All-Star National Championships Are Won At Tryouts

[King]

This is a question I have always pondered. Why would anyone pick a team that is not overly mastered the level they are in (outside of level 1)?

If the competition you are going against is sand bagging / stacking their team and the team you are filling up is 'giving people chances' are you surprised when the stacked team wins? Why not pick stacked teams at the beginning, deal with the quits/grumbles at the beginning, and have a highly competitive team all year long?


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[quitthedrama]

From a parents perspective, my issue is that progression for the athlete goes out the window. Winning is great, but it isn't ALL about banners and jackets. I could accept the process stated above if the gym also included opportunities for my CP to progress during the season within their fees (i.e. tumble and stunt classes at a higher level included in tuition), but I don't want to pay thousands of dollars per year for my child to not learn anything all season, or have to pay hundreds more for separate instruction in order to progress.

I do feel that gyms are being forced to go the route you are suggesting, all due to the gyms that are "sandbagging". It seems to become more common each season. Not sure where the middle ground is where the athlete can benefit and progress while the gym remains competitive.

 

[tumbleyoda]

I would venture to say that many gyms really struggle with getting parents/athletes to buy into competing a level or two lower than they really are in order to be competitive with programs that have way more talent to pick and choose from. I feel for our owners and many of them who get blasted regularly behind the scenes for daring to put an athlete on a their true level team or below. It doesn't matter to them that other gyms may do it. They want Suzie to get her tuck and she will never get it if she has to be on a team where she only needs a BHS so that is all the coaches will work on.

I would also say one persons sandbagging is another's stacking. All depends on what lens you choose to look through. Typically that mindset is what others do is sandbagging but what we ourselves do is stacking/level appropriate.

***ETA I have seen larger more prominent gyms be able to put a child on a lower level team and they accept it perfectly but at a less prominent gym the parents and athletes pitch a fit about being on the same level team.

 

[cheercurl]

This is a question I have always pondered. Why would anyone pick a team that is not overly mastered the level they are in (outside of level 1)?

If the competition you are going against is sand bagging / stacking their team and the team you are filling up is 'giving people chances' are you surprised when the stacked team wins? Why not pick stacked teams at the beginning, deal with the quits/grumbles at the beginning, and have a highly competitive team all year long?


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

HEY! I have had that exact same thought! Well, let me clarify that. Why would you start with a team who is barely level 4 with the hopes that athletes progress from mostly level 3 skills. Why not just be a solid kick booty level 3 team? 4 Athletes with standing tucks does not make a level 4 team. Then the entire year the team struggles to compete at that level and all those potential tucks only pan out to be 4 more. The athletes are frustrated with losing all season. The parents are upset with paying all this money to lose all over the place and at the end of your season you have parents and athletes looking for a new gym with winning teams.

I think large and mega gyms have the advantage of fielding "true" level teams but also have the ability to dangle the carrot of being on the next level of a good true level team in the near future.

At small gyms it is a crap shoot every year. Trying to keep parents and athletes satisfied with placement and field true level teams is a monumental task. I feel for the coaches and owners. They want to be successful....they want to hold on to their level 5 athletes but what if fielding a level 5 team is not in the cards this year with only a handful of true level 5 athletes left. If they do not squeak some kind of level 5 team out those athletes are going to look else where. What owners don't think about is that when they squeak together a level 5 team with just a handful of true lv5 kids...they water down every level that falls below it because level 5 will pull from level 4 and level 4 will pull from 3 and three from 2.....so what you end up with is a bunch of watered down teams with none of them being a solid level. All of them struggle....and the entire gym finishes the year looking ummm....not good.

 

[angelndscz]

This is such a debatable issue. I have over six gyms within an hours commute. Some gyms do sandbag others look at the cheerleader's potential. So should I pay thousands of dollars for my daughter to compete a level (or two) lower than her current level all for the guaranteed win? Or go with the gym who sees her potential and will work to grow her as an athlete and improve her skill level. I have both options. At the big name gym, she would probably make a level three team this season. She has been on a level three team the past two years. At the smaller gym she would probably make a level four team which would challenge her. So you think parents should choose the gym with the guaranteed win? I love to see my daughter's team win just as much as the next parent; but there is also the excitement of being challenged and growing as a team together.

I am not saying one gym is better than the other; but each individual needs to choose what he/she feels is best for them or their child.

 

[King]

From a parents perspective, my issue is that progression for the athlete goes out the window. Winning is great, but it isn't ALL about banners and jackets. I could accept the process stated above if the gym also included opportunities for my CP to progress during the season within their fees (i.e. tumble and stunt classes at a higher level included in tuition), but I don't want to pay thousands of dollars per year for my child to not learn anything all season, or have to pay hundreds more for separate instruction in order to progress.

I do feel that gyms are being forced to go the route you are suggesting, all due to the gyms that are "sandbagging". It seems to become more common each season. Not sure where the middle ground is where the athlete can benefit and progress while the gym remains competitive.

It is fine if it isn't all about banners and jackets but if a gym creates a team out of what they have and what they have isn not able to 'safely' compete and do the skills well that are in the level why not go a level down to something they can do extremely competently?

I would venture to say that many gyms really struggle with getting parents/athletes to buy into competing a level or two lower than they really are in order to be competitive with programs that have way more talent to pick and choose from. I feel for our owners and many of them who get blasted regularly behind the scenes for daring to put an athlete on a their true level team or below. It doesn't matter to them that other gyms may do it. They want Suzie to get her tuck and she will never get it if she has to be on a team where she only needs a BHS so that is all the coaches will work on.

I would also say one persons sandbagging is another's stacking. All depends on what lens you choose to look through. Typically that mindset is what others do is sandbagging but what we ourselves do is stacking/level appropriate.

***ETA I have seen larger more prominent gyms be able to put a child on a lower level team and they accept it perfectly but at a less prominent gym the parents and athletes pitch a fit about being on the same level team.

If the skill was an individual one, like gymnastics, I think parents are more willing to accept their child not be on the level they are working on. But if their child has a full it is very hard for them to see that the team as a whole is just not level 5 so their child can throw their full. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

HEY! I have had that exact same thought! Well, let me clarify that. Why would you start with a team who is barely level 4 with the hopes that athletes progress from mostly level 3 skills. Why not just be a solid kick booty level 3 team? 4 Athletes with standing tucks does not make a level 4 team. Then the entire year the team struggles to compete at that level and all those potential tucks only pan out to be 4 more. The athletes are frustrated with losing all season. The parents are upset with paying all this money to lose all over the place and at the end of your season you have parents and athletes looking for a new gym with winning teams.

I think large and mega gyms have the advantage of fielding "true" level teams but also have the ability to dangle the carrot of being on the next level of a good true level team in the near future.

At small gyms it is a crap shoot every year. Trying to keep parents and athletes satisfied with placement and field true level teams is a monumental task. I feel for the coaches and owners. They want to be successful....they want to hold on to their level 5 athletes but what if fielding a level 5 team is not in the cards this year with only a handful of true level 5 athletes left. If they do not squeak some kind of level 5 team out those athletes are going to look else where. What owners don't think about is that when they squeak together a level 5 team with just a handful of true lv5 kids...they water down every level that falls below it because level 5 will pull from level 4 and level 4 will pull from 3 and three from 2.....so what you end up with is a bunch of watered down teams with none of them being a solid level. All of them struggle....and the entire gym finishes the year looking ummm....not good.

I think the smaller gyms that start to 'stack' their teams are the ones who start to make the transition to the big time. Stacking a team causes grumbling in the beginning but happiness in the end. Teams that 'reach' for a higher level cause happiness in the beginning but grumbling in the end (because they most likely did not perform as well in the level as they had dreamed of). And, to me, do you know when athletes are most likely to leave your gym? When they had a crappy year competing up a level when they shouldn't have. Smaller gyms would last longer and do better by not over extending their level.

