All-Star New Basket Rules For College Cheer Are Making A Lot Of People Angry...

[ScottyB]

Right, I was using the fact that they did away with them as a logical reason why they wouldn't go back in that direction. I honestly was not sure as to why. Skills taping, as it was, was a farce. It would be an equal farce in the context in which it was presented.

Edited to address the second part of your post:

I think most athletic directors would tell you that they would rather do away with cheerleading entirely than deal with it at that level. There's no income from cheer. As good as the University of Kentucky cheerleading program is, they're not the ones that are filling Rupp Arena on a nightly basis. I'm not saying that there isn't millions of dollars floating around in college athletics, but it's not there because of the cheer programs. Employees of state colleges in Kentucky have salaries that are publicly available on the state government website. The only program who's college is paying a full time salary is Morehead State, and even that wouldn't be considered a full-time salary in any other part of the world than the small town of Morehead.

There are some spirit coordinator/coach roles that pay a "full time" salary. Granted most are pitiful.

While yes cheer won't make income, neither will rowing (money pit), or tennis (more money), or other non rev college sports. A university supporting their cheer squad should be a priority. This pic of mine on here that is my avatar, was printed in several athletic dept docs, two specific for donors. Usually I went to as many appearances each week as we had games, where we would take pics with fans and the mascots or perform or mingle and add to the spirit. Occasionally had to sing the alma mater accapella, no thanks on repeating that lol.

So much more than just holding signs at games and competing once a year. And if colleges want athletic looking cheerleaders, they need to be able to do skills within the sport, and to encourage skills and athleticism, a safety support system is needed from the school.

Key is, telling an AD they need to up the cheer budget 300% for safety and training, is laughable in most cases. And that's what sucks, still not being taken seriously.

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

There are some spirit coordinator/coach roles that pay a "full time" salary. Granted most are pitiful.

While yes cheer won't make income, neither will rowing (money pit), or tennis (more money), or other non rev college sports. A university supporting their cheer squad should be a priority. This pic of mine on here that is my avatar, was printed in several athletic dept docs, two specific for donors. Usually I went to as many appearances each week as we had games, where we would take pics with fans and the mascots or perform or mingle and add to the spirit. Occasionally had to sing the alma mater accapella, no thanks on repeating that lol.

So much more than just holding signs at games and competing once a year. And if colleges want athletic looking cheerleaders, they need to be able to do skills within the sport, and to encourage skills and athleticism, a safety support system is needed from the school.

Key is, telling an AD they need to up the cheer budget 300% for safety and training, is laughable in most cases. And that's what sucks, still not being taken seriously.

I agree with you.

I just don’t see it happening anytime soon.

We do too much to tarnish our own reputation. Anyone remember “failcheervids” on instagram? Anyone ever had a tragic-appearing skill videoed at practice make it onto social media for a good laugh? Ever had a kid roll an ankle and say, can you go one more and then be done? Ever see a uniform malfunction on stage (admittedly, I haven’t in college cheer, but multiple times in all stars)?

We post these videos and give them 40 million views and 2000 comments filled with laughing emojis like this stuff is funny. Never mind that while we are seeing these disasters as another source of entertainment and sharing them with the world, a real athlete is looking at the MRI of their newly blown ACL wondering if their career in professional sports is at jeopardy.

Until we experience a full-blown culture change within our own industry/activity that demonstrates some sense of self respect across the board, we neither deserve, nor will we get, respect from anyone else.

 

[ScottyB]

I agree with you.

I just don’t see it happening anytime soon.

We do too much to tarnish our own reputation. Anyone remember “failcheervids” on instagram? Anyone ever had a tragic-appearing skill videoed at practice make it onto social media for a good laugh? Ever had a kid roll an ankle and say, can you go one more and then be done? Ever see a uniform malfunction on stage (admittedly, I haven’t in college cheer, but multiple times in all stars)?

We post these videos and give them 40 million views and 2000 comments filled with laughing emojis like this stuff is funny. Never mind that while we are seeing these disasters as another source of entertainment and sharing them with the world, a real athlete is looking at the MRI of their newly blown ACL wondering if their career in professional sports is at jeopardy.

