- Dec 29, 2010
- 1,255
- 2,397
I would point the same is done with special teams in football. It is one of the least worked on parts, but it can be game changing. The more equal part intricacies in cheer the harder it makes it. I point to the winter Olympics where the american won Gold. He didn't have a quad... but he worked the other parts of the scoresheet and won. Why should such a small part of a routine determine the winner? Why should 30 seconds of stunting determine the better team? Why even do the other 2:00 minutes? Why not make it hard as heck and the full 2:30 matter? There are so many growing pains that cheer is going through that we could look at gymnastics AND ice skating and take a lot of guidance from.
Exactly. Otherwise why not just call it stunting and tumbling and be done with it?
It's not just that we're nowhere near a universal scoring rubric - it's that there isn't even consensus on what the components of the scoring rubric would be and how they should be weighted. It's like saying that football makes field goals worth 3 points one year, 5 points the next year, and then removes them altogether the year following.