- Dec 14, 2009
- 356
- 548
I am not saying it doesn't happen but you are talking only about an age or 2 difference and maybe 1 or 2 kids. Until you hit U16 or U18. Even then the age range is maybe 4 years all high schoolers.
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.
So what's the real reason why there are so many "baby flyers"? I mean, why would a gym put a little kid out there to throw their janky standing tuck and pull a dorito scorpion in the first place? And after four years of observing this sport and attending major competitions, the answer is obvious...because these gyms feel like it's the only way they can compete.
Now this isn't an indictment of younger kids on older teams. I stand by my original statement - while I prefer teams be age appropriate, you need to have a model where talent is allowed to "play up". That beautiful flyer or elite tumbler should have the ability to compete on a higher level team - even if that team is comprised of much older kids - if their skills warrant and they have the maturity to compete at that level. But the truth is that this isn't happening at many gyms, and what's happening instead is that everyone's putting the babies in the air even if they're not ready to be, because they think if they don't they've got no chance.
The reality is that they don't have much of a chance even if they do put the babies in the air. And that is the elephant in the room, isn't it?
If you look objectively at the major competitions - Worlds, NCA, Jamfest, etc. - you see a pretty consistent trend where the same gym are at or near the top. I haven't run the numbers, but I would bet cash money that there are probably, what, 75-100 gyms max that pretty much dominate the top level of cheer. Not necessarily winning Worlds, but consistently have teams that win competitive divisions at major events.
The gap between those teams and everyone else is striking. I look at my daughter's now former gym - a fairly large program with over 300 kids some years - that goes to these major comps and gets smoked more often than not. The issue isn't size of gym. It's the fact that some gyms, whether it be talent base, coaching, facilities, or some combination thereof - are simply so far ahead of everyone else.
This isn't limited to cheer. Look at college football, for example. Even within the football bowl subdivision (FBS) - the highest level of the sport - there are major differences between the haves and have nots. So much so, in fact, that there is discussion about creating yet another NCAA college football division on top of the four that already exist.
So what's the answer here? I'm not sure it's creating rules that attempt to bring everyone else back to the pack. Nor is it to create weird, arbitrary age limits that do nothing but stifle progression of elite athletes.
Perhaps it's time that cheer take a lesson from the NCAA - or heck, from many other sports - and create divisions. Maybe it's time to say that the top-100 gyms compete in their own division, and are the only ones that are allowed to have Worlds teams. Everyone else competes in the other division. So rather than Small Gym Junior 3, it's Division 1 Junior 3 and Division 2 Junior 3.
How do you pick those teams in Division 1? Look at the last three years of results for the gyms in Worlds and Worlds bid giving competitions, and pick the 100 teams with the best results. Every couple of years you can evaluate the list and determine if a.) there are teams in Division 1 that shouldn't be there anymore based on performance and b.) there are teams competing in Division 2 that are dominant and probably need to compete in Division 1. I'm not going to get into the mechanics of how that would work, but there are numerous examples in other sports about how that could.
Is that perfect solution? No. But I think so many rule changes over the years, whether it's been tumbling restrictions or age grid changes, are attempts to solve the real issue in piecemeal. The issue is that there's a discrepancy between the elite levels in all-star cheer and everyone else, and until that's addressed things will only get worse, not better.
King mentioned something along these lines somewhere else. The issue I see with this is that as soon as a gym gets that ONE kid they don't want to lose there will be another proposal.So what's the real reason why there are so many "baby flyers"? I mean, why would a gym put a little kid out there to throw their janky standing tuck and pull a dorito scorpion in the first place? And after four years of observing this sport and attending major competitions, the answer is obvious...because these gyms feel like it's the only way they can compete.
