Where Competitive Cheer Stands According to Title IX expert & Attorney

Welcome to our Cheerleading Community

Members see FEWER ads... join today!

No, I have never been an expert witness against Varsity Brands. And by writing online I can be questioned under oath the next time I am on a case. I have been on the side of plaintiffs (injured cheerleaders) and coaches/universities. I am an advocate for youth sport safety and my agenda is to have national guidelines for youth sport safety.

Did you hear about our work with the leaders of the Congressional Sports Caucus and the Government Accountability Office investigation on catastrophic sports injuries?

I am willing to answer any question, any time, any where about cheer, NCSF, so called "angles or beef", feel free to call me 1-800-596-7860 ext 301 or email [email protected] or PM or post publicly.

Thanks for asking, I really appreciate it and thank you so much for giving me an opportunity to clarify some misinformation that may have caused confusion.

That's cool, thanx for clearing that up, I do have 1 more question. Have you ever been involved with any cases or lawsuits for cheerleaders against Varsity Brands? If so, how many?
 
I really can understand why Jeff Webb made the testimony he did, though I don't think it was a wise business decision on his part to do so. Cheerleaders, coaches, owners, etc. want to be recognized for the hard work they do, I believe that Jeff Webb recognizes that and truly acknowledges competitive cheerleaders as athletes. However, I think Title IX's reservation is a lot deeper than just a title or recognition of cheerleading as a sport. As I understand it (and I am in no way affiliated with Title IX) Schools are obligataed to provide equal athletic opportunities to males and females through Title IX, if cheerleading is deemed a sport, as opposed to expanding their athletic programs and truly giving more options to girls, schools can choose to make their existing cheerleading programs "sports" meaning that 40+ girls will be counted as athletes even if they are just crowdleaders or pom shakers which means 40+ girls wont get the opportunity to participate in true athletic activity (ie the vollyball players) I definitely stand by the fact that competitive cheer, like what is done at University of Maryland, is a sport and should be recognized as such and no one even the Title IX supporters (that I am aware of) have debated that fact or accused the University of any kind of violations, however this type of "cheerleading" is not practiced by a large majority of universities, and I think Title IX wants to protect the interest of the students across the country by not giving an open door by saying all cheerleading teams can be classified as sports team. Their argument has never been that no cheer programs should be classified as sports but that there are not enough to label the practice as a whole. I believe wholeheartedly that what my allstar kids do is a sport, however, if my local highschool where the cheerleaders don't tumble or condition, and can barely even execute jumps, and are coached by inexperienced teachers told me they wanted to cut girls basketball and label cheerleading a sport I think I would be ok with saying that what they do as cheerleaders is not a sport and should not take the place of basketball.
In summary, I do not think school cheerleading has gotten to the point where they can blanketly say it is a sport. Allstar cheerleading across the board is a sport, some schools have "sport cheerleaders" (maybe they should adopt the stunt and tumble name) but enough of them do not to say all cheer teams should be considered sports. I think it should be left to a school by school basis, and once it grows and more schools adopt cheer as an official varsity sport we may reach the point where we can say cheerleading as a whole is a sport.
Let me also say that I do not know anything about QU cheerleading program and am in no way saying what they do is not sport, if they have competitive teams that compete only and train for an extended season then the university is correct to label them a sport.
 
So let's say they made 'cheerleading' a sport. Because the case was about whether all cheerleading was a sport(and as discussed earlier the word cheerleading is too broad and I'm starting to believe the word means more sidelines than the sport), would that make non-competitive schools a sport under title IX as well?
 
I am an expert witness for cheer and you are not demanded to appear in court, you are hired or selected by either the plaintiffs or the defendants. Also, Jeff is not a Title IX expert. He was an expert for why cheerleading is not a sport. The courts did not allow his testimony on Title IX or collegiate sport governance. Expert witnesses must be named by both parties 75 days before trial. Experts give a written opinion and are normally deposed before trial. As an expert you choose to be on a case because your expertise will help that side win. So you are saying he would have been wrong to help the NCSTA/Quinnipiac and had no choice but to prove cheer isn't a sport? I am really confused.
I don't know enough about this particular case to give much of an opinion of the validity of his testimony. My point was that if he believed that the specific definition of "sport" as was being used in this case didn't apply to the "cheerleading" as was being done by the squad involved, then his testimony was probably warranted. I have met Jeff W. a few times, and nothing that I have seen would suggest that he would deliberately lie under oath for his own business purposes. I certainly don't always agree with him or like everything that Varsity does for that matter, but I do feel that, like most event producers, coaches, parents, etc. he tries to do what he believes is best for the cheer athletes out there.

That will not likely be a popular opinion here, but knowing many of the main event producers, I really don't see them as the evil, money-grubbing, corporate robber-barons that they are often made out to be. It is much easier to stereotype them as being the big "opponents" of the everyday cheerleader, but the vast majority genuinely care about the athletes at their events and make decisions in their best interest.

To me, we really can't go forward with the discussion until we agree on a definition of the word "sport". Does someone have access to what the Title IX requirements are for determining what are sports?
 
