BlueCat
Roses are red, cats are blue
- Dec 14, 2009
- 4,503
- 19,507
It took us 30+ hours and 20 people to make our teams. Believe me I know.
That is sounds very much like our roster placement process.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It took us 30+ hours and 20 people to make our teams. Believe me I know.
Because all cheerleaders birthdays do not fall before the cutoff of Aug, i personally believe we should go back to using GRADE level instead of age.....this way we won't have some children (such as my own) waiting until they are sophomores in HS before getting to cheer on a senior team where the cutoff is 14
you can overlap one grade for each division
Seniors: 8th grade to 12th
Juniors: 4th grade to 8th?
and so on.........
That is sounds very much like our roster placement process.
What is the actual across the board cheer-related problem that is caused by the current age grid?
actually, I dislike the very tiny 8 year old on the senior team. Sometimes you have to think outside the level 5 box.The problem is that a lot of people dislike the very tiny, very flexible, and very talented 12 year olds flying on a senior team.
What is the actual across the board cheer-related problem that is caused by the current age grid?
Actually, although the whole issue of ages and maturity and handling of such is a side-effect of the issue (and I do consider it an issue-yes. From PERSONAL experience)- from what I've gathered from the posters above (many of whom are older, wiser, and much more cheer industry-knowledgeable) is that it's also a matter of division depth/competition. Many seem to feel that Tiny is an unnecessary division (competitive-wise, I agree. Most young ones under 5 haven't a clue about placements or anything besides 'dressing up for competition' and 'fun' lol)..and that by perhaps making it exhibition-only it can be more cost-effective for younger participants as well as cut down on competition running time. Also, a long-standing concern is the depth of divisions. By cutting divisions down to 4 instead of 5, hypothetically you're putting more participants into other teams, making them bigger and divisions deeper.
Although some people insist 'Why should we keep comparing ourselves to other sports, we're not like other sports!', actually, until we're even CONSIDERED a sport by other people [a complete subset is whether or not we should even strive to be considered a sport because it will negatively affect our industry, but I'm not able to speak on that], we kinda have to gauge the criteria by which other sports are considered sports. And for many people, the fact that you can 'play' in 2 different age levels doesn't really sit well with the whole 'sports' criteria. People of similar, smaller age sets play against each other. In what other rec/allstar/travel sport are you routinely competing against people of a 6-year+ age span? When I did YMCA comp gymnastics, they broke down the levels by age. I wasn't 12 competing against a 6-8 year old.. When I did AAU volleyball, I was U18, with people ages 18-16. People do play up (like I did), but most times it's a year or two. Not a 12 year old playing U18. Unless they're that little Argentinian or Peruvian boy who's set to play pro soccer the moment he's age-eligible.
I can't attest to MANY of the things you've posted. Why? I'm not a gym owner, nor do I have the depth of experience in the industry to claim I can make a judgment about why things should be one way or another. I can simply provide you with reasons as to why others are saying they want to alter the age ranges. You may disagree with the idea, and there are people, I'm sure, that agree with you. I'm not sure what I think either way, but in the meantime I can give you a for-the-good-of-the-sport reason for it, as opposed to a personal one (like the maturity issue). I'm sure one of the other posters: @kingston , @ACEDAD , @BlueCat , or others on here would give or have already given their reasons for or against a change, what the change should be etc.more to say, but heading out...
As for the other one, there are plenty of non-contact sports that also use closer age ranges. Gymnastics, our closest sister sport, also has classifications for age. There is 'senior' age competitors and 'junior' age ones, as well as rec levels that are then divided into age divisions for placements. Volleyball, also a non-contact sport (hypothetically lol) uses a similar breakdown. For many of the same reasons they're listing: maturity of the competitor, for one, and that like age/skill should play like age/skill.
Don't these other sports also make certain classifications based on skill? I have recollections of my sister playing travel soccer and there being an A division and B division for each Uage..gymnastics doesn't need a whole team, so you can break it down into tons of ages and 10+ levels and be fine.
giant 17 year old volleyball players spiking the ball at 10 year olds is different than a 17 year old working with a 10 year old to indirectly compete against other similarly aged teams.
and people play up all the time in other sports, they are u18, u16, u14 etc. not specifically 17-18, 15-16 etc. Your teams are also playing the same sport regardless of age, with t ball and coach pitch being the exception. with cheer you have levels that either prevent or allow you to throw certain skills.
Don't these other sports also make certain classifications based on skill? I have recollections of my sister playing travel soccer and there being an A division and B division for each Uage..
Edit - Divisions are declared at the beginning of the season - meaning if you are a state cup team (high level) you only play other state cup teams, and so forth -
The problem with these statements is that they are purely opinion. Stating opinions as fact is very misleading. This is very similar to when the age floor was put on level 5 teams for worlds. There was an uproar on how it was going to kill worlds and how horrible it would become. Now people are clamoring for LESS teams at worlds. Clearly the age floor did not hurt the sr level 5 teams.But in turn it would be making it more difficult on less-than-mega-gyms. You'd end up with too many small teams, or too many athletes unhappy with their level placements, maybe they suck it up for one year, maybe even 2, but the next year they're going to be out looking for a bigger gym that can meet their needs or they'll quit altogether. unhappy cheerleaders leave... if they gym tries to make a ton of small teams to accommodate, they need more staff, more practice areas, etc, but probably can't afford that being a less-than-mega gym. to me, it seems that would hurt cheer as a whole.