All-Star Worth A Read

Welcome to our Cheerleading Community

Members see FEWER ads... join today!

1st problem in my book is that it shouldn't be a business (industry) of kids in sports, it should be a youth sport with a viable governing body that is supported by an industry
 
Thanks for the vote of confidence and I'll be the first to admit I see the world through rose colored glasses at times BUT I am a bit confused. Question: So if you worked for a company like PG & E ( Erin Brokovitch) and you were on the board and knew the water was tainted... You wouldn't want me to be your CEO but I could coach your daughter while she swam in it? Not trying to be a jerk because I obviously need a lesson in big business. And I don't mean that as an insult. The business of kids in sports is not like the business of Walmart from my lens.

If you are stating you have 100% proof that this Corp. has been hiding evidence for years that was certified and proven dangerous at that time, they continued using the same processes, and even went out of their way to tell the public it was safe. "No", I don't want you as my CEO, I want you as a prosecuting atty. While your PG & E example sounds good, it was an extreme case that is an extremely poor example of what the majority of CEO's and Corps represent in this country. I want a CEO that when they are provided evidence that something is dangerous, and here's the key, they seek to find proof. Once proof has been determined, it is their responsibility to alter what they do to protect the industry and community they serve.

If you have PG & E type evidence and have been sitting on it, then I take it back, I don't want you as a CEO or as my kids coach. You are just as guilty.
 
Again I submit, whatever side of the proverbial argument you side with, the article is revealing. Call it business. Call it lack of transparency. Call it shady. Call it what you choose. The fact is your (our) view of ethics is often clouded by where you (we) sit. That then typically drives our perspective of what we deem is legal, law abiding or if something is merely a "rule" or suggestion than can be broken without punishment...which is the domain of most politicians. And truthfully there are many that have been found guilty of breaking numerous laws who contend they did nothing "legally" wrong. That it was flawed interpretation by others not themselves that got them in trouble, not necessarily what they did.
 
1st problem in my book is that it shouldn't be a business (industry) of kids in sports, it should be a youth sport with a viable governing body that is supported by an industry
100 percent agree!

This is one of the main sticking points.

If it is a business (industry) of kids in sports then the results of all events can potentially be driven by the bottom line or interests of the business.

If it is a youth sport with a viable governing body that is supported by the industry then the results are driven by the actual performance and not what team is best for marketing/business purposes.

So what do you do when competitor, judge, EP and governing body are owned and run by one in the same? Different names but same company? That is more business than sport IMO.
 
If you are stating you have 100% proof that this Corp. has been hiding evidence for years that was certified and proven dangerous at that time, they continued using the same processes, and even went out of their way to tell the public it was safe. "No", I don't want you as my CEO, I want you as a prosecuting atty. While your PG & E example sounds good, it was an extreme case that is an extremely poor example of what the majority of CEO's and Corps represent in this country. I want a CEO that when they are provided evidence that something is dangerous, and here's the key, they seek to find proof. Once proof has been determined, it is their responsibility to alter what they do to protect the industry and community they serve.

If you have PG & E type evidence and have been sitting on it, then I take it back, I don't want you as a CEO or as my kids coach. You are just as guilty.
 
If you are stating you have 100% proof that this Corp. has been hiding evidence for years that was certified and proven dangerous at that time, they continued using the same processes, and even went out of their way to tell the public it was safe. "No", I don't want you as my CEO, I want you as a prosecuting atty. While your PG & E example sounds good, it was an extreme case that is an extremely poor example of what the majority of CEO's and Corps represent in this country. I want a CEO that when they are provided evidence that something is dangerous, and here's the key, they seek to find proof. Once proof has been determined, it is their responsibility to alter what they do to protect the industry and community they serve.

If you have PG & E type evidence and have been sitting on it, then I take it back, I don't want you as a CEO or as my kids coach. You are just as guilty.