Not neccesarily but it would mean that schools could declare their cheer program a sport (even if it really shouldnt be) and save money by not implementing new athletic programs to meet Title IX regulations, technically it wouldnt qualify but there are so many schools not in compliance even now so would that really be regulated? The same could be said for basketball, maybe a team doesnt actually have a basketball team that competes a regular season yet they still count them towards their Title IX compliance but the likelyhood of this is a lot smaller in basketball because the vast majority of schools that have varsity basketball teams will definitely compete. It just wouldnt be safe to say the same about cheer now if there were hundreds of colleges with competition only teams then they would have a more pressing argument. JMO
 
That's cool, thanx for clearing that up, I do have 1 more question. Have you ever been involved with any cases or lawsuits for cheerleaders against Varsity Brands? If so, how many?

Zero, I have never been an expert witness in any cases or lawsuits against Varsity Brands.
 
That's cool, thanx for clearing that up, I do have 1 more question. Have you ever been involved with any cases or lawsuits for cheerleaders against Varsity Brands? If so, how many?

Zero, I have never been an expert witness in any cases or lawsuits against Varsity Brands.

I don't think he asked about being an expert witness.
 
So let's say they made 'cheerleading' a sport. Because the case was about whether all cheerleading was a sport(and as discussed earlier the word cheerleading is too broad and I'm starting to believe the word means more sidelines than the sport), would that make non-competitive schools a sport under title IX as well?

The case was about competitive cheer teams, not whether all cheerleading was a sport. Triable issues must apply to the specifics of the case not generalities or red herrings put out by the plaintiffs.
 
Zero, I have never been an expert witness in any cases or lawsuits against Varsity Brands.

That's not what I asked...I'll ask again..Have you ever been involved in a Lawsuit with anyone who has sued Varsity Brands? Like, any cheerleader or lawsuit from a school, etc, where you testified against Varsity? Any cases?
 
The case was about competitive cheer teams, not whether all cheerleading was a sport. Triable issues must apply to the specifics of the case not generalities or red herrings put out by the plaintiffs.

A. What do you mean plaintiffs and red herrings?

B. I'm basing this off the title ix blog YOU posted. It said confusion on the name cheer. That's why I asked. There is likevthree huge posts we all talked about the name cheerleading being one of the issues.
 
I don't think he asked about being an expert witness.

What is he asking then? I am not an attorney or party to any action. Did I know about any cases involving Varsity? Yes. Was I involved no. I have read over 200 cheerleading injury cases and the NCSF has provided services to injured cheerleader's families. Of the cases I have read that stick out that Varsity was a party to the action: a girl who was paralyzed at Varsity cheer camp in Utah, a serious orthopedic injury to a female in Virginia and the wrongful death case in MA.

Is that plain enough?
 
What is he asking then? I am not an attorney or party to any action. Did I know about any cases involving Varsity? Yes. Was I involved no. I have read over 200 cheerleading injury cases and the NCSF has provided services to injured cheerleader's families. Of the cases I have read that stick out that Varsity was a party to the action: a girl who was paralyzed at Varsity cheer camp in Utah, a serious orthopedic injury to a female in Virginia and the wrongful death case in MA.

Is that plain enough?

I guess I've heard some incorrect stories, thanx for clearing it up. After I saw you on the Penn & Teller show the other day, I started to look at your posts. On the TV show, you appear as if you really have it out for Varsity Brands. Just appeared that way on the show, whether it's true or not. Then after going back and reading your posts, it also seems that way. So, from the posts and the show, It just seems like something is bothering you, or something rubs you the wrong way about Varsity. I mean we are all a product of our past experiences. Did something happen to you in this industry with them?
 
A. What do you mean plaintiffs and red herrings?

B. I'm basing this off the title ix blog YOU posted. It said confusion on the name cheer. That's why I asked. There is likevthree huge posts we all talked about the name cheerleading being one of the issues.

It is an issue because everyone including the plaintiffs, media, attorneys ect keep referring to cheerleading. However, the case is about cheer.

I posted the Title IX blog because I found it fascinating that the one of the leaders of Title IX who has fought for many years to keep cheer no matter what the form from being a part of Title IX had such great things to say about someone who is the CEO of cheer company including USA Cheer that wants it to be a sport. Collegiate competition certainly plays a role in developing Olympic sports and being a NCAA sport would be a huge step for cheer in the Olympics quest.

Keep in mind the Amicus Brief is NOT nuetral. It is an additional argument for the plaintiffs. Her blog is not nuetral, therefore they will use cheerleading as much as possible so that the Quinnipiac case becomes blurred rather than focused on the program in question: competitive cheer

Does that make sense?
 
Yes it does. But chatting about it in other threads we keep talking about (theoretically) getting rid of all references to cheerleading and cheer because then there would be no reservations. If someone can point at sidelines and say "isn't that cheer?" and the answer is yes then that's a problem. I'm not sure HOW to do it or name it but the sport we do isn't cheer or cheerleading. It comes from cheerleading or cheer, but isn't cheer or cheerleading because it's a sport. That's the semantic issue I personally see.

So if I say I'm a cheerleader or cheer person any layman will say "oh, like at a football game" and I've already fallen to a stereotype because our sport won't get past the word cheer. Shed the word and you CANT be labeled the same as a sideline activity.
 
Back