All-Star New Nca Rule. No Sandbagging!

[ccd1025]

They lost because the pyramid didn't hit. We didn't go level 4 because the technique in their layouts was horrible. A lot of the kids learned their fulls right after a tuck plus we had some backyard tumblers so their layout positions were awful . We only had one person that could tumble out of a punch front.

 

[ccd1025]

I'm confused. It's not sandbagging because they never dropped down. But then they only dropped down 1 level (3 to 2). But then they actually did compete as a 5, but only locally.

Their original coach had them as level 5, but the new coach had them as level 2. You're honestly going to say this team didn't drop for an easier shot at jackets? Dropping 1 level is at least understandable, but there's a huge difference in level 5 down to 2. You will never convince me this wasn't sandbagging, nor anyone else who was aware of this whole mess when it happened.

Again the team never competed as a level 5 in the 08-09 season. The next season the new team with new kids competed as a level 5. So to say that the level 5 team dropped down to level 2 is false because in the 08-09 season they never competed as a level 5. I'm only trying to say that in the 08-09 season they weren't Sandbagging because they didn't drop from a Level 5 to a Level 2 and I don't appreciate people being disrespectful when they don't have all of the information.

 

[icecheermom]

Last year at Cheersport Nationals we went against a team that already had a full paid bid to Worlds and they dropped to Senior Open. We didn't get 2nd or anything b/c the first day wasn't very good but when I heard this I thought. Aww thats BS!!!

 

[Mclovin]

They lost because the pyramid didn't hit. We didn't go level 4 because the technique in their layouts was horrible. A lot of the kids learned their fulls right after a tuck plus we had some backyard tumblers so their layout positions were awful . We only had one person that could tumble out of a punch front.

So every single one of them could do punch front step step step round off 2 and a back but they couldn't do punch front thru to tuck? Their tucks were beautiful. I remember them. I remember being awestruck at how amazing they were. I just don't believe for a second that only one could step out. And their technique was practically flawless from what I remember. Now i'm going to watch their routine from NCA as sr open 5 and see how sloppy their tumbling was because I just don't believe it at all. And i'm not trying to be disrespectful at all. Just trying to discuss a team that I clearly saw with my own eyes compete at a level way below where their true talent was...

 

[cheeringfor3]

To the original post - I think the idea that's presented is a good start.

Where I disagree with Justin Carrier's response is his implication that preventing sandbagging over a full season is impossible. It isn't. As I've laid out numerous time before, a combination of athlete credentialing and a "majority rule" would take care of this issue.

Basically, my proposal is that all athletes need to be credentialed at a particular level at the start of the season - and that any team that competes at a USASF-sanctioned event must have a majority of their athletes credentialed at the level they wish to compete at. Athletes can change their credentialed level one time per year, and can only move up/down one level.

This would give small gyms flexibility to allow athletes to cross down to lower level teams without allowing them to stock teams unfairly. (it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to have a senior 5 team compete in senior 3 team in this model)

I like this proposal because it also keeps a gym from taking the younger members of their Jr 5 team and competing them as youth 3. Which I personally have seen locally more times than I can count. I always hate sitting there watching and seeing a level 3 team full of basically the same kids as on that gym's level 5.

 

[Mclovin]

http://varsity.com/event/1448/nca_nda_all_star_national_championship.aspx

Type in Premier Cheer Lynx in the search bar.

This is them at NCA as sr. open 5. I beg to differ that their technique in their layouts was horrible. This team is VERY entertaining as a open 5 and was truly sandbagging as a level 3. Come on. Let's just be real here.....

 

[cheeringfor3]

http://varsity.com/event/1448/nca_nda_all_star_national_championship.aspx

Type in Premier Cheer Lynx in the search bar.

This is them at NCA as sr. open 5. I beg to differ that their technique in their layouts was horrible. This team is VERY entertaining as a open 5 and was truly sandbagging as a level 3. Come on. Let's just be real here.....

I never heard about this situation when it was happening.

However, judging from what I just saw in that link, I find it hard to believe that a team with switch ups, double downs from one leg, team jumps to tuck, and all layouts and fulls in tumbling couldn't compete as level 4 and HAD to drop to level 3.

I call sandbagging.

 

[newcheerdad]

I like this proposal because it also keeps a gym from taking the younger members of their Jr 5 team and competing them as youth 3. Which I personally have seen locally more times than I can count. I always hate sitting there watching and seeing a level 3 team full of basically the same kids as on that gym's level 5.

In my proposal you *could* do that, but those junior 5 kids couldn't constitute the majority of the team. So if you've got 6 10-year olds on your J5 team, you could move them down to youth 3...but you'd have to have at least 7 other kids credentialed at level 3 in order to be in compliance. It would give you the flexibility to let some kids cross over to a lower level team in order to fill squads (important for small gyms) but wouldn't let you just take a team and move them en-masse to a far lower level.

 

[ztaprincess]

Wait a minute, so this person is saying that in the 08-09 season the original coach decided that since a team had 4 or 5 fulls they would go level 5 but when the new coach came in they realized that really they were just a level 2 team. How in the world did the original coach think it was going to work going level 5 if all those other athletes were only a level 2 team? I call complete bull on this.
Next season the team is back to level 5, wow what a nice jump from a team of level 2 cheerleaders to one with fulls and level 5 stunting in just 1 season. Of course these athletes had some injuries so they were dropped to level 3 because well they could do fulls but their layouts were bad, so tucks it is. If you honestly think anyone with half a brain is going to buy this story then you need to get your head checked because it is full of crazy. If your team competes level 5 at anytime during the year there is NO excuse to drop down past a level 4.
I ask why in the world you would teach a full right after they learn their tuck (you claimed this so I am not just making it up)? If this is really happening then the parents at your gym need to think twice about being at that gym because it is an injury waiting to happen.