I never asked to be your CEO, child's coach or prosecuting attorney. You defined where I would fit in. You marvel us with your business acumen and as you state it is reality. Well, I agree I wouldn't fit in more importantly... I Wouldn't WANT to. Before I cited PG& E... I named various sports leagues and their boardrooms and their placing more value on their profit rather than their players. Does it matter whether it's tainted water, tobacco, faulty seat belts... YOU need to go back and read your words on why board rooms make decisions that they make. And I get to respectfully disagree. There are years and hundreds of posts by many on this board regarding conflicts of interest in this not a sport, sometimes a sport, more than a sport, and in keeping on topic... Peculiar path to a sport. Where did I state I had evidence? I believe I said... I know more than most. I believe there are more who KNOW more than me. And for those who told me the back door antics that affected my athletes... I am forever blessed that they cared enough to keep me out of the dark. So before you scratch my eyes out catlady, I Care about the kids. I care that they get the proper care more than 30 years overdue. I care that their parents finally feel their investments paid off. I want them set on the path to academic excellence while playing their sport. And for all of these reasons I am GUILTY as charged.
 
There are many here that now lurk that know way more than they will ever post. After years of being flamed, gaslighted, attack and demonized, they choose to remain to talk in places where they know their conversations aren't being monitored or reported in. After I revealed several years ago that a certain large EP was being sold to the monopoly if not already sold, that Ep went directly to the board owner (not Fierceboard) trying to get him to reveal who I was, how I knew what I knew and get me banned. Thankfully the board owner did not cave in and told me. He advised me to watch what I post even if true, because many things were being done that they did not want revealed because it would adversely affect the business model of the clients knew about it before it was complete. From a business point of view I understood, yet something is inherently wrong with knowing you wont be supported if you are truthful in your dealings.

Since that day I have held back on these boards of saying all I know because I refuse to let my athletes be punished for me speaking my opinion. The old dictum is true.

A wise Old Owl
Sat in an oak
The more he heard
The less he spoke
The less he spoke
The more he heard
That wise old owl
Was a wise old bird

Never divulge all you know to those already predisposed to not believe a word you say. They only want to know so they can form a new defense to defend themselves. Cynical? Perhaps...but after all this is a business. #realtalk
 
100 percent agree!

This is one of the main sticking points.

If it is a business (industry) of kids in sports then the results of all events can potentially be driven by the bottom line or interests of the business.

If it is a youth sport with a viable governing body that is supported by the industry then the results are driven by the actual performance and not what team is best for marketing/business purposes.

So what do you do when competitor, judge, EP and governing body are owned and run by one in the same? Different names but same company? That is more business than sport IMO.

This has been the age old question. . .
 
There are many here that now lurk that know way more than they will ever post. After years of being flamed, gaslighted, attack and demonized, they choose to remain to talk in places where they know their conversations aren't being monitored or reported in. After I revealed several years ago that a certain large EP was being sold to the monopoly if not already sold, that Ep went directly to the board owner (not Fierceboard) trying to get him to reveal who I was, how I knew what I knew and get me banned. Thankfully the board owner did not cave in and told me. He advised me to watch what I post even if true, because many things were being done that they did not want revealed because it would adversely affect the business model of the clients knew about it before it was complete. From a business point of view I understood, yet something is inherently wrong with knowing you wont be supported if you are truthful in your dealings.

Since that day I have held back on these boards of saying all I know because I refuse to let my athletes be punished for me speaking my opinion. The old dictum is true.

A wise Old Owl
Sat in an oak
The more he heard
The less he spoke
The less he spoke
The more he heard
That wise old owl
Was a wise old bird

Never divulge all you know to those already predisposed to not believe a word you say. They only want to know so they can form a new defense to defend themselves. Cynical? Perhaps...but after all this is a business. #realtalk
Well said @tumbleyoda and @coachrah
I think many a cheer parent has sadly learned to live by the same rule:

Since that day I have held back on these boards of saying all I know because I refuse to let my athletes be punished for me speaking my opinion. The old dictum is true.

