All-Star International Coed 5/all-girl 5 Thoughts

[BSS2000]

before last year they had always had to afford it before.

I know, and the division has grown a lot in that short amount of time. This season alone there has to be at least a hand full of new quality teams. I would imagine my gym wouldn't have put ours together if a paid bid wasn't an option. What non-international teams that really deserve a paid bid haven't in the past because of an international team? There couldn't be enough to justify taking paid bids away from international completely. All I'm trying to say is, not having a paid bid option would stop an international team from existing period, before it would keep a regular worlds division team from making it to Orlando. So keep some great teams in the sport, or give a few more teams in the other divisions money?

 

[King]

I know, and the division has grown a lot in that short amount of time. This season alone there has to be at least a hand full of new quality teams. I would imagine my gym wouldn't have put ours together if a paid bid wasn't an option. What non-international teams that really deserve a paid bid haven't in the past because of an international team? There couldn't be enough to justify taking paid bids away from international completely. All I'm trying to say is, not having a paid bid option would stop an international team from existing period, before it would keep a regular worlds division team from making it to Orlando. So keep some great teams in the sport, or give a few more teams in the other divisions money?

Level 6 can technically score higher at Varsity events, even if they arent a high quality team. So even if I take a terrible level 6 team to NCA, as long as we are in all the top categories for level 6 we should get a paid bid. Is that what I am hearing?

 

[KING-EVOLUTION]

BRANDON ALL-Stars STEEL!
IOC5!!!
Really GOOD!

http://cheerlibrary.com/videos/386/brandon-all-stars-steel-10-11

 

[Weezy]

BRANDON ALL-Stars STEEL!
IOC5!!!
Really GOOD!

http://cheerlibrary.com/videos/386/brandon-all-stars-steel-10-11

They are really good!

 

[BSS2000]

Well

Level 6 can technically score higher at Varsity events, even if they arent a high quality team. So even if I take a terrible level 6 team to NCA, as long as we are in all the top categories for level 6 we should get a paid bid. Is that what I am hearing?

If they score in all the top categories for level 6, how are they terrible? Anyways, whose fault is it that there isn't a system for figuring out bids on a level playing field? Our sport has a lot of flaws, especially in reference to the international division. It's bad enough only three teams make finals and now we want to take paid bids back. What changed?

 

[KING-EVOLUTION]

They are really good!

Yea there stunts were good!
i think they have a chance!!

 

[King]

Well
If they score in all the top categories for level 6, how are they terrible? Anyways, whose fault is it that there isn't a system for figuring out bids on a level playing field? Our sport has a lot of flaws, especially in reference to the international division. It's bad enough only three teams make finals and now we want to take paid bids back. What changed?

The thing is it shouldn't be a level playing field for level 6. They do skills that aren't legal in level 5, and have to be judged on a higher scale to accommodate the legality to keep all our scoring consistent.

And to reach level 6 in baskets you just need a back tuck (think pyramid braced flip without the brace). A front flip dismount (think bird front flip but dont hold onto the ankles) and a walk up 2 2 1.

Besides, if the paid bids really start going to IO(C) 6's then what is to stop all the college teams from going to all the major nationals and getting those paid bids? Think GT, UK, SFA, HPU, OSU, Alabama, Tenn, UCF, and a bunch of others. Int 6 is more UCA than UCA and would reward all those stunting teams and give them an honest shot to take the title. They dont even have to be associated with a gym. They can just go and compete in their college uniforms and get bids. And if the choice were between giving an 6 college team a bid and a 5 international team if it really takes off I would bet more times than not the 6 would get it. Would you be fine with that?

 

[BSS2000]

Well to be honest I don't really care for international 6 anyways so I would put up no argument in eliminating it.

 

[Emily Jane]

I do think paid bids should only go to club level teams. The whole industry is built on the back of club level teams, so club level teams should be rewarded. If international disappeared tomorrow there will be little consequence, but if club were to disappear so would all of allstar cheer. I say this as a coach of an international 6 team. Paid bids are there for club level teams.

As for LESS teams going to worlds (aka making the event more prestigious) I think it is a double edged sword. What makes worlds so amazing is the ridiculous amount of teams there. After 90% of those teams are done (the ones just happy to be competing there) they turn around and sit in the stands and become the most crazed fervent fans you can imagine. They fill the air with a sense of importance and excitement that can't be described. If we lower the teams we lose that. BUT with so many teams it is harder to be accurately judged.

I don't think there should be 'international' divisions. It is either club or open. Open is 18+ and allows college level kids. Club is 12-18 and no kids who can cheer in college are allowed. You are either a club athlete or an open level athlete, age wise there would be a cutoff where you switch from one to the other.

There should not be just top 3 from a country. That doesn't make sense. If you want the sport to grow, dont restrict talent. If a country wants to send one representative to a division that only has one US team... well isn't that what the ICU is for?

Last, IOC 5 should have normal balanced scoresheets that look like either large all girl or unlimited coed depending. IOC 6 can have the over emphasis on building skills because amazing building is highlighted in 6.

I'm not attacking your arguments but I would just like to point out that your age proposal might cause problems in other countries, for example here in England our age ranges are slightly different (juniors is age 15 and under, and seniors is all members 10+ with one or more member 16+). In England we don't have a huge number of true level 5 athletes so your age propositions would make it even more difficult to form a proper level 5 team - Englands best coed 5 team has athletes age 16 - 20 something year olds, changing the ages would cut talent from this team. Although it may benefit US cheerleading it may hinder the progression of high level international cheerleading.

Also to get a bid to compete at ICU all the teams would have to compete at UKCA, one of the least respected organisations in the UK (unless the rules have changed there are no levels which means the rules are very dodgy - junior teams are allowed to backtuck basket but not double down from two footed stunts such as preps because it isn't safe :confused: UKCA does not have a sprung floor, even at its nationals so the chances of the top UK teams going are very slim).

 

[BlueCat]

You make good points. There are valid criticisms of the current setup, certainly. However, I think that Int. 5 has grown to fill a vacuum in the age grid. I would argue that the division would have grown even more in the US were it not for the arbitrary limitations put on Worlds in that age bracket.

By the way, there is nothing stopping a university from simply bringing its team to compete now. It kind of already feels like that happens with a couple of teams.

 

[King]

Well to be honest I don't really care for international 6 anyways so I would put up no argument in eliminating it.

So you base your decisions on what divisions to keep on your personal preference, not what might be good for the industry?

I'm not attacking your arguments but I would just like to point out that your age proposal might cause problems in other countries, for example here in England our age ranges are slightly different (juniors is age 15 and under, and seniors is all members 10+ with one or more member 16+). In England we don't have a huge number of true level 5 athletes so your age propositions would make it even more difficult to form a proper level 5 team - Englands best coed 5 team has athletes age 16 - 20 something year olds, changing the ages would cut talent from this team. Although it may benefit US cheerleading it may hinder the progression of high level international cheerleading.

Also to get a bid to compete at ICU all the teams would have to compete at UKCA, one of the least respected organisations in the UK (unless the rules have changed there are no levels which means the rules are very dodgy - junior teams are allowed to backtuck basket but not double down from two footed stunts such as preps because it isn't safe :confused: UKCA does not have a sprung floor, even at its nationals so the chances of the top UK teams going are very slim).

Well the fact is we dont have a standard age for cheerleading (nor scoresheets nor anything really). And the idea is not to hurt England, but to talk about the broader sense of what we are trying to accomplish. England (and many other countries) would adapt to the new rules and eventually succeed.

Besides that, how many countries have different perspectives on what age fits a division and what doesn't? What if my ideas hurt England but help Germany? Or your ideas help England but hurt France?

You make good points. There are valid criticisms of the current setup, certainly. However, I think that Int. 5 has grown to fill a vacuum in the age grid. I would argue that the division would have grown even more in the US were it not for the arbitrary limitations put on Worlds in that age bracket.

By the way, there is nothing stopping a university from simply bringing its team to compete now. It kind of already feels like that happens with a couple of teams.

