple location does go to those events, run unopposed in many divisions, dominates in others , and brags about winning everything. They are a 200 kid gym wiping the floor with gyms of 20 kids. Our gym chooses not to do that.

It didn't used to be that way. I don't really have a solution, it just makes me sad to see the decline of the independent event producers. I really do get how it looks that a gym is taking the easy road by going to one of these events. I also see how going there to these events is trying to be supportive of the independent producers. FWIW, we have been to some very tiny, not particularly competitive Varsity events at times also.

My point was that some gym owners will happily discuss at length how unfair it is that 15-20 programs have gone from 5% of the all star market to 10% and want something regulatory to be done about it. However, they will still willingly write big checks to the single event producer that has gone from 25% to 90% of the market. (I am estimating those percentages.)

I don't want to be hypocritical. We write some insanely huge checks to that same conglomerate and, in most cases, get good value from that. For all of the good they do and the good services they provide, I still don't want to see them be the only option.

 

[Cobalt_Jeron]

I agree with Bluecat. There will always be the small guy, and big guy. The bigger guy will always have a slight advantage, but that just pushes us to be the best we can be. Why don't they just say anything over 125 kids is a big gym, anything under is D2, regardless of how many locations?

What i think is the hardest on a small gym right now is the age grid. And when i say small i mean our size, 30 kids. Which i think is more a micro gym.

It's hard enough trying to field competitive teams with 30 kids, then you add in the age and skill of each kid and it gets worse. The changes they made for next year will only make that harder. At least for us, unless we grow a considerable about.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

 

[cheer25mom]

It didn't used to be that way. I don't really have a solution, it just makes me sad to see the decline of the independent event producers. I really do get how it looks that a gym is taking the easy road by going to one of these events. I also see how going there to these events is trying to be supportive of the independent producers. FWIW, we have been to some very tiny, not particularly competitive Varsity events at times also.

My point was that some gym owners will happily discuss at length how unfair it is that 15-20 programs have gone from 5% of the all star market to 10% and want something regulatory to be done about it. However, they will still willingly write big checks to the single event producer that has gone from 25% to 90% of the market. (I am estimating those percentages.)

I don't want to be hypocritical. We write some insanely huge checks to that same conglomerate and, in most cases, get good value from that. For all of the good they do and the good services they provide, I still don't want to see them be the only option.

ITA. There is no easy answer. I would love to see independent events become more competitive, and would love to see the monopoly that is Varsity broken up. I just am not sure how to go about achieving that.

 

[cheer25mom]

I agree with Bluecat. There will always be the small guy, and big guy. The bigger guy will always have a slight advantage, but that just pushes us to be the best we can be. Why don't they just say anything over 125 kids is a big gym, anything under is D2, regardless of how many locations?

What i think is the hardest on a small gym right now is the age grid. And when i say small i mean our size, 30 kids. Which i think is more a micro gym.

It's hard enough trying to field competitive teams with 30 kids, then you add in the age and skill of each kid and it gets worse. The changes they made for next year will only make that harder. At least for us, unless we grow a considerable about.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

I think there should be more than 2 divisions. I don't think a gym with 126 kids should be competing against a gym with 400, or that a gym of 30 should be competing against a gym of 120. I think we should go to a division system similar to what high school sports do to level the playing field. A school of 200 kids has no businesses competing against school of 2000. They simply don't have the resources to stand a chance. The same is true about an all star gym of 30 kids trying to hold its own against the likes of Rays, CA, Cali, ect. Sure a small gym might get lucky one year with one special team that is the perfect mix of kids and do well, but by and large they just don't have the resources to compete on that level. They shouldn't be forced to.