All-Star No Competition At Competitions?

[AshleyCheer93]

I never thought I would see the day where there are the same amount of small all girl teams as large all girl teams competing at NCA.

Personally, I think they need to kill some divisions that have and will continue to be so small. (Ex: Large mini 2, large youth 3/4 and just have small as an option.) It’s frustrating for parents to consistently spend all this money to compete against no one. Removing a few divisions and not adding any new ones for a while would be nice. It’s suppsoed to be competitive cheerleading and there’s nothing wrong with having deep divisions in my opinion.

The number of divisions is indeed starting to cause problems , there are a lot of near empty divisions so removing the entirely empty ones seem like the best solution.

 

[CLynn]

I think it's sandbagging when you deliberately put together a team where nearly everyone is two or three levels below their skill level. Example: CP's former gym put together a Senior 1 team made up of level 3 and 4 athletes, or a gym makes a level 2 team up of level 4/5 athletes.

I would imagine they would eventually have a hard time keeping those athletes happy though, and if another option was available to them nearby perhaps they would leave? I think to be compete these days many teams are composed of athletes that could be considered a level above in that have all the skills for the level they are on and have many skills at the next level already.

 

[AshleyCheer93]

I would imagine they would eventually have a hard time keeping those athletes happy though, and if another option was available to them nearby perhaps they would leave? I think to be compete these days many teams are composed of athletes that could be considered a level above in that have all the skills for the level they are on and have many skills at the next level already.

Lets not forget crossovers such as Kenley which are a level or two above skill wise.

 

[cheermomforever]

I think it's sandbagging when you deliberately put together a team where nearly everyone is two or three levels below their skill level. Example: CP's former gym put together a Senior 1 team made up of level 3 and 4 athletes, or a gym makes a level 2 team up of level 4/5 athletes.

Happens all the time and is discussed all the time...will never change!

 

[CLynn]

Lets not forget crossovers such as Kenley which are a level or two above skill wise.

Well crossing over is another issue entirely. Generally speaking I am not a fan and think crossovers should be used sparingly if at all.

 

[Mndl]

I would imagine they would eventually have a hard time keeping those athletes happy though, and if another option was available to them nearby perhaps they would leave? I think to be compete these days many teams are composed of athletes that could be considered a level above in that have all the skills for the level they are on and have many skills at the next level already.

No, in these examples all the athletes were also on other teams. The Senior 1 team was put together to be a showcase winning team:rolleyes: I get teams want to put together competitive winning teams but sometimes it's just ridiculous.

 

[123jump4!]

No, in these examples all the athletes were also on other teams. The Senior 1 team was put together to be a showcase winning team:rolleyes: I get teams want to put together competitive winning teams but sometimes it's just ridiculous.

At summit you can only cross down 1 level though. So if the level 1 team and level 3+ team both got bids they couldn't both compete with the crossovers.

 

[cheermomforever]

At summit you can only cross down 1 level though. So if the level 1 team and level 3+ team both got bids they couldn't both compete with the crossovers.

It should b all year round...instead of having Summit tryouts in March because of too many or illegal crossovers!

 

[123jump4!]

It should b all year round...instead of having Summit tryouts in March because of too many or illegal crossovers!

I agree. But not all gyms do extra tryouts. My CP's team actually had someone from 2 levels up who wanted to cross down because we needed a replacement for someone who quit... but she wasn't allowed to. Because it would be problematic if both got bids.

 

[CLynn]

Sounds like this hasn’t changed from 10 years ago.

Sigh...if only this industry organized itself like a sport

The only thing that seems to have changed is that it has become even more expensive. It is such an odd number of interests at play for youth sports with programs, Varsity, ep’s, uniform companies, convention centers, etc etc all dipping into the same pockets.

It is funny bc there seems to be little interest in competitive balance at all. Where as other sports are organized into leagues and regions, it is pretty much a free for all. And now that most events are pretty much owned by varsity, does there need to be such a discrepancy in events, attendance etc? So that some are so sparsely attended and others -within driving distance- have teams competing well into Sunday night.

 

[NJ Coach]

Lets not forget crossovers such as Kenley which are a level or two above skill wise.

You are new, so I want to share some helpful advice. Generally speaking, we don't allow minors to be named on the boards, unless they are a known individual. You are ok in mentioning Kenley's name because she is so well known, but I just want to make sure you are aware :)

 

[AshleyCheer93]

You are new, so I want to share some helpful advice. Generally speaking, we don't allow minors to be named on the boards, unless they are a known individual. You are ok in mentioning Kenley's name because she is so well known, but I just want to make sure you are aware :)

Sorry about that I had no idea , thanks for the friendly warning !