Until we experience a full-blown culture change within our own industry/activity that demonstrates some sense of self respect across the board, we neither deserve, nor will we get, respect from anyone else.

100% we all have to lift each other and our standards up if we want to be taken seriously.

(here in CO we have been dealing with the fall out of that splits PR nightmare for that one coach, waiting to hear if we have added education reqs or not uhhh - but in the mean time we all here are having to put out the good press to ensure no one hammers us later)

 

[Ems]

I'm going to come at this one just to see your response.

If you played softball would you be insulted at the idea of wearing a face mask as a pitcher because the male baseball pitchers aren't required to wear one?

Both rules are in place to ensure the safety of athletes

Both rules are different based on gender

Softball players played for years without a facemask before someone decided that it needed to be a requirement. In Kentucky, they've made an even newer requirement that corner infielders must do the same.

The implication could be made that male baseball players are not required to wear the face mask because they are athletically developed enough to protect themselves from a hard hit line drive back up the box while the females are not.

Yet, I don't hear any softball players complaining about being insulted by being told to put on a face mask. They apparently value their health and well-being over their pride. In fact, before the rule about corner infielders was put in place for the 2018-2019 season, the corner infielders at the high school where I work voluntarily chose to wear them. This came about because an infielder in Kentucky this year was almost killed. She was a varsity-level athlete on a competitive team. She had been well-trained to make that play. Is that what it's going to take in cheerleading for athletes to start accepting rules? Do we have to wait for UK, Morehead, U of L, Oklahoma State, etc has a near-death experience before we decide...maybe this isn't a good idea?

To me, Putting on a face mask isn’t the same as being told you cannot do something but your male counterparts can.

 

[ScottyB]

To me, Putting on a face mask isn’t the same as being told you cannot do something but your male counterparts can.

Softball.. (ball, field, type of pitch [which btw is hard to hit off for many sandlot type athletes]) basketball.. (smaller ball, different 3 point line, shot clock)

Two very mainstream sport examples where the function of the sport is fundamentally different for the female version than the version with the males.

I get it that many of you very strong women feel insulted, I would be too. But this is not an attack on you and your work ethic, this is a change from an overarching safety and risk management organization that puts their stamp of approval and safety on the national competitions. If an athlete gets hurt at a competition doing some skill that is known to be dangerous, that put UCA/NCA/Varsity/AACCA at a liability.

 

[Ems]

I get it that many of you very strong women feel insulted, I would be too. But this is not an attack on you and your work ethic, this is a change from an overarching safety and risk management organization that puts their stamp of approval and safety on the national competitions. If an athlete gets hurt at a competition doing some skill that is known to be dangerous, that put UCA/NCA/Varsity/AACCA at a liability.

I understand there reasoning, I know it’s not a personal attack on the women who are capable of throwing the baskets. But the limitations based on gender still stings.

 

[cheertired]

Just my two-cents. I've been retired from college cheer for two years and regularly flew baskets.

Now, my college was a smaller D3 coed program with little to no funding. We had a great coach but didn't draw in massive amounts of talent like a strong D1 team would.

In my experience, 90 percent of the guys we pulled to be on the team had NEVER cheered before. Like, ever. We recruited them during fundraisers and campus events and sucked them in.

As a (former) flyer, I'd often have to fly on the newbie guys. Those baskets has tremendous power, but teaching a new boy the technique to throw, spot and catch a girl was the catch-22.

In my experience, I always felt SIGNIFICANTLY more comfortable throwing elite level baskets on a group of powerhouse females who could out-technique anyone else in the program vs. newbie male bases/backs.

I (and my coaches) knew my limits with all-girl baskets, but in general, the height on the female basket was roughly the same as the male basket due to the sheer amount of technique these girls had.

The gendered bias in this rule is what frustrates me the most.