A wise Old Owl
Sat in an oak
The more he heard
The less he spoke
The less he spoke
The more he heard
That wise old owl
Was a wise old bird
 
So I will just lay out the web (pun intended):

Jeff Webb creates Varsity (over time this involves the creation of NCA, UCA and merging of these entities)

Varsity owns or controls:
- USA Cheer - the self-proclaimed "National governing body for sport cheer"
-- No group or organization ever created this with the interest of the sport, Jeff Webb created it and was the first president. Conveniently today's board of directors is almost entirely people from Varsity entities

- ICU - Created by Jeff Webb and he is the current president. Since then ICU has "negotiated" with the Olympic Committee to receive sport consideration even if it doesn't technically meet the rules of being a sport
-- Incidentally there was already an international cheer organization - The International Federation of Cheerleading which was founded in 1997. They had a "World Championships" and everything. Instead of incorporating and joining this organization Jeff Webb created his own and became the president. Then they told international teams that "there is only one world championship" and if any of them participated in the IFC competition why could not attend Worlds (Disney version)

- STUNT - USA Cheer created this "sport" to claim they had created a sport that could be a varsity level at schools. They did this after NCATA created a fully functioning sport with compulsory rules and valid judging and already had 13 colleges signed up with FULL VARSITY STATUS and meeting title IX rules. Yep - including full sport scholarships.
-- STUNT immediately told schools that if they participated in an NCATA competitions they could not compete at either UCA or NCA, stifling another viable sport rather than supporting it. BTW - NCATA went to Varsity for sponsorship but was turned down and would not give up industry influence, which is why they became sponsored by USGA

- a majority of the EPs (as stated different names but all connected or under contract to support big V)
-- Just enough EPs are left to be independent to not consider the EP industry a "monopoly"

- The single largest uniform company (someone correct me if I am wrong, but diffinitely one of the largest)
-- Years of late and incorrect uniforms with a policy of only doing business with the gyms so that parents - i.e. The consumers who are paying for the uniforms have no recourse when a product is late, misized or incorrectly made except to punish the gym (which may be a smart idea if it keeps going with a bad uniform company)

- The largest coaches entity, NACCC - which started out as an indepenedent org but became a Big V entity

- The industry safety organizations, ACCAA and Cheer Safety.org
-- They run all the certifications required for all levels of the sport. A great effort to be sure, but often times less than it could be after this many years of emphasis on safety
-- These entities have led "safety studies" that always validate the current status quo, but independent studies always get rebuffed.
-- Case in point: Gymnastics long ago banned any tumbling not on a spring floor because they know it is bad for young bodies in their growth stages and no building skills (stunting) are allowed without an "approved surface". The approved surface definition is clearly demonstrated in credible fall studies. Somehow the governing body of cheer has not taken on this same guidance in the interest of athletes over fear that it would hurt particpation

- They promote the "family plan" which gives BIG kickbacks to gyms for ordering uniforms and going to a certain number of V competitions a year. This makes it hard for gyms to not take them up on the big discounts and harder for independent IEPs to compete

- They promote camps run by UCA and NCA for schools (Middle School through College) which are required to get a "bid" to a competition - would be cheaper if they skipped the camp and just went directly to the competition it all schools go for the "bid"
-- These camps are good for teaching basic skills and some safety but advanced teams don't need them. Also there are better ways to get concentrated safety training

So I laid all of this out off the top of my head. The individual elements are not enough in any individual market of the cheer industry to be called a monopoly but it's tough to not make the argument that the whole of the parts does not constitute monopolistic practices

Enjoy the info and feel free to research on your own.

Shark out. . .
 
So I will just lay out the web (pun intended):

Jeff Webb creates Varsity (over time this involves the creation of NCA, UCA and merging of these entities)

Varsity owns or controls:
- USA Cheer - the self-proclaimed "National governing body for sport cheer"
-- No group or organization ever created this with the interest of the sport, Jeff Webb created it and was the first president. Conveniently today's board of directors is almost entirely people from Varsity entities

- ICU - Created by Jeff Webb and he is the current president. Since then ICU has "negotiated" with the Olympic Committee to receive sport consideration even if it doesn't technically meet the rules of being a sport
-- Incidentally there was already an international cheer organization - The International Federation of Cheerleading which was founded in 1997. They had a "World Championships" and everything. Instead of incorporating and joining this organization Jeff Webb created his own and became the president. Then they told international teams that "there is only one world championship" and if any of them participated in the IFC competition why could not attend Worlds (Disney version)

- STUNT - USA Cheer created this "sport" to claim they had created a sport that could be a varsity level at schools. They did this after NCATA created a fully functioning sport with compulsory rules and valid judging and already had 13 colleges signed up with FULL VARSITY STATUS and meeting title IX rules. Yep - including full sport scholarships.
-- STUNT immediately told schools that if they participated in an NCATA competitions they could not compete at either UCA or NCA, stifling another viable sport rather than supporting it. BTW - NCATA went to Varsity for sponsorship but was turned down and would not give up industry influence, which is why they became sponsored by USGA

- a majority of the EPs (as stated different names but all connected or under contract to support big V)
-- Just enough EPs are left to be independent to not consider the EP industry a "monopoly"

- The single largest uniform company (someone correct me if I am wrong, but diffinitely one of the largest)
-- Years of late and incorrect uniforms with a policy of only doing business with the gyms so that parents - i.e. The consumers who are paying for the uniforms have no recourse when a product is late, misized or incorrectly made except to punish the gym (which may be a smart idea if it keeps going with a bad uniform company)

- The largest coaches entity, NACCC - which started out as an indepenedent org but became a Big V entity

- The industry safety organizations, ACCAA and Cheer Safety.org
-- They run all the certifications required for all levels of the sport. A great effort to be sure, but often times less than it could be after this many years of emphasis on safety
-- These entities have led "safety studies" that always validate the current status quo, but independent studies always get rebuffed.
-- Case in point: Gymnastics long ago banned any tumbling not on a spring floor because they know it is bad for young bodies in their growth stages and no building skills (stunting) are allowed without an "approved surface". The approved surface definition is clearly demonstrated in credible fall studies. Somehow the governing body of cheer has not taken on this same guidance in the interest of athletes over fear that it would hurt particpation

- They promote the "family plan" which gives BIG kickbacks to gyms for ordering uniforms and going to a certain number of V competitions a year. This makes it hard for gyms to not take them up on the big discounts and harder for independent IEPs to compete

- They promote camps run by UCA and NCA for schools (Middle School through College) which are required to get a "bid" to a competition - would be cheaper if they skipped the camp and just went directly to the competition it all schools go for the "bid"
-- These camps are good for teaching basic skills and some safety but advanced teams don't need them. Also there are better ways to get concentrated safety training

So I laid all of this out off the top of my head. The individual elements are not enough in any individual market of the cheer industry to be called a monopoly but it's tough to not make the argument that the whole of the parts does not constitute monopolistic practices

Enjoy the info and feel free to research on your own.

Shark out. . .

And there you have it for the newcomers....

There are many other issues of cronyism, blackballing, vendettas, etc. but they pale in comparison to what @SharkDad has posted. Again for or against is your call. But know what it really is instead of just accepting the pablum we are force fed by those who only have their eyes on their profit$ way more than they do on sport or safety. It is a business.
 