 

[ASCheerMan]

The last several exchanges regarding a level change example supports my opinion that sandbagging isn't a black/white issue. There is a spectrum of reasons why people drop levels and varying degrees of sandbagging in each of them. You can't just outlaw sandbagging--it isn't that simple. Please be careful in applying your coaching/teaching/competition principles to another program's situation.

In our 'Level Eligibility' policy (it's actually not officially called a 'Sandbagging Policy' as it was informally titled in this FierceBoard thread) we deliberately avoid NCA having to evaluate or pass judgement on whether a drop in levels is 'good enough' and not sandbagging. What is good enough for YOU and your business isn't good enough for someone else's. And a 'legitimate reason' for a mega-gym dropping levels may never fly for the goals of a smaller program. Ex: Many gyms in Texas don't field a Level 4 team unless they take the mat w/ squad standing tucks. If a Level 4 team from (for example) the New England region competes with only a majority standing tucks most of the season, but goes Level 3 in Dallas because TX teams have different skill set standards, is the New England team 'sandbagging' to do well or simply adjusting strategies to align with the competition????
The Answer: I DON'T KNOW AND have no interest in playing Sandbagging Judgement God. The policy's intent is to make sure teams that drop a level are moving as part of a long term adjustment and not an isolated NCA Nationals incident. I caution everyone to consider the spectrum of issues when making statements that may insult another team's coaching principles. In the end, I just hope every decision results in a positive impact for the young athletes on the teams affected.

 

[kristenthegreat]

The last several exchanges regarding a level change example supports my opinion that sandbagging isn't a black/white issue. There is a spectrum of reasons why people drop levels and varying degrees of sandbagging in each of them. You can't just outlaw sandbagging--it isn't that simple. Please be careful in applying your coaching/teaching/competition principles to another program's situation.

In our 'Level Eligibility' policy (it's actually not officially called a 'Sandbagging Policy' as it was informally titled in this FierceBoard thread) we deliberately avoid NCA having to evaluate or pass judgement on whether a drop in levels is 'good enough' and not sandbagging. What is good enough for YOU and your business isn't good enough for someone else's. And a 'legitimate reason' for a mega-gym dropping levels may never fly for the goals of a smaller program. Ex: Many gyms in Texas don't field a Level 4 team unless they take the mat w/ squad standing tucks. If a Level 4 team from (for example) the New England region competes with only a majority standing tucks most of the season, but goes Level 3 in Dallas because TX teams have different skill set standards, is the New England team 'sandbagging' to do well or simply adjusting strategies to align with the competition????
The Answer: I DON'T KNOW AND have no interest in playing Sandbagging Judgement God. The policy's intent is to make sure teams that drop a level are moving as part of a long term adjustment and not an isolated NCA Nationals incident. I caution everyone to consider the spectrum of issues when making statements that may insult another team's coaching principles. In the end, I just hope every decision results in a positive impact for the young athletes on the teams affected.

Well, I am one of the aforementioned New Englanders, and I will mention one little tidbit you excluded from your concept- most New England teams who aren't playing the level game smartly, don't attend NCA in the first place! I can count on one hand the number of teams who travel to NCA from CT(and they all stayed in their level although some went small gym), and many of the local gyms I know don't travel farther than Myrtle Beach. There are plenty of decent nationals to be found along the season without having to travel all the way down to Texas. I feel like you should be playing the pick-your-levels game with smarts..

 

[ASCheerMan]

K

Well, I am one of the aforementioned New Englanders, and I will mention one little tidbit you excluded from your concept- most New England teams who aren't playing the level game smartly, don't attend NCA in the first place! I can count on one hand the number of teams who travel to NCA from CT(and they all stayed in their level although some went small gym), and many of the local gyms I know don't travel farther than Myrtle Beach. ..

Sorry Kristen, I didn't mean to make the issue cluttered with my example. I was trying to simplify the message by using a fictitious example and pulled 'New England area' and 'majority standing tucks' to illustrate the idea--not because I'm actually dealing with a team from New England in this predicament. I usually avoid real-life scenarios in my examples so that programs don't spend time speculating who I'm REALLY referring to. We have great teams from New England and surrounding areas that make the trip to Dallas historically and we are picking up even more this season. I, in no means used them in my example because I think New England teams are sandbaggers. I just needed a region to use for description. Sorry if there was confusion.

 

[NJ Coach]

K

Sorry Kristen, I didn't mean to make the issue cluttered with my example. I was trying to simplify the message by using a fictitious example and pulled 'New England area' and 'majority standing tucks' to illustrate the idea--not because I'm actually dealing with a team from New England in this predicament. I usually avoid real-life scenarios in my examples so that programs don't spend time speculating who I'm REALLY referring to. We have great teams from New England and surrounding areas that make the trip to Dallas historically and we are picking up even more this season. I, in no means used them in my example because I think New England teams are sandbaggers. I just needed a region to use for description. Sorry if there was confusion.

Those New Englanders are always trouble. Can't drive either

 

[kristenthegreat]

Those New Englanders are always trouble. Can't drive either

Hold. Up.

But really, it's like every snowstorm people magically forget that historically, we get really crazy snowstorms and PANIC.

And @ASCheerMan - I forgive you your trespasses against my fair New England region

 

[Deleted member 1556]

Those New Englanders are always trouble. Can't drive either

HEY.