- Dec 14, 2009
- 1,960
- 5,349
At what point should a gym not consider trying a new member (someone just moved or just decided to switch gyms) if it means moving a team member who has been there since tryouts, working hard, and doing a good job? Should loyalty matter or in the end should you always replace if someone else comes along who might benefit the team just a tiny bit more?
Protecting the anonymous since this post
Thanks for tagging me in this and asking my opinion. I believe @oncecoolcoachnowmom has answered most of my positions for your question, so I did not want to be redundant. The only things slightly different to me are:
1.) What is the focus of that team? If it is to get to Worlds/Summit or the season is a bust there is a higher likelihood that they might be replaced. Like it or not this is a scoresheet dictate and if you want the chance to be competitive (not just compete) you have to have the required skills and skill combinations to do that.
2.) What is the focus of the program in general? That tends to dictate the competitive push of the teams and may lead to a quicker replacement. For a program like ours with many athletes having been there over 5 years, loyalty means the world to us. While they still have to have or maintain their skills to remain on whatever team they are on, they chances they will be moved in favor of a newcomer is low. They would be nuggeted or replaced by someone in the house first.
3.) Did the first athlete have the skills when placed on the team? If she/he did and is now inconsistent, then the possibility is raised significantly for replacement. If they did not but I placed them with the hopes they would get the skills in time, they should not be punished for my decision to give them a chance. My preference is every athlete has the tumbling skills at the level they are placed. This is not always possible, especially in smaller gyms. It also usually comes back to bite you in the rear when Carla Can't Do It and Wendy Won't Do It and their parents feel like since they made the team without a BHS, Tuck, Layout, etc then they don't have to get one at all this year.
4.) No athlete is given a team placement solely on what they threw/did not throw at tryouts. Especially our long time athletes. The adrenaline and bribes are high during that season. Once they are taken away the athlete tends to drop back down to their normal skill set. I prefer to watch them over time and compare how they are in tumble classes before I give my opinion on where they should be placed.
5.) We have turned away athletes when we have had full teams and recommended them to other gyms in the area if we felt they were a better competitive fit for them. If the athlete would be a better fit in another program we will tell them and even call the other program to tell them we are sending somebody their way.
6.) There is a vast difference in being able to do a skill in tumble class, vs being able to do it during practice vs being able to do it in a routine vs being able to do it at a local comp vs being able to do it at a major comp with your idol programs all standing around the mat watching you and knowing you are competing against them. Some athletes simply don't perform well under pressure and that must be taken into consideration of placements as well.
So my answer is no. We focus more on the long term objectives than the short term gratifications. Yet there are scenarios where it could happen. I would rather give the athlete a chance that has been with me than the new one that walked in the door. I don't know him/her or their issues yet. I believe I lost a coach in part to this, but the athlete in question totally understood - rather than sulk or quit or look for another gym and continued to push herself to make her "dream team" in our gym the next year, which she did.