All of those large senior teams (including CA Panthers) have competed at Worlds and finished out of the medals at least once.
The biggest divisions already have the majority of the teams performing twice. How many performances before a team will qualify as "happy?" Would changing the names of the rounds in huge divisions make a difference? Prelims, "Finals" (top 25), "Medal Round" (top 10)? We could give out finalist ribbons to everyone in the 2nd round.
Math errors abound in some of the posts. Please don't throw out wild numbers and stats to try to back up your point if they are incorrect. I am trying to focus on the intent of the posts, but I can only contain my inner Sheldon (nerd) for so long.
Barring a tie, there is no way for more than 10 teams to experience being in the top 10 in their division. Every team theoretically starts Worlds with a chance to be top 10, but only 10 will make it regardless of how many rounds there are.
We have had teams finish out of finals, including those that we thought were contenders for medals. It sucks, but that is the way the game is played. You know going in that hitting in prelims/semis is part of the process. I do get where people are coming from wanting to have as many people "win" from their perspective as possible, but IMO, Worlds should be the one competition a year out of hundreds that is focused on determining who are the best teams.
I completely agree with you...and in terms of math errors...I'm assuming you meant me because I admit my math was incorrect..If there are 70 teams and 10 go to finals, then 85%, not 90% will get wiped out in one day...That is still a ridiculously high amount of teams and I will continue to use this statistic to back my point. If worlds is about determining who the best teams are, then 70 teams shouldn't be invited, plain and simple. Better yet, why are more than 5 teams in ANY division even invited when we can pretty much predict year after year who will take home the globes, give or take a team or two?
When you are from Cheer Athletics, Stingray Allstars or any other big-name gym with multiple Worlds globes, it easy to have a nonchalant attitude about only taking 10 of 70 teams to finals because you've won this division more than once. And if you're part of the Large Senior division, you probably don't value the importance of top 10 because there aren't even 10 in that division. Likewise, even if you don't medal in one division, many of you field other Worlds teams that can potentially medal in another division. Worlds is about "crowning" the best teams, right? Then why even announce the top ten in a dramatic, heart-pounding awards ceremony if 4th through 10th place is nothing to be proud of or to work hard for? There is something to be said about making it to the top ten if the USASF actually makes such a huge deal about it in the 40+team divisions.
I'll quote from another post
..."It's actually Worlds, not a rinky-dink competition in someone's backyard." I agree completely. And Worlds USED to seem like an exclusive, prestigious event solely for the best of the best, but we all know what it has turned into. The USASF has created a culture of entitlement where everyone can win a bid and everyone feels like they deserve to compete twice. We all have fallen victim to that sense of entitlement whether we're from a program that consistently takes home a globe or a program that is climbing the proverbial ladder. For instance, if Large Senior will only take 50% to finals, then why is a third team entitled to slip by just because there are only 4 teams in the division? I've proven not to be a mathematician, but I do know 50% of four is two :) We've all been witness to Large Senior awards over the past few years...1st place jumps around screaming and convulsing like they just won the lottery while second and third place looks like someone just told them all of their mothers just died. Sometimes 1st place doesn't even get so much as a congratulations from 2nd and 3rd. There apparently is no glory in silver or bronze anymore. Meanwhile over in small senior the tenth place team jumps around like they just won the megamillions because they appreciate how hard it was to even get to the top ten. This is the culture that has been created, like it or not. I'm not saying it's right, but it is the reality. It's like inviting 70 people to a party that was only supposed to be for an exclusive bunch of four or five and then telling 60 of them they have to leave. The answer? Don't invite so many guests and nobody's feelings will get hurt because the unwanted won't be there to begin with.
In any case, if only ten teams in small senior are indeed going to finals this year, then I say keep Large Senior finals at 50% and let the top two teams battle it out...No medals, one winner. Someone is going to go home very unhappy, but again this is not supposed to be about making people happy and making them value a wonderful experience..We're just here to pick the winners.