Last edited:
I never asked to be your CEO, child's coach or prosecuting attorney. You defined where I would fit in. You marvel us with your business acumen and as you state it is reality. Well, I agree I wouldn't fit in more importantly... I Wouldn't WANT to. Before I cited PG& E... I named various sports leagues and their boardrooms and their placing more value on their profit rather than their players. Does it matter whether it's tainted water, tobacco, faulty seat belts... YOU need to go back and read your words on why board rooms make decisions that they make. And I get to respectfully disagree. There are years and hundreds of posts by many on this board regarding conflicts of interest in this not a sport, sometimes a sport, more than a sport, and in keeping on topic... Peculiar path to a sport. Where did I state I had evidence? I believe I said... I know more than most. I believe there are more who KNOW more than me. And for those who told me the back door antics that affected my athletes... I am forever blessed that they cared enough to keep me out of the dark. So before you scratch my eyes out catlady, I Care about the kids. I care that they get the proper care more than 30 years overdue. I care that their parents finally feel their investments paid off. I want them set on the path to academic excellence while playing their sport. And for all of these reasons I am GUILTY as charged.

While I think the article is interesting, there's nothing really peculiar about its path from a business standpoint. To quote the article on Jeff Webb's thoughts on the decision, "a monumental milestone for cheerleading" and "the culmination of my life's work". The difference between the "board" and the boardroom, is it becomes about federal, state, and city laws, regulations, liability, safety, growth potential/ceilings and how things like new regulations in healthcare and medical discoveries become obstacles blocking goals and effecting profit margins. The difference between the board and the boardroom is trying to get several organizations to mirror and sync to the needs of each other and to have the funding, legal, and cooperation to achieve that goal. My guess is people weren't run off for stating the obvious, my guess is they were run off for naming those they felt were the villains and saints in business.

I am amazed at the puffery in light of the truth. Had the path resembled the road less traveled I might agree but I know more than most.

Let's recap, I originally stated I don't think anything is that peculiar from a business standpoint. You come back with "I'm amazed at the puffery in light of the truth" and "I know more than most." I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me but, don't be surprised if you post articles on the NHL and ask me questions and I actually respond. By the way you liked my post where I answered your question on PG & E, I'll take that as a mistake. Cue the removal in 3, 2, 1....

@SharkDad No one is going to dispute the history of Varsity, cheer and stunt. I'm just trying to understand this post and some of the others from a very fundamental standpoint and that is: What is it you all want to happen? Are there investors, or laws, that can actually make it happen?
 
Industry professionals risk retribution for speaking out against the practices I outlined.

Many would argue that past decisions on the direction of the industry suggest that safety and athlete concerns are not the #1 driver of those decisions.

To answer your question if people want this to be a youth sport that acts in the best interests of the kids they should take control of it as a sport and have their governing "federation" be run by the members (participants) of the federation not the businesses that profit from it.

That's just my take from the standpoint of a true organizational leadership approach.
 
To answer your question if people want this to be a youth sport that acts in the best interests of the kids they should take control of it as a sport and have their governing "federation" be run by the members (participants) of the federation not the businesses that profit from it.

That's just my take from the standpoint of a true organizational leadership approach.

I'm asking because, I truly don't know, how would participants gain control? Are there examples in sports where an industry has owned the governing body and eventually relinquished it to its members? NASCAR (France family) is the only sport I can think of off of the top of my head that owns and operates the governing body along with controlling the ISC (ownership and management of Indy and NASCAR race tracks) and IMSA. But, they haven't relinquished it, nor can I think of a reason why they would want to or have to. The ISC's competitors have filed many anti-trust suits against them but, as of yet have not won. Granted, I'm talking adults versus kids but, the interest in safety versus profit would be very similar. Again, I'm not trying to argue, I'm just trying to find out if there another sport where control has been relinquished, why, and how.
 
I don't think you can compare a professional sport with a youth sport.

Youth football, youth baseball, youth basketball, soccer, hockey, gymnastics, etc. These are youth sports with standardized safety rules, competition systems, judging/refereeing systems, etc.there is influence by various companies that provide products that support the sport (Ridell, Nike, etc.)but by and large the governing bodies have the youth participant safety as the main driving factor for decisions.

Cheer seems perfectly content to buck that trend.
 
Back