- Feb 4, 2010
- 5,486
- 19,660
I would be ignorant if I didn't think politics were involved in cheerleading. I grew up in a ridiculously political sport, so I guess I am somewhat immune to it. However, your example can (and has) actually worked the opposite. I remember a few years back there was a lot of talk that an EP who was trying to increase attendance at their competitions invited and paid for a mega gym's hotel rooms to get them to attend their competition, and that team ended up getting the paid bid. They may very well have deserved it, but the manner in which things happened made the situation seem shady.All this makes me wonder now if a EP would be biased towards a large program when handing out their bids. Like does that one really good team traveling 600 miles to compete just their level 5 team have a shot against all these programs that brought 17 teams when there is a rule such as this in place. The EP would probably have to put up w/ a lot of animosity if a gym w/ one team got the bid (and essentially all the level 1-4 comp fee money that the large gyms were FORCED to spend).
This is making me realize cheer isn't so much unlike competition dance where there are some comps that have "reputations" for giving out the top overall awards to whichever studio brought the most numbers.
As @Ashley stated, AC always had a 50% minimum team rule up until last year when a well know gym traveled to come. I think the exception to the rule is unfair. There should either be a rule for everyone or no rule. We have to drive 325 miles for this comp so gyms in our area who are attending (there are several) have to bring the majority of their teams, while gyms that live 75 miles further away only need to bring one team. This is a good comp so I think our gym would bring several teams even if they lived 401 miles away, but it is unfair to to be required.
Last edited: