All-Star Small Gym But Not "small Gym"

[Valvalmom]

After another long weekend at a "Nationals" competition, I'm increasingly more frustrated. as a small gym that doesn't qualify as a "small gym," how do we compete against huge mega-corporations? Our cheerleaders can't try out for the elite senior teams when we may only have enough age appropriate kids for one senior team. It's near impossible to have truly on level teams because to do so would move some kids down a level (sometimes 2) and you risk upsetting the kids (well let's face it, more so the parents) enough that they quit. But more them up and you create a " below level" team. I just feel that instead of "small gym" there be a "large gym." Now of course, we can keep our competitions to very small events, but that's no fun (and why should we have to)?

Just wondering if anyone else is stuck in "not small enough" purgatory and has some advice.
Thanks!!!!

 

[JulieP]

After another long weekend at a "Nationals" competition, I'm increasingly more frustrated. as a small gym that doesn't qualify as a "small gym," how do we compete against huge mega-corporations? Our cheerleaders can't try out for the elite senior teams when we may only have enough age appropriate kids for one senior team. It's near impossible to have truly on level teams because to do so would move some kids down a level (sometimes 2) and you risk upsetting the kids (well let's face it, more so the parents) enough that they quit. But more them up and you create a " below level" team. I just feel that instead of "small gym" there be a "large gym." Now of course, we can keep our competitions to very small events, but that's no fun (and why should we have to)?

Just wondering if anyone else is stuck in "not small enough" purgatory and has some advice.
Thanks!!!!

Not sure on the exact circumstances of your gym size, but we have found that making smaller, level-appropriate teams works best for us. I have 10 on my J2 and 11 on my S4. There are 3 crossovers between the two teams. I think most gyms would make a team of 18 and maybe go level 3, but inevitably I would have 7 kids on that team that would be struggling to keep up and 11 kids that were frustrated with the 7. I know that staffing and gym costs make this impossible sometimes, but I am just throwing it out there as something that worked for us.

 

[CoachTamara]

I guess I don't understand how if you aren't a small gym you cannot make level appropriate teams... That means you have over 75 kids. That gives you a ton of wiggle room as far as making large teams that can hide others that are lacking skills, or small teams that are correctly leveled.
If you can't hang with big gyms, I think you have to look at the why, not blame it on being a small gym. We have both beat and been beat by large gyms, and I don't blame it on our size. I blame it on either my kids not having enough skills to max out, making mistakes, or me simply not giving them a routine that is good enough to beat that routine. All of those are my fault as a coach, NOT the fault of my gym being small.

 

[cupieqt]

^yep
What she said.

 

[DaniV]

I thought "small gym" meant 3 or less teams? Or does each EP have their own classification for makes a gym a "small gym"?

 

[CoachTamara]

I thought "small gym" meant 3 or less teams? Or does each EP have their own classification for makes a gym a "small gym"?

Small gym is 75 kids or less, not counting special needs teams or dance. In Texas, at most competitions EPs use 125 I believe.

 

[NEliteSteven]

I don't understand. We have between 80-85 kids and we've won in small gym, and we've been pretty successful and have been winning as a "large" gym. It's all about team placement.

 

[Magnolia]

That is because your program is one of the best! Truly always very impressed with your teams - always amazing, even when fielding very small teams.

 

[JulieP]

Preach CoachTamara and NEliteSteven. Team placements, coaching, and a number of other factors make a bigger difference than all this big gym v. small gym stuff. I like competing against the big dogs, but that's just me. I'd rather take 4th out of 10 in a stacked division with a bunch of big gyms than 1st out of 3 in the small gym division. Once again, that's my personal preference.

I just had two more things to add:

1. You have to measure your team's success off what your team does. I cannot waste my time wondering what the gym down the road does. In short, it doesn't change the way that I coach my teams, and it only takes my attention off my team which only helps said gym down the road.
2. What's with this "everyone gets to win" mentality nowadays? We already split into levels, team sizes, and gym sizes, which is far more than what they did when I was a kid and they split only by age. How many more breakdowns can there be?

 

[dawgshow]

JulieP you get a shimmy and a

 

[Valvalmom]

There is a big difference between a gym with enough kids to have a youth, jr, and sr level 3 team vs a gym that has a handful of level 3 kids that span the age divisions. If you take out our tiny and large mini 1 teams, we have 5 small teams, and that's with a handful of crossovers. Assuming those 70 or so kids are a microcosm of the cheer world and represent a variety of ages and abilities, what's the best thing to do with them? Age appropriate leveling or a bunch of senior teams for each level? I honestly think there are too many levels out there.

And I don't think it's an "everyone deserves to win" mentality so much as an "everyone deserves to be competitive" mentality. Some days I feel like what's the point of putting out all the money for this sport when it feels that if you don't stack your teams with higher level crossovers or use maxed out ages with baby fliers, you can't be competitive. Do you have to sell your soul to the devil for a chance to win?

 

[NEliteSteven]

Valvalmom Less levels would probably mean your team will have an even smaller shot at being competitive. You have to go by level, or you'll never score well.

 

[NEliteSteven]

Also, if the coaching is sub-par, they probably will never be successful. I see so many high school teams around here with raw talent, but the coaches are random girls that just cheered sideline and graduated and now are magically qualified to coach comp. Then they do terribly because the coach doesn't know what she's doing. Woof.

 

[DaniV]

I read somewhere on here that at tryouts all the kids are placed into age-level folders and then from there separated into what level tumbling they have. Whatever falls into the majority category (75% or higher) is what the team is placed at level-wise. Obviously some kids will be shifted around to make sure there are full stunt groups and honor special requests.

I coach at a small gym that follows a similar principle. We have 59 athletes and 5 teams (Mini 1, Youth 1, Junior 2, Sr 2, and Sr3). Our teams that have done the best are the smaller teams that are maxed out tumbling wise and the stunting fell in to place. My youth 1 team has 8 kids on it, all of which who have tumble, and is undeafeated. We have beat some of the "larger" big name gyms in our area but we are still struggling with some of our teams not being 100% competitive with the other gyms. Now, I am not saying that it is the "small gym" mentality that is hurting us but it is our coaching and the athletes skill level that just isn't up tehre with the other teams yet. We have alot of new kids coming in to the program and it takes awhile to build up their skill level since they haven't been with the program for years and years.

I would say the best advice would be to base your team level off of what the majority of athletes can tumble at (stunting in consideration for the level 3 or higher levels) and then go from there. Work on maxing out the score sheet where you can, highlighting what you're good at, and CLEAN CLEAN CLEAN.

Good luck!

 

[12stepCheermom]

I know our most successful team is our mini 1, with 10 kids on it. They have racked up some wins this year whereas our older teams (with skills and crossovers) have not. They have squad tumbling as a start.

I have come to believe you're only going to be competitive if you have squad tumbling at the beginning of the season (not something you're working to get to by the end if the season).

Our J4 has been the most competitive (not meaning they win necessarily, but able to hang with the big dogs) and when that team was built, all but about 5-6ish had lv4 tumbling. That number has worked down to 2-3, and probably 8-10ish kids have since developed a full and probably 5-7 more are working on fulls.

They'd never be competitive at level 5 because well less than half could throw that skill in competition but I think the more kids you have that have level appropriate skills and are working up = success.

More often I see teams put together where kids are having to work just to reach the level they're already on. Those are the ones that aren't as successful In either scoring ranges or technique IMO.

The key is convincing a kid or a parent to be a level "under" the skill their throwing if they're one of a small number at that level. Personally both of mine are two that have developed a full during the season. I'm NOT chomping at the bit for them to be level 5 or for our team to compete up a level. I'd rather they stay where they are and have some success than move up to where 1/3 of the team has the skill and get creamed. Been there, done that. I think part of the reason so many have gained new skills is that there IS no pressure to get the skill...they don't need it at level four so no kids or parents are freaking out that Sally doesn't have it yet and pressuring her into a mental block.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is its about how the teams are built, not how many kids you have. Saw a mini 1 with FIVE kids on it last year and they won (in divisions with 8-10 competitors) EVERY TIME. Basically it was squad specialty passes and on a ratio score sheet, that will compete better than a large team where only 70% of the kids have the skill