All-Star Should They Be Going To World's?

[Cheer_Explosion_Coach]

Call me old fashion, but what ever happen to states, regionals, nationals, progression? Then maybe Worlds could be the final tier. How awesome if your team had to make it all the way through just to compete at Worlds. Then only 10 teams per division. :cloud9:

 

[TheUltimateFan]

Maybe someone should write a proposal for changing how bids are given out. Just a thought.

There have been several really good ideas posted in the last month. But I think that the eventual consensus each time was that as long as USASF continues to make a profit on every team that participates, bids will never be limited.

How about a pre-Worlds event on a different weekend, where everyone with an At Large bid has to compete to qualify for Finals? USASF can rake in the cash on two weekends, and it might discourage teams from taking a bid "just for the experience".

I am only half-joking about this.

 

[NJ Coach]

Maybe someone should write a proposal for changing how bids are given out. Just a thought.

I always wondered why they didn't do a video judging before hand (like they did with juniors)

 

[Drkilluzionz]

Call me old fashion, but what ever happen to states, regionals, nationals, progression? Then maybe Worlds could be the final tier. How awesome if your team had to make it all the way through just to compete at Worlds. Then only 10 teams per division. :cloud9:

Money...If an EP turns people away (lets say they didnt have the score at states to qualify for natonals) that's less money going into their business.

 

[Cheer_Explosion_Coach]

It's funny that nobody asked the gyms who make money on standing fulls, and bounding classes if they cared if tumbling was restricted.

*Just stating my opinion. This is not saying I am for or against the tumbling restrictions. Just that I could care less if an EP makes less money. I am for the safety and sanctity of our sport.

 

[Ignis Pater]

I have been saying it for 4 or 5 years. Make teams earn it. EP's can advertise offering "up to" a set number of bids. Teams must reach a percentage of score to receive a paid bid. Either a percentage of highest possible or first place if winner already has a bid. At-large bids would be based on the number of paid bids given and a slightly lower percentage would be needed to receive one of the at-large bids.

 

[AllHeartxo3]

Obviously coaches and gym owners just want to be able to say "we sent a team to worlds" at their open house to bring more people in. I know TONS of teams that should not be going, and I really don't think they know how bad they're going to be embarrassed because the excitement clouds their judgement. I feel like there shouldn't be an obligation to give bids just because you have them. When I say this I mean that when the teams who would get a bid have one, so a less deserving team gets it because they are next in line.

 

[Aussiekat]

The idea of having to get a minimum score to earn a bid has merit... but you need a universal score sheet to set a fair minimum that can be applicable across all events, right?

 

[njallday]

i completely agree with you. it's unsafe and unfair to the parents to shell out $1000 (probably more.) (And maybe 10% of teams this late in the season actually were restricted 5 competing up just for fun - sometimes it works though - ie. stingray amber and brandon white)

Since the progressional idea would unfortunately not work (counties, states, regionals, nationals, etc.) I think the only way to truly combat this is a minimum score on the WORLDS scoresheet, less at large per paid ratio (I'd say 1, the USASF probably needs at least 2 for $), and allow companies to refuse to give out bids. Do they really want to be represented by some of these teams?

IMO, it is unacceptable that teams scoring in the 70s out of 100 are receiving bids to our most "prestigious" event.

 

[newcheerdad]

I'll say what I've said for my entire tenure on FB. Get rid of the at-large bid. Let any team that wants to compete at Worlds do so if they participate in a minimum number of paid bid giving competitions at their specified division.

You're never going to get anyone in charge to buy off on reducing the number of teams at Worlds. I'd be much happier just getting rid of the pretense of the at-large.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk

 

[garretttt]

i completely agree with you. it's unsafe and unfair to the parents to shell out $1000 (probably more.) (And maybe 10% of teams this late in the season actually were restricted 5 competing up just for fun - sometimes it works though - ie. stingray amber and brandon white)

Since the progressional idea would unfortunately not work (counties, states, regionals, nationals, etc.) I think the only way to truly combat this is a minimum score on the WORLDS scoresheet, less at large per paid ratio (I'd say 1, the USASF probably needs at least 2 for $), and allow companies to refuse to give out bids. Do they really want to be represented by some of these teams?

IMO, it is unacceptable that teams scoring in the 70s out of 100 are receiving bids to our most "prestigious" event.

Amber has been medium all year long. Spice was the restricted team that went large at uca last year.

 

[cheercurl]

I am more than a little shocked that a coach, parents or a gym in general doesn't understand "Just because you have received an at large bid doesn't mean you should attend Worlds". My daughters have been at a small gym and at a medium well respected gym that has sent a team to Worlds since the second year it was started. That small gym knows even if they received a bid they have no business attending. The medium gym that has sent a team to Worlds every year except the 1 st, that coach/owner has decided they will not attend this year with an at large bid. I understand this was not a popular decision but it was the right decision. The team this year is just not quite competitive enough to make a good showing.

What is so difficult to understand? How is it in your gyms best interest to send a crappy team to Worlds? I really think as a gym/owner it would be just as impressive to the average parent to say "We received an at large bid this year...we are all so proud".


This may sound like a dumb question but has an At-Large-Bid ever one Gold at World's? or Silver or Bronze for that matter? Just curious?

 

[crazycheermom]

Just curious..How many total bids are give out... full/partial..whatever; and how many team actually go? Generally, I guess how many are given out and how many go?

 

[njallday]

Amber has been medium all year long. Spice was the restricted team that went large at uca last year.

you are correct. oh man, i feel dumb. how did i mess that up? love (and miss) the spicy rays <3

 

[fullinitup]

what i think sucks is they go off of last years registration as a whole to determine how big the event grew. it doesnt matter if the event only grew in the level 1, 2, and 3 divisions and had 50 new small gyms attend they are then allowed to up the amount of bids given out making more not so qualified level 5 teams end up at worlds.