All-Star Ways To Eliminate Sandbagging

[GreatWhite92]

I honestly never thought about this. At this point I am tracking your ideas, with just some suggestions, so I can maybe create a proposal document. You all have it now and are running with it!;)

The only thing is how would EPs get the means to do this? Would the USASF provide them with what they need? Would the USASF have someone at each competition taking care of this? Maybe I am thinking to much into this.

 

[TheUltimateFan]

The only thing is how would EPs get the means to do this? Would the USASF provide them with what they need? Would the USASF have someone at each competition taking care of this? Maybe I am thinking to much into this.

No! These are all important questions. :)

Right now they do team check-ins right? Does USASF have a rep at most competitions? Any? All? Once the athlete database is built, it would be easy to create a front-end that would allow the person doing check-in to pull up the individual athletes. Having the time or the staff to do it is a concern. Electronic IDs and scanners would be the optimal solution. I wonder how much the scanners cost. Electronic IDs aren't that expensive when outsourced. Millions of companies in this country, small and large, use electronic card access. It can't be that expensive. Does anyone know?

I wonder if 'random' checks would be adequate, if the penalty was program suspension for the season or something equally harsh.

 

[GreatWhite92]

No! These are all important questions. :)

Right now they do team check-ins right? Does USASF have a rep at most competitions? Any? All? Once the athlete database is built, it would be easy to create a front-end that would allow the person doing check-in to pull up the individual athletes. Having the time or the staff to do it is a concern. Electronic IDs and scanners would be the optimal solution. I wonder how much the scanners cost. Electronic IDs aren't that expensive when outsourced. Millions of companies in this country, small and large, use electronic card access. It can't be that expensive. Does anyone know?

I wonder if 'random' checks would be adequate, if the penalty was suspension for the season or something equally harsh.

Yes I wouldn't want to be that coach that has to explain to her atlhetes why they can't compete the rest of the season...

 

[TheUltimateFan]

Yes I wouldn't want to be that coach that has to explain to her atlhetes why they can't compete the rest of the season...

Or, Heaven help them, explain it to the Cheer Moms.

 

[GreatWhite92]

Or, Heaven help them, explain it to the Cheer Moms.

That would definitly make it undesirable to cheat. I think random checks could definitily work for small competitions but all larger competitions sould be checked...Cheersport, nca, uca

 

[samantha says]

I will post my devils advocate post on here too... Disclaimer: I do not have an opinion on this topic, nor do I have a team involved. Just playing devils advocate by trying to create the most relevant analogy I can think of off the top of my head:

Mark Ingram, Cam Newton, and Robert Griffin III (all heisman candidates) played NCAA Football... They could've attended a Junior College. Ultimately, it's their decision and their families decision what team they want to play for. It's really not up to the fans or the schools where these players go to school, no matter how talented they are.

So they're the best running backs and quarterbacks in the nation coming out of high school. Should the NCAA force them to go to a Division 1 university such as Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma State or LSU... Or should the players be able to decide for themselves if they want to go to LSU or Western Arizona Community College?

 

[GreatWhite92]

I will post my devils advocate post on here too... Disclaimer: I do not have an opinion on this topic, nor do I have a team involved. Just playing devils advocate by trying to create the most relevant analogy I can think of off the top of my head:

Mark Ingram, Cam Newton, and Robert Griffin III (all heisman candidates) played NCAA Football... They could've attended a Junior College. Ultimately, it's their decision and their families decision what team they want to play for. It's really not up to the fans or the schools where these players go to school, no matter how talented they are.

So they're the best running backs and quarterbacks in the nation coming out of high school. Should the NCAA force them to go to a Division 1 university such as Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma State or LSU... Or should the players be able to decide for themselves if they want to go to LSU or Western Arizona Community College?

I really don't see that as being relevant in cheerleading. Cheerleading has different levels for good reasons. Football is football no matter where what level you play at. Its still the same rules, sure you get little differences between college and NFL but its basically all the same rules. However a level 1 routine looks light years different than a level 5 routine. Maybe if you compared them to picking a flag football team over an NFL team but really now is that going to happen?

 

[samantha says]

I really don't see that as being relevant in cheerleading. Cheerleading has different levels for good reasons. Football is football no matter where what level you play at. Its still the same rules, sure you get little differences between college and NFL but its basically all the same rules. However a level 1 routine looks light years different than a level 5 routine. Maybe if you compared them to picking a flag football team over an NFL team but really now is that going to happen?

It's relevant because Western Arizona CC and Alabama are in their own ways "levels" (consider WACC level 2 and Alabama level 5). Should Mark Ingram, Cam Newton and Robert Griffin III have the option to play at WACC (level 2, way below their capability, where they will be by far the best player on the team) or should they be forced to reach their max potential and play at LSU or Alabama (level 5, pushing them to the limit where they may not be the best person on the team, but an equal). The NCAA says they get the choice... So does USASF right now...

 

[GreatWhite92]

It's relevant because Western Arizona CC and Alabama are in their own ways "levels" (consider WACC level 2 and Alabama level 5). Should Mark Ingram, Cam Newton and Robert Griffin III have the option to play at WACC (level 2, way below their capability) or should they be forced to reach their max potential and play at LSU or Alabama (level 5, pushing them to the limit where they may not be the best person on the team, but an equal). The NCAA says they get the choice... So does USASF right now...