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

The only thing that seems to have changed is that it has become even more expensive. It is such an odd number of interests at play for youth sports with programs, Varsity, ep’s, uniform companies, convention centers, etc etc all dipping into the same pockets.

It is funny bc there seems to be little interest in competitive balance at all. Where as other sports are organized into leagues and regions, it is pretty much a free for all. And now that most events are pretty much owned by varsity, does there need to be such a discrepancy in events, attendance etc? So that some are so sparsely attended and others -within driving distance- have teams competing well into Sunday night.

I started to post earlier, but then went to sleep (night shifter). Then I came back after coaching a game, and I saw your post....which sort of pointed out the problem to which I was going to throw a purely hypothetical solution.

WHAT IF....

Instead of giving out a certain number of bids at a random number of competitions, Varsity All Star began to rank and sort teams more like the NCAA in college basketball. Teams could be ranked similar to RPI based on how they've done head to head against other teams, the strength of their schedule, and any other factors. It could truly be as complex as someone wanted to make it.

To begin, at any given competition, the final results would generate a team's record. So if Team A placed 3rd of 10, their record is 6 wins and 2 losses....IE; they beat 6 teams, and were beaten by 2. They would be shown as having a "win" against a team below them and a loss to a team ahead of them. The next competition, they may beat out one of those two teams resulting in a 1-1 record. They may lose to other teams, etc.

That goes on all year long. The major competitions (Jamfest Super, Cheersport, NCA nationals, etc) would carry more weight. Competitions held by competition companies who draw larger numbers of entrants in general could carry more weight. Small regional competitions with crap attendance, would carry the least amount of weight. The right programmer could write code for a computer program that would rank these teams according to the predetermined criteria. There's even room for the scores to count in the final rank.

At the end of the season, the top x number of teams are invited to the Summit.

 

[SharkDad]

WHAT IF...
This was more like a true sports competition system.

Early competitions in the season were all regionals with no bids given out so they are truly to get your skills in order and get competition experience.

“Nationals” could only use that title if they had 10 teams per division or greater. Encourage competition in each division not just participation with multiple divisions with only 1 team.

Worlds and Summit have a limit on the number of bids so that the nature of “elite” competition doesn’t get watered down.

Proper, safe execution of skills is always priority so that any improper tumbling or building does not get credit, therefore would not put kids at risk. (think gymnastics level standards)

WHAT IF...

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

WHAT IF...
This was more like a true sports competition system.

Early competitions in the season were all regionals with no bids given out so they are truly to get your skills in order and get competition experience.

There could be limits placed on how far teams could travel prior to January. Teams who wished to travel a greater distance could apply for a waiver showing that in order to compete it was "necessary." This should not be a formality, but rather a way to keep teams located in their own region. I would think a 200-mile radius would cover most situations, but I'm from KY where IN, St. Louis, Louisville, Nashville, Lexington, etc are all well within the limit and have multiple decent competitions a year. I am not sure how this would work in say Wyoming or Nebraska.

“Nationals” could only use that title if they had 10 teams per division or greater. Encourage competition in each division not just participation with multiple divisions with only 1 team.

Limit Nationals competitions to January/February/March, and in order to use the word "nationals" they must demonstrate that they had teams from x number of states the year before. Each competition company is limited to using this word for ONE event per year.

Worlds and Summit have a limit on the number of bids so that the nature of “elite” competition doesn’t get watered down.

Going back to my post which you shimmy'ed, here's a good place for my RPI format to come in. Regional competitions carry a certain amount of weight, and nationals carry twice that much. The incentives start to pile up for event promoters to offer a TRUE nationals experience, and teams to attend one of those competitions.

Proper, safe execution of skills is always priority so that any improper tumbling or building does not get credit, therefore would not put kids at risk. (think gymnastics level standards)

To a degree, this falls out of the scope of what I was discussing, but I understand where you're coming from, understand that you weren't directly referencing my idea, and understand/believe in this whole-heartedly. The All-Star industry does not penalize poorly executed skills enough in their execution scores. Then they double-fail when the deductions for falls/touches/etc are not big enough to truly defer a coach from leaving bad skills in the routine. For example, a stunt fall should be penalized to the degree mathematically it makes more sense for a team to compete level 4 skills in a level 5 routine than risk falling on a level 5 skill.

WHAT IF...

Well, crap, I answered in my quote of your post without thinking about it.