All-Star Too Small A Venue

[yojaehs]

the whole point of worlds is to have the best of the best compete, and lets be honest some of the teams there that are sub par, miraculously got their bids, god only knows how.... im not trying to hate on certain teams, but ehh.... it just would make more sense to limit the bids they hand out, cause a change of venue is probably not going to happen anytime soon.

This is my arguement against that, now that there is prelims, semis an finals. The cream rises to the top but the "experience" is available for most. Do I hear what your saying, yes but do I want to see Worlds continue to grow, yes do venue adjustments need to be made, ABSOLUTELY!

 

[BlueCat]

Finding something big enough to do year-by-year wouldn't be an issue, but I could see it being harder to work out the "extras" (athletes staying together-mostly, the transportation and the "activities"-theme parks, etc.)

Orlando isn't the only place in the U.S. with hotels, busses, or even theme parks for that matter. (I'm not convinced that riding "It's a Small World" or getting your picture taken with Goofy is essential for a World Championship, but that is a whole different topic.)

The venue is stifling the event & our sport. The people running the event are now forced to do everything they can to discourage people from attending. The whole mission statement of the USASF is based around increasing the participation in all star cheer. Having what is theoretically the premier event at the same pitiful venue year after year goes directly against that.

 

[FierceIsTheName]

Y'know lady, we've been through this discussion sooo many times. You're not being funny, subtle or smart. We ALL know some international teams aren't up to American standards, just like there are many small senior teams that shouldn't be getting bids. Going on about it and making snide remarks isn't helping them get better or bringing any solutions to the table. It's not getting us a bigger venue. It's not improving the spectators' or athletes' Worlds experience. It's not aiding the growth of the sport and it's not helping families afford the jacked up prices. I don't care if you don't enjoy watching them or think they aren't good enough. The point is that they earned a bid as the best representation of cheer in their country and this is a WORLDS competition. Without international athletes its just another nationals. So have fun with that. And I sincerely hope you get some cough syrup.

I hate to start a fight, but all of you say the same thing, sometimes even worse. Sometimes, you should read your own posts, because most are even ruder. I wasn't trying to be start a fight, i just strongly think there are some international teams that aren't level 5 but are competing it. Not all, not even 1/4 of them.
And to the bold part; I've never even said one thing about international teams until now. I think you could be mixing me up with someone... Have a nice day

 

[FierceIsTheName]

That explination made barely any sense above and i ran out of edit time so...
BowCat
I didn't mean to be mean, but we all know there are SOME teams who shouldn't be there because of skill level. It would be stupid to get rid of some Small Senior teams (although there are a lot) that are up to skill level, but not get rid of the ones who are international and not at level 5.
If it makes it right, it would've been better to say this instead of "some international teams" how about "some teams that AREN'T up to par"
I apologize if it came out mean. I just really don't think its right for an international team (or any team for that matter) to compete at Worlds and not have level 5 or 6 skills, IMO. Have a nice day, BowCat. Oh and i've never said anything about Int'l teams until now.

 

[njallday]

That explination made barely any sense above and i ran out of edit time so...
BowCat
I didn't mean to be mean, but we all know there are SOME teams who shouldn't be there because of skill level. It would be stupid to get rid of some Small Senior teams (although there are a lot) that are up to skill level, but not get rid of the ones who are international and not at level 5.
If it makes it right, it would've been better to say this instead of "some international teams" how about "some teams that AREN'T up to par"
I apologize if it came out mean. I just really don't think its right for an international team (or any team for that matter) to compete at Worlds and not have level 5 or 6 skills, IMO. Have a nice day, BowCat. Oh and i've never said anything about Int'l teams until now.

the purpose of a world championship is to compete against the best from each country. if the best team jamaica/japan/chile/mexico etc. has to offer is level 3, than so be it. it wouldn't be worlds without them. if you don't like it, go to NCA.

while i am an advocate for having international teams there, the excessive amount of american teams could be cut down, IMO. though, if every team that's barely level 5 in the country has to attend, i think last year's set up was a good compromise with prelims/semis/finals.

 

[Ashley]

That explination made barely any sense above and i ran out of edit time so...
BowCat
I didn't mean to be mean, but we all know there are SOME teams who shouldn't be there because of skill level. It would be stupid to get rid of some Small Senior teams (although there are a lot) that are up to skill level, but not get rid of the ones who are international and not at level 5.
If it makes it right, it would've been better to say this instead of "some international teams" how about "some teams that AREN'T up to par"
I apologize if it came out mean. I just really don't think its right for an international team (or any team for that matter) to compete at Worlds and not have level 5 or 6 skills, IMO. Have a nice day, BowCat. Oh and i've never said anything about Int'l teams until now.

It's a world championship - you compete against the best from each country, even if the best from that country aren't very good. It happens in the Olympics too. You get athletes who are nowhere up to the level of those up top who get to go and compete and represent their country because they're the best there. See, for example, the women who were allowed to compete for Saudi Arabia this year.

