All-Star Releasing Athletes

[dawgshow]

I don't see why it's so difficult.
1) Have a set cut off date. After that date, no athlete is released for the remaining season
2) Prior to that, the only reason to refuse release is debt owed
3) Include a change of residence clause specifying a specific range (more than 90 minutes from the gym, for example) as an exemption to #1
4) Include an appeals process to handle disputes to #2

 

[Cheer Dad]

@yojaehs that must have been tough. I think my biggest concern with this rule is the kids who are roved from a team (not their choice) who cannot move on to a different team of the same caliber should the opportunity arise if a gym will not sign a release.


Ones perception is not always reality.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

As a coach it's frustrating to go until December and have an athlete "change their mind" but I signed and moved on.

The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

Do you not think it's equally as frustrating for an athlete to compete on a team all season, only to be replaced when someone better comes along? Or to compete on a team that is a certain level, only to have the coach "change their mind" and level it down in January? (Based on others' skills, not the athlete in question)

I totally hear you, and get what you're saying. I just don't get why people feel like it's ok that this only applies to the gym.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[CharlotteASMom]

@yojaehs You pretty much said what I was thinking about all this morning. I'm really trying to look at this with an open mind especially since a couple posters that I tend to mostly agree with feel so strongly against this rule. But, I just can't get past the point that you have SIX MONTHS to make this decision. Six months of seeing half your team throwing layouts and knowing you won't be competitive during the season, six months of your coach telling you everything will be fine when at the same time most of your stunt groups can't hit a level 5 stunt, six months of seeing other kids leave the program but you chose to hang in there, or six months of rumors about financial issues but you chose to ignore them. Most of the examples given in this thread could be seen well before November 1st but the parents/athletes chose to ignore them.

For the record I do believe there should be an appeals process but while having no actual knowledge of this I am willing to bet that the USASF has not adopted one is because of the culture of cheer. With the way the industry is right now can you imagine the appeal reasons? "My baby's coach yelled at her during practice." "Her teammate bullied her because she said she wasn't tight in the air." "We only got third at our last competition. " "My cp wants to be on a big name team and a spot opened up." The USASF would be so inundated with silly appeals that they'd never get to the real ones.

I think 95% of the reasons given here for the need for release could have been seen well before November 1st and are just dumb. The only ones that have been presented that I really "get" are a gym closing down after November 1st or an athlete being dismissed from a level 5 team. A coach once said to me that he will sign a release if he asks an athlete to leave the gym or to leave the level 5 program but if the athlete chooses to leave after November 1st then he wouldn't. I think there's something to that.

 

[CharlotteASMom]

Do you not think it's equally as frustrating for an athlete to compete on a team all season, only to be replaced when someone better comes along? Or to compete on a team that is a certain level, only to have the coach "change their mind" and level it down in January? (Based on others' skills, not the athlete in question)

I totally hear you, and get what you're saying. I just don't get why people feel like it's ok that this only applies to the gym.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

I can't sign on to the reason of the team suddenly dropped a level after November 1st. As an athlete or parent you know in plenty of time how competitive your team will be well before then. Coaches don't drop teams that have full squad fulls and doubles. Heck some friends of mine that just changed gyms knew after just one practice exactly how many kids had fulls/doubles and who were hitting elite stunts. If you choose to stay on a team that is a low competitive level 5 or a good level 4 then that's on you.

Now the replacement thing, I completely get that and agree there should be an appeals process for this.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

@yojaehs You pretty much said what I was thinking about all this morning. I'm really trying to look at this with an open mind especially since a couple posters that I tend to mostly agree with feel so strongly against this rule. But, I just can't get past the point that you have SIX MONTHS to make this decision. Six months of seeing half your team throwing layouts and knowing you won't be competitive during the season, six months of your coach telling you everything will be fine when at the same time most of your stunt groups can't hit a level 5 stunt, six months of seeing other kids leave the program but you chose to hang in there, or six months of rumors about financial issues but you chose to ignore them. Most of the examples given in this thread could be seen well before November 1st but the parents/athletes chose to ignore them.