Now this isn't an indictment of younger kids on older teams. I stand by my original statement - while I prefer teams be age appropriate, you need to have a model where talent is allowed to "play up". That beautiful flyer or elite tumbler should have the ability to compete on a higher level team - even if that team is comprised of much older kids - if their skills warrant and they have the maturity to compete at that level. But the truth is that this isn't happening at many gyms, and what's happening instead is that everyone's putting the babies in the air even if they're not ready to be, because they think if they don't they've got no chance.
The reality is that they don't have much of a chance even if they do put the babies in the air. And that is the elephant in the room, isn't it?
If you look objectively at the major competitions - Worlds, NCA, Jamfest, etc. - you see a pretty consistent trend where the same gym are at or near the top. I haven't run the numbers, but I would bet cash money that there are probably, what, 75-100 gyms max that pretty much dominate the top level of cheer. Not necessarily winning Worlds, but consistently have teams that win competitive divisions at major events.
The gap between those teams and everyone else is striking. I look at my daughter's now former gym - a fairly large program with over 300 kids some years - that goes to these major comps and gets smoked more often than not. The issue isn't size of gym. It's the fact that some gyms, whether it be talent base, coaching, facilities, or some combination thereof - are simply so far ahead of everyone else.
This isn't limited to cheer. Look at college football, for example. Even within the football bowl subdivision (FBS) - the highest level of the sport - there are major differences between the haves and have nots. So much so, in fact, that there is discussion about creating yet another NCAA college football division on top of the four that already exist.
So what's the answer here? I'm not sure it's creating rules that attempt to bring everyone else back to the pack. Nor is it to create weird, arbitrary age limits that do nothing but stifle progression of elite athletes.
Perhaps it's time that cheer take a lesson from the NCAA - or heck, from many other sports - and create divisions. Maybe it's time to say that the top-100 gyms compete in their own division, and are the only ones that are allowed to have Worlds teams. Everyone else competes in the other division. So rather than Small Gym Junior 3, it's Division 1 Junior 3 and Division 2 Junior 3.
How do you pick those teams in Division 1? Look at the last three years of results for the gyms in Worlds and Worlds bid giving competitions, and pick the 100 teams with the best results. Every couple of years you can evaluate the list and determine if a.) there are teams in Division 1 that shouldn't be there anymore based on performance and b.) there are teams competing in Division 2 that are dominant and probably need to compete in Division 1. I'm not going to get into the mechanics of how that would work, but there are numerous examples in other sports about how that could.
Is that perfect solution? No. But I think so many rule changes over the years, whether it's been tumbling restrictions or age grid changes, are attempts to solve the real issue in piecemeal. The issue is that there's a discrepancy between the elite levels in all-star cheer and everyone else, and until that's addressed things will only get worse, not better.
We never leave anything alone long enough to see if there is any improvement.King mentioned something along these lines somewhere else. The issue I see with this is that as soon as a gym gets that ONE kid they don't want to lose there will be another proposal.
I agree! I proposed a SET 2 year cycle!We never leave anything alone long enough to see if there is any improvement.
There are 2 year cycles in place, but the next line is always to the effect of but we can change it whenever we want
The point is, in hockey you have the occasional kid who can play up and really belong on the team. It seems in cheer that the PARENTS think that once their CP has a full or jumps to tuck, they want them on a senior 5 team.
A stacked junior team doesn't bother me as much as the same being done on a senior team. Currently those same ages apply.Does anyone else see the potential abuse on the open Jr category? I can see teams stacking a team of jr aged kids and then put one 10 year old on the team so they can be on the open level competing against other gyms that have to fit kids into that category because there is no where else to put them.
FORGET IT. IT is allllll about the money. Of that I am sure.I love this proposed age grid but to be fair I have to admit I like it because I hope that some day all star will be referred to as a sport instead of an industry. I feel this splits age groups on par with other sports so it is a step in the right direction.
Is this a legit proposal for the 2013-2014 season? Where did the OP get this information? I can't believe at this late date the age grid for 2013-2014 is changing (or for 2014-2015 either).