 

[King]

This is such a debatable issue. I have over six gyms within an hours commute. Some gyms do sandbag others look at the cheerleader's potential. So should I pay thousands of dollars for my daughter to compete a level (or two) lower than her current level all for the guaranteed win? Or go with the gym who sees her potential and will work to grow her as an athlete and improve her skill level. I have both options. At the big name gym, she would probably make a level three team this season. She has been on a level three team the past two years. At the smaller gym she would probably make a level four team which would challenge her. So you think parents should choose the gym with the guaranteed win? I love to see my daughter's team win just as much as the next parent; but there is also the excitement of being challenged and growing as a team together.

I am not saying one gym is better than the other; but each individual needs to choose what he/she feels is best for them or their child.

It isn't so much about winning as much as the journey. Teams that are stacked have a way more enjoyable journey than teams that STRUGGLE to get to the end. A decent amount of struggle is always good ( read David and Goliath by Malcolm Gladwell on why failing and struggle is good to a child's success) but insurmountable odds or a situation that is setup for failure is bad. Read FAILURE is not bad, just a situation where all you can do is fail can be very hard. But a team that is setup for success will enjoy their entire journey and learn even if they do fail.

 

[TheVipersMom]

I guess it depends on the athlete.

Our old gym put teams together on what kids mostly had/ almost had/ could possibly have for competition. We got second to last at every competition. 4 of 5, 5 of 6, 6 of 7. We went to competitions hoping we didn't get last .. (Maybe we should of hoped for more since it seemed to be working and we just got 2nd to last instead lol) the gym is an amazing family atmosphere and had the same core returning athletes for many many years. For my daughter who was 5 and 6 at the time she was one of very few that seem to get frustrated and upset after every competition. Not that we thought they should of won but I felt like for her the fun was being sucked out of it. When we were there for me/ and my kid personally we focused more on my kid. It was all about her, what she had, what she was doing, what she could throw. We didn't feel like the team amounted to much as we weren't competitive so we just made her competitive with herself.


At our current gym they require you to have all skills to be placed on that team. It is very much stacking (as referred to here), we go to large competitions. We are not going to be competitive if we go out there and struggle to do certain skills. This is where my kid thrives. She enjoys having an amazing team, she enjoys knowing that no one kid is bringing the team down. She enjoys working hard and doesn't mind a hard practice, or a practice where she gets in trouble and has to run 100 laps. Trust me Jaylen did plenty of that our first year here lol. For Jaylen she cares less about what she can do now, who has what or why Susie didn't get her tick tock, and where she is in the routine and more about what her team looks like when performing, what changes can be made to make them better etc.

I think our gyms growth is because of that. They went from less then 100 athletes 3 seasons ago, to I believe topping 200 with the new teams just added last weekend.
On the other hand we do lose multiple athletes after tryouts due to team placements but usually have so many late comers coming in those kids were already replaced and we just had tryouts at the beginning of the month.

I will say for us, it took one season of unhappy placements (not what my kid wanted to be on) to realize so much as to why she was placed on the team she was.

Also want to say that season that began in question was such a huge life lesson to Jaylen.. She learned a lot. Cheer/skills related and personal things as well.


Eta: what @quitthedrama posted about allowing kids to work on higher skills then what they are placed at no extra cost to the parent is brilliant. I think more people would be ok with this method, if they didn't have to pay for those stunt classes and tumble classes so my kid can use her skills while preparing for the next level!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[King]

I want to throw in isn't this one of the issues brought up by the show CheerHab?

 

[5-6-7-8]

It also depends how you define an athlete's level. I think a lot of us get so wrapped up with tumbling skills.