 

[tojofasho]

Softball.. (ball, field, type of pitch [which btw is hard to hit off for many sandlot type athletes]) basketball.. (smaller ball, different 3 point line, shot clock)

Two very mainstream sport examples where the function of the sport is fundamentally different for the female version than the version with the males.

I haven't really commented too much on this topic because I personally am thrilled to see baskets on the way out (sorry everybody who disagrees, but I'm freaking ecstatic). However, like many others on here, the gender differentiation is the issue that I see, partially from offense (I cannot be unbiased, obviously), but also there is no comparison. There are very few truly coed sports out there to use as comparison, and the ones you listed are NOT coed. They are entirely different sports (softball vs. baseball) or played by entirely one-gendered teams (men's vs. women's basketball). The only one I can think of as truly being comparable is coed softball, which my brother participates in. He plays on the same field as his female teammates, he hits the same ball as his female teammates, and he throws pitches the same way as his female teammates. IF there was no coed cheer, just all-male and all-female, I could see them having different sets of rules. As it stands, though, all these athletes work together on the same mat, on the same TEAM, and therefore should be able to throw the same skills.

Normally I agree with you 100% Scotty because let's be honest, you're probably one of the more knowledgeable people in this board in terms of everything cheer related, but on this specific point I have to disagree. If men and women were both playing baseball/basketball/softball TOGETHER and switching out balls, field size, type of pitch, shot clock, etc., then you'd have a comparison. But they're set up as completely different, non-coed sports. And the coed versions don't have different rules for men and women, because it would be a logistical nightmare to try and change the rules depending on if it was a man or woman up at bat.

Now whether the rules should include anyone doing flipping and twisting baskets is another story, because as someone who got hit in the face multiple times on full twist baskets, I am not a fan and hate them with every fiber of my being. But if they're going to continue to exist in the cheer world, they should exist for both men and women, with no weird gender rules separating who can and cannot do something.

 

[catlady]

I haven't really commented too much on this topic because I personally am thrilled to see baskets on the way out (sorry everybody who disagrees, but I'm freaking ecstatic). However, like many others on here, the gender differentiation is the issue that I see, partially from offense (I cannot be unbiased, obviously), but also there is no comparison. There are very few truly coed sports out there to use as comparison, and the ones you listed are NOT coed. They are entirely different sports (softball vs. baseball) or played by entirely one-gendered teams (men's vs. women's basketball). The only one I can think of as truly being comparable is coed softball, which my brother participates in. He plays on the same field as his female teammates, he hits the same ball as his female teammates, and he throws pitches the same way as his female teammates. IF there was no coed cheer, just all-male and all-female, I could see them having different sets of rules. As it stands, though, all these athletes work together on the same mat, on the same TEAM, and therefore should be able to throw the same skills.

Normally I agree with you 100% Scotty because let's be honest, you're probably one of the more knowledgeable people in this board in terms of everything cheer related, but on this specific point I have to disagree. If men and women were both playing baseball/basketball/softball TOGETHER and switching out balls, field size, type of pitch, shot clock, etc., then you'd have a comparison. But they're set up as completely different, non-coed sports. And the coed versions don't have different rules for men and women, because it would be a logistical nightmare to try and change the rules depending on if it was a man or woman up at bat.

Now whether the rules should include anyone doing flipping and twisting baskets is another story, because as someone who got hit in the face multiple times on full twist baskets, I am not a fan and hate them with every fiber of my being. But if they're going to continue to exist in the cheer world, they should exist for both men and women, with no weird gender rules separating who can and cannot do something.

It has nothing to do with strength and everything to do with estrogen and relaxin (ETA). What goes up, must come down with incredible force on the joints. Women are more susceptible to joint injury because of joint laxity and flexibility, generally a good thing except when it comes to impact.

 

[quitthedrama]

I get it that many of you very strong women feel insulted, I would be too. But this is not an attack on you and your work ethic, this is a change from an overarching safety and risk management organization that puts their stamp of approval and safety on the national competitions. If an athlete gets hurt at a competition doing some skill that is known to be dangerous, that put UCA/NCA/Varsity/AACCA at a liability.

Really, this is the biggest reason for the change. Insurance costs and liability. $$$$$ as always is the basis for most of the changes in this industry.

 

[ScottyB]

I haven't really commented too much on this topic because I personally am thrilled to see baskets on the way out (sorry everybody who disagrees, but I'm freaking ecstatic). However, like many others on here, the gender differentiation is the issue that I see, partially from offense (I cannot be unbiased, obviously), but also there is no comparison. There are very few truly coed sports out there to use as comparison, and the ones you listed are NOT coed. They are entirely different sports (softball vs. baseball) or played by entirely one-gendered teams (men's vs. women's basketball). The only one I can think of as truly being comparable is coed softball, which my brother participates in. He plays on the same field as his female teammates, he hits the same ball as his female teammates, and he throws pitches the same way as his female teammates. IF there was no coed cheer, just all-male and all-female, I could see them having different sets of rules. As it stands, though, all these athletes work together on the same mat, on the same TEAM, and therefore should be able to throw the same skills.

Normally I agree with you 100% Scotty because let's be honest, you're probably one of the more knowledgeable people in this board in terms of everything cheer related, but on this specific point I have to disagree. If men and women were both playing baseball/basketball/softball TOGETHER and switching out balls, field size, type of pitch, shot clock, etc., then you'd have a comparison. But they're set up as completely different, non-coed sports. And the coed versions don't have different rules for men and women, because it would be a logistical nightmare to try and change the rules depending on if it was a man or woman up at bat.

Now whether the rules should include anyone doing flipping and twisting baskets is another story, because as someone who got hit in the face multiple times on full twist baskets, I am not a fan and hate them with every fiber of my being. But if they're going to continue to exist in the cheer world, they should exist for both men and women, with no weird gender rules separating who can and cannot do something.

Fair to disagree! (And yay for agreeing that baskets are sliding to the wayside)

My only point in reply is that at this point coed cheer is separate from all girl (they aren't switching between all girl skills and coed skills in a coed routine like you mention swapping balls and field etc - it's coed stunts, pyramids, and baskets to the end without a dance like all girl has [UCA]), similar to how softball and baseball are different but similar, or how men's and women's bball are similar to almost 99%, but are ultimately separate sports. Just seems off to think that we can't have coed and all girl have slight variations based on squad composure for rules and safety.

Just my opinion of course as I was neither an all girl base in college nor am a college coach

(agreed there is no direct comparison, but comparisons about variations across competitive arenas provide good context)

 

[XtremeWpg]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but...

If everyone is up in arms about gender issues with these rules, why has no one mentioned that in all star (I know these rules aren't for all star), coed teams have a coed stunting requirement for quantity, all girl does not. How come no one was up in arms when that became a requirement? It's very close to the same thing, though not identical. Why did no one say "it's not fair that men have to partner stunt just because they may be stronger than the women". I get that this requirement isn't a limitation on a gender, but why are we only concerned about gender bias or discrimination (I think it's a huge leap to call the basket rules discrimination BTW, but I also work with cases with Human Rights Commission implications) when we're limiting something? How are we not upset when we tell coed teams you *must* partner stunt in order to get your quantity points?

Look, I hate baskets. I have always hated them. I don't care if they're perfectly executed a la Team USA. They terrify me because I've seen entirely too many go wrong, thankfully none resulting in major injury, but they 100% could have. We could eliminate them fully and I'd be a happy camper. I loved my last 3 years coaching level 1 because I didn't have to deal with them!

ETA-
I'd be interested to know the opinions of the people who dislike that all girl has a lower difficulty level than coed when it comes to physical fitness testing requirements where women have a lower/lesser/easier standard than men. Ie- my husbands fire dept. Women's physical requirement is about 70% of the mens in terms of weight and have additional time added to complete the same task at lower weight.

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but...

If everyone is up in arms about gender issues with these rules, why has no one mentioned that in all star (I know these rules aren't for all star), coed teams have a coed stunting requirement for quantity, all girl does not. How come no one was up in arms when that became a requirement? It's very close to the same thing, though not identical. Why did no one say "it's not fair that men have to partner stunt just because they may be stronger than the women". I get that this requirement isn't a limitation on a gender, but why are we only concerned about gender bias or discrimination (I think it's a huge leap to call the basket rules discrimination BTW, but I also work with cases with Human Rights Commission implications) when we're limiting something? How are we not upset when we tell coed teams you *must* partner stunt in order to get your quantity points?

Look, I hate baskets. I have always hated them. I don't care if they're perfectly executed a la Team USA. They terrify me because I've seen entirely too many go wrong, thankfully none resulting in major injury, but they 100% could have. We could eliminate them fully and I'd be a happy camper. I loved my last 3 years coaching level 1 because I didn't have to deal with them!

ETA-
I'd be interested to know the opinions of the people who dislike that all girl has a lower difficulty level than coed when it comes to physical fitness testing requirements where women have a lower/lesser/easier standard than men. Ie- my husbands fire dept. Women's physical requirement is about 70% of the mens in terms of weight and have additional time added to complete the same task at lower weight.

I’ve been dying to say all of the above since the start of this thread, but knew it had to come from a female first. Thank you. I especially like the part about being hard-pressed to call this discrimination.

 

[XtremeWpg]

I’ve been dying to say all of the above since the start of this thread, but knew it had to come from a female first. Thank you. I especially like the part about being hard-pressed to call this discrimination.

When you refer employment issues to the Canadian Human Rights Commission a couple times a week, you start to learn and understand what true discrimination really is. Not being able to compete a layout full basket toss 100% doesn't qualify.

I'm pro equality for everything. I do think it's a little heavy handed to limit the all girl tosses more than the coed tosses, but I also know that throwing phrases like gender discrimination or bias around is dangerous because it diminishes what those things actually are.

 

[coachrah]

There are some spirit coordinator/coach roles that pay a "full time" salary. Granted most are pitiful.

While yes cheer won't make income, neither will rowing (money pit), or tennis (more money), or other non rev college sports. A university supporting their cheer squad should be a priority. This pic of mine on here that is my avatar, was printed in several athletic dept docs, two specific for donors. Usually I went to as many appearances each week as we had games, where we would take pics with fans and the mascots or perform or mingle and add to the spirit. Occasionally had to sing the alma mater accapella, no thanks on repeating that lol.

So much more than just holding signs at games and competing once a year. And if colleges want athletic looking cheerleaders, they need to be able to do skills within the sport, and to encourage skills and athleticism, a safety support system is needed from the school.

Key is, telling an AD they need to up the cheer budget 300% for safety and training, is laughable in most cases. And that's what sucks, still not being taken seriously.

Most sports are non revenue. Universities add sports to comply with Title IX and EADA reporting. There are 3 prongs to Title IX to effectively reach compliance in keeping with The Office of Civil Rights and the Department of Education. Adding a sport or full time coaching staff is more than just a salary at hand. There have been many cases where athletic directors have simply said, you do not need certain stunting, tossing and flipping skills to lead cheers. NCAA does not insure the practice for competition or competition itself. Most ADs are beginning to realize this AACCA, the originator of this rule maintains and has for decades that
cheerleading is not a sport and in fact wrote to the government to stop it from being considered as a sport. Varsity lobbied in California 2 years ago to keep “competitive cheer” from being a sport. Jeff Webb maintained competitive cheer had to have a different name to preserve the ambassador nature of cheerleading and that sideline cheer also competed and needed protection. I’m not sure upping the cheer budget for safety and training is laughable as much as practical from a budget mindset of a Board of Trustees who understand that certain uninsurable skills are not needed to lead the crowd. When a University commits to a sport several budget necessities come into play: scholarships, salaries, trainers, strength coaches, academic support, laundry services, facility practice space, nutritionists, sports psychologist etc. And so tell me again, how AACCA as a rule maker and the owner of the position paper that Cheer is not a sport is adding to safety when all of these benefits add to a safer experience? Oh it must be the rule that doing these skills on grass and rubberized track keep it safe...yup that’s it.