I guess I just dont understand what vacuum the age grid you are talking about is? If they are under 18 the athletes have plenty of choices. If they are over 18, they would be more than fine with raising the open age of the division to 18+. IF they raised the age of IOC 5 open to 18+ (to be the age group you go to after club) and bid companies were still fine with giving a paid bid to IOC 5 or 6, I would be fine with that.

(but really, what age vacuum are you discussing?)

 

[BlueCat]

The "international 5" age bracket (I agree the name is awful, by the way) fills a need for many gyms. While there are some gyms who could fill an entire team with athletes over 18, there are many more who have just a few athletes that age who still want to have the opportunity to cheer. Whether it is a small gym who is struggling to put together enough 12-18 year old athletes to form a single L5 team - a medium gym that has enough for a single senior 5, but not really 2 - or a mega-gym that has enough for 4 and not really 5, the "international" age bracket helps those programs find teams for those people.

By eliminating that age bracket option, you would force many of those athletes to either not cheer, or quit their current gym and go to another gym (probably a gym like yours or mine) that has the resources to create entire team(s) using only 19+ year-olds. While that may be great in the short-term for the mega-gyms, that would be bad for the industry, IMO. The state of the economy is such that we shouldn't be making it that much more difficult for gyms to form teams.

To me, it is much like suggesting that we restrict the mini division to ONLY 6-7 year olds, the youth to 8-9, junior 10-13, and senior 14-18. There would be just as many total divisions, but gyms would have a dramatically tougher time making teams without the overlapping age ranges. By doing that, you would have: 1. Cut back on the options for each individual athlete AND 2. Made creating teams more difficult for gyms - all without even the benefit of eliminating any divisions.

 

[BSS2000]

So you base your decisions on what divisions to keep on your personal preference, not what might be good for the industry?

NO, that is not at all what I'm saying!

It is possible to not care for something for a valid reason, you already stated a lot of reason why 6 causes problems with worlds. Level 6 has no place in all star cheer as far as I'm concerned, at least not at worlds. If you want to cheer level 6, goto college. The division isn't as competitive at worlds as international 5, not nearly.The international 6 teams from other countries need to stop focusing so much on crazy level 6 stunts when they don't even have level 4 squad tumbling. We want the rest of the world to catch up but I don't think level 6 is helping. Worlds should be for level 5 strictly.

 

[Ashley]

Besides, if the paid bids really start going to IO(C) 6's then what is to stop all the college teams from going to all the major nationals and getting those paid bids? Think GT, UK, SFA, HPU, OSU, Alabama, Tenn, UCF, and a bunch of others. Int 6 is more UCA than UCA and would reward all those stunting teams and give them an honest shot to take the title. They dont even have to be associated with a gym. They can just go and compete in their college uniforms and get bids. And if the choice were between giving an 6 college team a bid and a 5 international team if it really takes off I would bet more times than not the 6 would get it. Would you be fine with that?

Could they actually do this? Most college have restrictions on how many "nationals" you can attend, I think it's one. Didn't some college teams do a Paula Abdul cheer show on MTV and then couldn't go to UCA/NCA nationals? I know that GT *is* Louisville, but they're associated with a gym in that case. I guess all of those teams could just make friends with a local all-star team and become their level 6 team. But why wouldn't that be done more than it is now?

Edit: Ugh, I keep thinking I'm replying to comments that are on the last page, only to find out that they aren't.

 

[King]

NO, that is not at all what I'm saying!

It is possible to not care for something for a valid reason, you already stated a lot of reason why 6 causes problems with worlds. Level 6 has no place in all star cheer as far as I'm concerned, at least not at worlds. If you want to cheer level 6, goto college. The division isn't as competitive at worlds as international 5, not nearly.The international 6 teams from other countries need to stop focusing so much on crazy level 6 stunts when they don't even have level 4 squad tumbling. We want the rest of the world to catch up but I don't think level 6 is helping. Worlds should be for level 5 strictly.

but most other countries are setup to only do level 6 like a level 6 scoresheet. check out any of the world or international competitions on youtube. and if you say no levle 6 then an team competing at ICU would have to have a completely different routine than they could take to worlds. lots of them do the same thing.