It's the same reason an athlete registration with a level (an idea kicked around now and again) would be pretty complicated, especially if a CPs skills aren't a consistent level.

I also hear often, "Suzie just got her tuck so now she is level 3." I've also seen Suzie's mom take Suzie to a bigger program because she didn't get put on a level 3 team only to be placed appropriately on a level 2 or 1 team at said larger program. And then suddenly it is fine?

I tend to prefer a team consisting of say 80% rock solid level skills and role players as needed to round out a good team. I cringe when I see stunts / tumbling that are almost unsafe.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[cheermomforever]

I guess it depends on the athlete.

Our old gym put teams together on what kids mostly had/ almost had/ could possibly have for competition. We got second to last at every competition. 4 of 5, 5 of 6, 6 of 7. We went to competitions hoping we didn't get last .. (Maybe we should of hoped for more since it seemed to be working and we just got 2nd to last instead lol) the gym is an amazing family atmosphere and had the same core returning athletes for many many years. For my daughter who was 5 and 6 at the time she was one of very few that seem to get frustrated and upset after every competition. Not that we thought they should of won but I felt like for her the fun was being sucked out of it. When we were there for me/ and my kid personally we focused more on my kid. It was all about her, what she had, what she was doing, what she could throw. We didn't feel like the team amounted to much as we weren't competitive so we just made her competitive with herself.


At our current gym they require you to have all skills to be placed on that team. It is very much stacking (as referred to here), we go to large competitions. We are not going to be competitive if we go out there and struggle to do certain skills. This is where my kid thrives. She enjoys having an amazing team, she enjoys knowing that no one kid is bringing the team down. She enjoys working hard and doesn't mind a hard practice, or a practice where she gets in trouble and has to run 100 laps. Trust me Jaylen did plenty of that our first year here lol. For Jaylen she cares less about what she can do now, who has what or why Susie didn't get her tick tock, and where she is in the routine and more about what her team looks like when performing, what changes can be made to make them better etc.

I think our gyms growth is because of that. They went from less then 100 athletes 3 seasons ago, to I believe topping 200 with the new teams just added last weekend.
On the other hand we do lose multiple athletes after tryouts due to team placements but usually have so many late comers coming in those kids were already replaced and we just had tryouts at the beginning of the month.

I will say for us, it took one season of unhappy placements (not what my kid wanted to be on) to realize so much as to why she was placed on the team she was.

Also want to say that season that began in question was such a huge life lesson to Jaylen.. She learned a lot. Cheer/skills related and personal things as well.


Eta: what @quitthedrama posted about allowing kids to work on higher skills then what they are placed at no extra cost to the parent is brilliant. I think more people would be ok with this method, if they didn't have to pay for those stunt classes and tumble classes so my kid can use her skills while preparing for the next level!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

At the current gym where you need certain skills to b on a team, is not really "stacking" to me..............stacking is where u have level 5 skills and compete level 2. that is smart to make a team of athletes that have the skills FOR THAT LEVEL and are competitive within their division they compete. No athlete wants to go to competitions all season and pray they are not last, that is no fun and a waste of $$.

 

[TheVipersMom]

At the current gym where you need certain skills to b on a team, is not really "stacking" to me..............stacking is where u have level 5 skills and compete level 2. that is smart to make a team of athletes that have the skills FOR THAT LEVEL and are competitive within their division they compete. No athlete wants to go to competitions all season and pray they are not last, that is no fun and a waste of $$.

I agree but it was referred to as stacking somewhere else so I just reused the word!

Also like the previous poster before you said as well that more then tumbling go into this. My kid can throw a full, has a standing back and (ugly) jumps to back, and she made a large junior level 3 this season. My kid cannot fly very well and doesn't want to/ to small to base.

So people look at our team and say wow.. She is level 5, that's why your team wins. No- only one other girl on the team just got her full recently. Youngest two kids on the team and both have only previously done level 2 so they just can't jump to 5. The other kids on the team are true level 3 tumblers (squad Ro tucks, ro BHS tucks, all but 3 have punch fronts) with level 3 stunting capabilities. So definitely not a team knocked down 2 levels to win but more so so they can be competitive and not hold anyone back. The coaches did say the 3 non punch front girls have to get it by competition so we will see!
(Correction- I think outside of the two youngest with fulls there is one older girl who has a layout)


There are kids who tried out for 3 and did not make it because they couldn't do specialty to tuck, not great at basing, etc so they did not make it because there were better candidates for the team.

Some people look at one kids tumbling ability and say sandbagging, some consider it stacking since that's not what they do at their gym.

Really the gyms just make a choice, do we want them to already be the level, or work to be the level eventually and not be very good at it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cheermommaRN]

Unfortunately unless you are a large gym with the talent pool available to stack a team this is not always possible. It's easy to "stack" your level 1 team with kids that easily have back handsprings if you have so many level 2 kids coming through the door you can pick and choose. In large gyms the difference between being on a level 1 and a level 2 is your ability to do a front walkover.
For my child it's not about the win. She was on a team that won every competition and it was great but by the end of the season it was just another jacket. She never wears her NCA jacket. This past year she was on a team that came in 2nd or 3rd every time and as a team they busted their butts at every practice. The jacket she won with that team she wears almost every day.
I also agree with the poster that talked about programs offering kids the capability to work on their next skills. If you want to stack my kid's team...fine but offer her extra tumbling classes (at no charge) instead of me having to shell out more money for classes or private lessons.
Also it depends on the kid. Mine would rather be pushed to improve than rest on her laurels all season with skills she perfected 2 seasons prior.

 

[CGAcheer]

There are levels of stacking, sandbagging, and being in too high of a level

Example for level 3
Most have layouts, standing bhs tuck but might be a little shakey on the standing tuck or don't have 2 to layout
To me that is sandbagging

Almost all have speciality to great technique tuck and good jump to 3, close to layout and maybe has standing bhs to tuck.
To me that's stacking

Everyone has standing 3, most have their tuck and about half can do a speciality to tuck
Level appropriate

Less than 75% having the standing and running skill
Should consider dropping down

We place at level appropriate with the goal of being between stacked and sandbagging by the end of the season.

We do fairly well, 3 of our 5 teams made it to the summit, but it we started with stacked teams maybe we would have made finals or top 3 or better

 

[xtremeteal4life]

It is fine if it isn't all about banners and jackets but if a gym creates a team out of what they have and what they have isn not able to 'safely' compete and do the skills well that are in the level why not go a level down to something they can do extremely competently?



If the skill was an individual one, like gymnastics, I think parents are more willing to accept their child not be on the level they are working on. But if their child has a full it is very hard for them to see that the team as a whole is just not level 5 so their child can throw their full. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.



I think the smaller gyms that start to 'stack' their teams are the ones who start to make the transition to the big time. Stacking a team causes grumbling in the beginning but happiness in the end. Teams that 'reach' for a higher level cause happiness in the beginning but grumbling in the end (because they most likely did not perform as well in the level as they had dreamed of). And, to me, do you know when athletes are most likely to leave your gym? When they had a crappy year competing up a level when they shouldn't have. Smaller gyms would last longer and do better by not over extending their level.

It isn't so much about winning as much as the journey. Teams that are stacked have a way more enjoyable journey than teams that STRUGGLE to get to the end. A decent amount of struggle is always good ( read David and Goliath by Malcolm Gladwell on why failing and struggle is good to a child's success) but insurmountable odds or a situation that is setup for failure is bad. Read FAILURE is not bad, just a situation where all you can do is fail can be very hard. But a team that is setup for success will enjoy their entire journey and learn even if they do fail.

IFL!~ I've got to get some sleep bc the words are starting to look like they're moving (after I'm done typing, lol!)