For the record I do believe there should be an appeals process but while having no actual knowledge of this I am willing to bet that the USASF has not adopted one is because of the culture of cheer. With the way the industry is right now can you imagine the appeal reasons? "My baby's coach yelled at her during practice." "Her teammate bullied her because she said she wasn't tight in the air." "We only got third at our last competition. " "My cp wants to be on a big name team and a spot opened up." The USASF would be so inundated with silly appeals that they'd never get to the real ones.

I think 95% of the reasons given here for the need for release could have been seen well before November 1st and are just dumb. The only ones that have been presented that I really "get" are a gym closing down after November 1st or an athlete being dismissed from a level 5 team. A coach once said to me that he will sign a release if he asks an athlete to leave the gym or to leave the level 5 program but if the athlete chooses to leave after November 1st then he wouldn't. I think there's something to that.

I agree with a lot of this. And yes, if the appeals process is just an open call then I could definitely see that being disastrous. But what about a list of things you don't need a release for? (So you really wouldn't need to appeal) Things like the gym closing, the athlete moves (with a mile limit, like more than 100 miles away or something), or the athlete being dismissed. Very black and white, no wiggle room, just "if this happens, no release. Otherwise, you need one. Period."

The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[CharlotteASMom]

I agree with a lot of this. And yes, if the appeals process is just an open call then I could definitely see that being disastrous. But what about a list of things you don't need a release for? (So you really wouldn't need to appeal) Things like the gym closing, the athlete moves (with a mile limit, like more than 100 miles away or something), or the athlete being dismissed. Very black and white, no wiggle room, just "if this happens, no release. Otherwise, you need one. Period."

The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

Ok gets my stamp of approval!!

 

[Dixie]

Not being argumentative, but I've been a parent on a team that had every skill needed to be on level X, competed level X from November to January and then were told we were competing level Y for the rest of the year. No one left, no one lost skills. The only thing the parents could see was that we were coming in second to another strong, local gym. We competed level Y and still came in second.
On another note:
Last year we were on a team that changed drastically (IMO) after the Christmas break. Yes, we had been on the team for 6 months and knew what the details were. We had concerns and talked with the coaches in the summer and were told to please stay until NCA. We agreed. Athletes from a competitor came in January (they had competed against us a few times that year) and were put on our team causing existing athletes to be bumped to nugget or alternate. We chose to exit at that point (they obviously had enough qualified athletes to replace us). We were told we could not get a release if we came asking for one. Good thing she chose to stop cheering.
I think people are questioning the personal aspect of the release. If the gym had to notify USASF or whomever as to why they denied it, I think the game would change drastically.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

I think people are questioning the personal aspect of the release. If the gym had to notify USASF or whomever as to why they denied it, I think the game would change drastically.

Yes. This.

@CharlotteASMom

Yeah... I see what you're saying about knowing all season if your team is janky. I think I agree (although my cp's L5 team was a janky L5 for 3 seasons before the year she was on it. They dropped to L4 the season after we quit - I could see those parents not knowing it would be dropped, because they'd been cruising along for years. However, in the same vein, they did choose to stay on a janky team for that long... so I probably still would have been ok with them needing a release)

I think the team level dropping would be more applicable to lower levels, should the rule ever extend to them (which I thought was the long-term plan?)
I've had my younger cp's J3 team disbanded before, in December (their coach quit, they lost about 6 kids who left the program with the coach, etc). They combined some with M1 to form a new Y1/Y2. Some moved to S3. And yes, the ones who were 10/11-ish with L3 skills were put on the youth team (because they maxed out their S3 team with the older kids). My cp was fine, because she belonged on a Y1/Y2. But I could see where someone might not be too excited about being 11 with solid L3 skills and being put on a level 1 or 2 team, with a bunch of 7 and 8 year olds, mid-season.

Did they die from having to spend a few months on that team? No. Was it that big of a deal, considering they still had a good 7 or 8 years left? No. But all I'm saying is that if you change the deal that much, it's not really fair to hold someone to it. Especially with the amount of money we're talking. I'm all for having teams that are competitive, but it's really not fair to that one child to expect them to be there solely to help out.

That gym was closed within 2 months of this happening. Some might say, "See? That's why we need a rule!" I say, "See? That's why you shouldn't make crappy decisions and not consider your customers!"