I can see the comparison but its still a different issue. NCAA players do all the same skills as WACC players. Do they do them better? yes. But a level 1 athlete doing walkovers is not the same skills as a level 5 athlete doing double fulls.

 

[samantha says]

I can see the comparison but its still a different issue. NCAA players do all the same skills as WACC players. Do they do them better? yes. But a level 1 athlete doing walkovers is not the same skills as a level 5 athlete doing double fulls.

Is it the same exact comparison? No, that's why it's an analogy... A comparison of similar concepts. Either way you look at it, it's athletes competing below their full potential at a sport. A running back averaging 300 yards a year is "level 2" and a RB with 1,000 yards a year is essentially "level 5." Gotta think out of the box with me here... It's definitely relevant. It just depends if you can see both sides of an issue...

 

[GreatWhite92]

Is it the same exact comparison? No, that's why it's an analogy... A comparison of similar concepts. Either way you look at it, it's athletes competing below their full potential at a sport. A running back averaging 300 yards a year is "level 2" and a RB with 1,000 yards a year is essentially "level 5." Gotta think out of the box with me here... It's definitely relevant. It just depends if you can see both sides of an issue...

I guess I am just not a fan of sandbagging no matter what sport it is in. I don't think gyms should be given a choice whether or not to place all their level 5 athletes on a level 2 team because in the end, where does that leave for the growth of the sport? What does that teach our children? To do whatever it is you can to get ahead? Even if that means dropping down levels?

 

[GreatWhite92]

However, Now I would like to get back on topic about finding a way to stop it, so all comments from me from this point will be just that.

 

[samantha says]

I guess I am just not a fan of sandbagging no matter what sport it is in. I don't think gyms should be given a choice whether or not to place all their level 5 athletes on a level 2 team because in the end, where does that leave for the growth of the sport? What does that teach our children? To do whatever it is you can to get ahead? Even if that means dropping down levels?

And I totally respect your opinion, and appreciate you sharing it with me. I personally don't have an opinion on this topic. I'm just merely trying to stretch our readers on this board out of their comfort zone. Looking forward on reading everyones opinions on if Mark Ingram should be allowed to play at Western Arizona or if he should be forced to go to a school like LSU... USASF style.

 

[TheUltimateFan]

I will post my devils advocate post on here too... Disclaimer: I do not have an opinion on this topic, nor do I have a team involved. Just playing devils advocate by trying to create the most relevant analogy I can think of off the top of my head:

Mark Ingram, Cam Newton, and Robert Griffin III (all heisman candidates) played NCAA Football... They could've attended a Junior College. Ultimately, it's their decision and their families decision what team they want to play for. It's really not up to the fans or the schools where these players go to school, no matter how talented they are.

So they're the best running backs and quarterbacks in the nation coming out of high school. Should the NCAA force them to go to a Division 1 university such as Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma State or LSU... Or should the players be able to decide for themselves if they want to go to LSU or Western Arizona Community College?

Good analogy, overall, for the placement of athletes and how that decision should be made (I am definitely in favor of it being athletes first, with coach encouragement and approval). But these athletes aren't allowed to play for two different schools at the same time. So the sandbagging issue doesn't exist there and the question of choice doesn't come into play.

 

[SarahS]

1) Each athlete is credentialed to a particular level by their gym at the beginning of the season. The gym can use whatever criteria they want to determine the athlete's level.

2) This level is entered into a USASF database and the athlete is issued a photo ID card that identifies their credentialed level.

3) Teams competing at level X can be comprised of athletes credentialed at level X, level X+1 or level X-1. At least 50% of the team must be comprised of athletes credentialed at level X.

4) Athletes and their photo ID cards will be checked at the entrance to warm-ups of each competition by way of a bar-code scanner that verifies athlete/level/birthdate information.

5) Teams with more than 50% of athletes credentialed at an improper level would not be allowed to compete at that competition.

This proposal addresses several concerns brought up in this thread:

a) Athletes could be credentialed at a lower level than their "true" skill level, but they would not be able to compete for both a very high level team and a very low level team during the same season.

b) At the same time, athletes wishing to compete both with friends of the same age at a lower skill level and with similarly-skilled peers would be able to do so (ie, someone could compete on a level 5 team and cross over to a level 3 team, if credentialed at level 4).

c) Because of rule 3 requiring at least 50% of the team to be at their credentialed level, this would discourage gyms from credentialing vast swaths of athletes at an inappropriate level, if they wish to compete at a higher level at any point in the season (ie, gyms couldn't credential all level 5 athletes as level 4, because then they would not be able to field a level 5 team at all, nor would they be able to completely stack a level 3 team with level 5 athletes.)

d) Because gyms make the determination of credentialing level, this allows for athletes with lower skill levels to be credentialed a bit higher if necessary for team placement (ie the example of the gym with only a few senior level 1 athletes who would only be able to compete on the gym's senior 3 team - they could be credentialed at level 2 in order to be able to participate with the senior 3 team).

I like the idea of tracking trending, but it just seems really cumbersome. I think this might be simpler and workable. Feel free to shoot holes in the proposal, though - I'll see what I can do to come up with solutions.