We can start cutting the number of us teams before we start telling an international team who is representing their country that they can't attend.

 

[Ashley]

Edit: double post

 

[mariahnicole1216]

I LOVE the idea of Worlds moving around cities! I think that would be really cool. Yeah disney is good for an 'experience' but I think a better experience would be getting to see different big cities around the country. It also makes things more fair for people on the west coast. If possible, I think that would be the best option.

 

[xpressjag]

I think they should rotate it.. even if its every 2-3 years. Here are a few venues I like:

*Anaheim Convention Center
*Dallas Convention Center
*McCormick Place in Chicago
*Orange County Convention Center in Orlando

 

[BowsnBling]

Agreed, because all of the major events in sports are required to have their event in the same location every year. Well, every major event not counting: Superbowl, Summer Olympics, Winter Olympics, World Series, Stanley Cup, FIFA World Cup, NBA Finals, NCAA Final Four, PGA Championships, NCAA Title Game, and 99% of every other World and National Championship in every sport.

haha, good point! I am not sure if I was not awake when I posted that, but clearly I did not even think of that.

 

[just_kay_today]

In all seriousness, what I expressed in my email was the immediate need for a solution to the overcrowding from last year. There are not just parents and fans who want to watch the athletes, there are pseudo parents. In gyms you form relationships with these kids who are not, biologically, your own. They want you to watch them compete. I used the video I posted, a few pages back, to illustrate a possible solution to some of the overcrowding. I agree with those who have said that the treatment of the spectators, be they parents, adopted parents, or fans, was counter productive to the overall growth of the sport. It's like being "uninvited to your own party." I said that in my email. I hope they listened.

 

[kristenthegreat]

Have you WATCHED any of the international teams videos lately?! The leaps and bounds they've made in skills is astronomical, considering how long it took us (relatively), to push for those skills. What Viqueens can do on a dead floor is magical.

In case you'd like to see some evolution:
- Not bad at all. From 2008
- This is another NZ team (couldn't find a video of the same team) that I got from the 2012-2013 video thread. Notice a difference?

The only international teams who didn't have particularly strong showings, were the countries who I can guarantee only started teams within the last 2 years or so. Jamaica, South Africa (at ICU, anyway). Give them 5 years, decent facilities and qualified coaches and see what you can do. Half these int'l teams don't get near the facilities we do..Americans BETTER look good on that floor.

 

[BlueCat]

Have you WATCHED any of the international teams videos lately?! The leaps and bounds they've made in skills is astronomical, considering how long it took us (relatively), to push for those skills. What Viqueens can do on a dead floor is magical.

The only international teams who didn't have particularly strong showings, were the countries who I can guarantee only started teams within the last 2 years or so. Jamaica, South Africa (at ICU, anyway). Give them 5 years, decent facilities and qualified coaches and see what you can do. Half these int'l teams don't get near the facilities we do..Americans BETTER look good on that floor.

So how far do they need to progress until we no longer need to give them competitive advantages in regards to the scoresheet or set up of finals?

Please note that I am only referring to club team Worlds - not ICU. ICU is set up to be country vs country so the whole limit teams by gym address makes sense in that context.

 

[njallday]

So how far do they need to progress until we no longer need to give them competitive advantages in regards to the scoresheet or set up of finals?

Please note that I am only referring to club team Worlds - not ICU. ICU is set up to be country vs country so the whole limit teams by gym address makes sense in that context.

a point was made in the new videos thread (by kickdblcj or chyeeaaa69 i think one of them? and they said it much better than i am about to) that if the rule was taken away now, the only division that it would truly make a difference in is IOC5. If the rule was taken away last season in both L6 divisions and IAG5, i think the results (at least top 3) would have remained unchanged.

The US just has so many powerhouse teams in IOC5, and while i would like the rule to be taken away, if it were currently, i'm not sure an international team would be breaking top 10. while the (true) international teams have made significant progress, it's still rare (except maybe for canada) that the country has more than 1 or 2 teams in contention for a globe.

 

[kristenthegreat]

So how far do they need to progress until we no longer need to give them competitive advantages in regards to the scoresheet or set up of finals?

Please note that I am only referring to club team Worlds - not ICU. ICU is set up to be country vs country so the whole limit teams by gym address makes sense in that context.

Personally, I'd be ok removing it now. I think I mentioned it to somebody in another thread (I think it was chyeeaaa69), and he mentioned that it wouldn't matter much for international teams still because rarely are there more than 3 per country in any one division. Maybe Canada now and the UK.

I think 3 per country could go (or if they don't want to get rid of it completely just yet due to size of division, how about 5?), I definitely think tumbling rewards should be higher (not sure how skewed the int'l scoresheet still is. Last I read it which was probably 2 years ago- I know tumbling was practically nothing).

I remember a conversation involving either you or kingston..about a way to reward countries who do well but make the scoresheet more 'normal'. Like an 'emerging nation' cup or something. Can't quite word it properly this morning.