I know that usually people are just gym hopping, and that it's rare that specific circumstances actually warrant someone leaving. But what is the big deal?! Add a couple sentences to the rule and move on.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[dawgshow]

@yojaehs that must have been tough. I think my biggest concern with this rule is the kids who are roved from a team (not their choice) who cannot move on to a different team of the same caliber should the opportunity arise if a gym will not sign a release.


Ones perception is not always reality.

Ok. Add that to my above list. I hadn't considered that scenario.
Editing this to include any significant breach of agreement by the gym.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[mollymags]

I'm curious about something. Imagine you are the gym owner, you have a decent level 5- not a contender to win at Worlds, but can hold their own, will generally fall in the middle of the pack. Assume your staff is competent, safe, and not abusive to the kids mentally/emotionally. You haven't bumped a kid off the team. One of them comes and asks for a release in February so he/she can go to another area gym and go to Worlds with them. You've upheld your part of the bargain but Sally thinks the gym down the road is "better". Why SHOULD you agree to release them?

 

[Dixie]

@mollymags Because if they are asking for a release they have probably already checked out of their current team. It stinks for the gym being left, but it's a choice for the consumer to make. It's also probably better to have them gone instead of rubbing negativity onto the remaining athletes.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[Just-a-Mom]

I'm curious about something. Imagine you are the gym owner, you have a decent level 5- not a contender to win at Worlds, but can hold their own, will generally fall in the middle of the pack. Assume your staff is competent, safe, and not abusive to the kids mentally/emotionally. You haven't bumped a kid off the team. One of them comes and asks for a release in February so he/she can go to another area gym and go to Worlds with them. You've upheld your part of the bargain but Sally thinks the gym down the road is "better". Why SHOULD you agree to release them?

This would be a case where I would probably be ok with not releasing them. I see what @Dixie is saying and I agree, but I also see where this is why the rule is needed. I just want it to more fair is all.

The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[dawgshow]

@mollymags in my opinion, you shouldn't. The fact is, choices have consequences and there is a lot to be said for learning to honor your commitments. I have a feeling that my beliefs are in the minority, though.

 

[tumbleyoda]

Why are gyms going to be going to other gyms poaching level 3 athletes for their Worlds team ? That seems highly unlikely. A Restricted Level 5 maybe but not a Level 3. How many Worlds athletes are only performing Level 3 skills ? Besides, they still can poach away until November when a release becomes necessary. The rule was obviously established to prevent poaching other Worlds teams athletes. So they determined they would arbitrarily apply the release rule to all Worlds athletes without consideration of it's impact on the lower level athletes. The way the rule currently reads it gives the gyms all the power to use the release to control an athlete, if they choose to. There are many scenarios where the rule can be abused and the athlete is forced to suffer unjustifiably. The rule is bias and only takes the gym's position into consideration. And it's done at the athletes expense.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

One thing you find out the longer you are in this industry: don't be surprised about anything - just because you haven't heard about it or don't think it is likely, does not mean it has not happened. What rivals do to one another in the battle for local supremacy if you will, often does not make this message board. The things I have heard this year alone makes me renew my claim I would never ever open a cheerleading gym. Too much backstabbing,m even amongst supposed friends.

While the rule is not perfect I feel it does help what I encountered when I first started teaching tumbling in cheer only facilities on 2004. Kids/parents would abandon their teams at the drop of a dime, even if they had a decent chance at getting to Worlds. There were even reports of changing teams at competitions - don't know if that was mere gossip or not, but those rumors were very strong way back then. The rule hinders some of that behavior. Of course those that want to find a way around it will. All the release does is give some of the leverage back into the hands of the gym owners where prior to the rule they had zero.

There should be an appeals board to deal with the extreme cases that are always presented as reasons against the rule. Some of the bias should be leveled out. But I don't want to go back to the days of cross country fly ins and constantly losing high level team members simply because one gym will give them a free ride and another won't either. Or because Gym A has a better chance of winning Worlds than Gym B so I will stay with Gym A and leave them high and dry in February when Gym B is ready to make it's hard push to Worlds.

Please note I have zero problems releasing an athlete if bills are paid. That I do not debate. But don't expect to ride on my train for free for years then bolt the gym with unpaid bills and promises of being paid that you never fulfilled.