All-Star Can We Avoid Sandbagging Through The Athlete Tracking System?

5-6-7-8 said:

Sadly, one team I can think of that may be dangerously close to sandbagging IS small gym.

I understand a larger gym has more resources, but it comes down to the gym owners how they think is best to assign athletes to teams. And that's unfortunately the part that is hard to "police" since there aren't any rules to police.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

Click to expand...

I definitely don't think it's limited to large gyms. Though like you said, there are more resources to pull from. It's a hard call...do you want the easy win and a banner or do you want to challenge the athletes?

Say you're a really small gym with enough kids to make 1 junior team ( we will assume all are age appropriate). You have 20 kids... 3 1s, 5 2's, 4 3's, 5 4's and 3 5's....what team do you make? Once a relatively small gym factors in age differences, this is sometimes the scenario they are left with. Do you make an easy to win level 2? Do you challenge and go level 4? Or do you fear losing your potential future worlds winners and appease them with a level 5?

Unearthing this one. Anyone see the Spirit Sports tweet that linked over to the USASF athlete registration info.

Was usasf athlete registration voluntary last year for standard competitions? Now it looks to be mandatory, is that correct?

Outside of issuing registration numbers and uploading birth certificate, what other plans are there to use this system to the industry's benefit? Anyone know?

It appears to be a step in the right direction, just wondering if they're phasing in "teeth" to go with it.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

last season a "senior 3 coed" team got 1st place and grand champs... then at awards one of the people on that team decided to show off and throw a double full and double back, and a bunch of others threw fulls, standing fulls, etc. ugh

FutureWorldChamp__ said:

last season a "senior 3 coed" team got 1st place and grand champs... then at awards one of the people on that team decided to show off and throw a double full and double back, and a bunch of others threw fulls, standing fulls, etc. ugh

Click to expand...

But if that person was declared a level 4, then he would still be within the one level up or down proposed guideline. What is the incentive of being declared level 5, except to say you are declared level 5. If a team or individual wants to sandbag, they wont care about that.

Eliminating crossovers would eliminate this problem I know I know I know small gyms can't do it, I get it I get it. In my opinion I truly wish and INDUSTRY rule (I'm talking to you USASF) would be made so that this problem would die. I know crossovers is a necessary evil for the industry but as long as there are no boundaries then no one is truly "sandbagging".
The funny thing about crossovers is how different they are perceived at different places. Me, personally I HATE using crossovers. I've used them and probably have every year I've coached. MY justification is it's due to injury, last case scenario. I know gyms that promote double teaming and families that get upset if their kid isn't asked to double team. I'm not saying either is right or wrong. Under the current system (which basically doesn't exist) both are 100% legal so to argue any gym is doing anything wrong isn't fair. My opinion (even though I HATE crossovers) is as long as it is within the rules and is legal at that Event then I can't complain.

yojaehs said:

Eliminating crossovers would eliminate this problem I know I know I know small gyms can't do it, I get it I get it. In my opinion I truly wish and INDUSTRY rule (I'm talking to you USASF) would be made so that this problem would die. I know crossovers is a necessary evil for the industry but as long as there are no boundaries then no one is truly "sandbagging".
The funny thing about crossovers is how different they are perceived at different places. Me, personally I HATE using crossovers. I've used them and probably have every year I've coached. MY justification is it's due to injury, last case scenario. I know gyms that promote double teaming and families that get upset if their kid isn't asked to double team. I'm not saying either is right or wrong. Under the current system (which basically doesn't exist) both are 100% legal so to argue any gym is doing anything wrong isn't fair. My opinion (even though I HATE crossovers) is as long as it is within the rules and is legal at that Event then I can't complain.

Click to expand...

Can you tell us how you really feel?

NJ Coach said:

Can you tell us how you really feel?

Click to expand...

I guess I don't like crossovers? Lol. I understand some "need" them. My personal experience as a coach is its a pain in my ... Splitting practices, one team needs the kid when another team needs them. Splitting time. Running back and forth between warm ups and performances (don't even get me started on UCA and different venues) so all in all it's a pain for ME. I get many gyms structure their teams off of them so will we ever go back to no crossovers? I highly doubt it. I do wish a consistent standard would happen that all EP's had to abide by. EP's complain saying they don't want to limit them bc they will lose customers. NCA has arguably the strictest crossover rules in place. Since they began implementing it they have grown. Why this doesn't happen more often baffles me.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

yojaehs said:

Eliminating crossovers would eliminate this problem I know I know I know small gyms can't do it, I get it I get it. In my opinion I truly wish and INDUSTRY rule (I'm talking to you USASF) would be made so that this problem would die. I know crossovers is a necessary evil for the industry but as long as there are no boundaries then no one is truly "sandbagging".
The funny thing about crossovers is how different they are perceived at different places. Me, personally I HATE using crossovers. I've used them and probably have every year I've coached. MY justification is it's due to injury, last case scenario. I know gyms that promote double teaming and families that get upset if their kid isn't asked to double team. I'm not saying either is right or wrong. Under the current system (which basically doesn't exist) both are 100% legal so to argue any gym is doing anything wrong isn't fair. My opinion (even though I HATE crossovers) is as long as it is within the rules and is legal at that Event then I can't complain.

Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of what you say and I get heated every time this subject comes up. Crossovers themselves are not a bad thing, but the USASF rules as they stand now encourage the use of crossovers to sandbag. For the teams that have stayed level 1 for several years - how many of those kids are also competing for a higher level team? A couple of years ago an athlete who was last pass on a Worlds team competed on a junior 1 team along with several of his teammates - I can not think of another sport where this would be allowed. The solution can be VERY simple - particularly with athlete registration. No athlete can cross to a team more than 1 level up or down, so that even if an athlete is "credentialed" as a level 4, if they compete as a level 5 they can not compete as a level 3. I also am in favor of only 15% crossovers being allowed for any team. Despite an overwhelming response to place limits on crossovers at the last rules cycle one of the only things that was changed was going from crossing to unlimited teams to three teams. Unfortunately, the way USASF/Varsity is structured I don't see this changing - they have too much $ to lose. EPs (many owned by Varsity) charge per athlete for competitions. The more crossovers there are, the more money they make. Given the amount of crossovers used in competitions in our region, I think it is a fairly large incentive for Varsity to keep things just the way they are.

quitthedrama said:

Unfortunately, the way USASF/Varsity is structured I don't see this changing - they have too much $ to lose. EPs (many owned by Varsity) charge per athlete for competitions. The more crossovers there are, the more money they make. Given the amount of crossovers used in competitions in our region, I think it is a fairly large incentive for Varsity to keep things just the way they are.

Click to expand...

If every team is allowed max 15% crossovers, then just charge the first athlete more OR increase the crossover price.. it will all work out

5 per team, allows for injury fill ins, lets gyms "fill" teams, lets really small gyms make a variety of teams.

Level restrictions are especially complicated though, if you don't have multiple teams at that level then you can't even fill in for injuries.

Still provides enough flexibility to have crossovers and cover injuries and make money without the opportunity to create completely crossover sand bag teams, 5 kids aren't going to make a huge difference

CGAcheer said:

5 per team, allows for injury fill ins, lets gyms "fill" teams, lets really small gyms make a variety of teams.

Level restrictions are especially complicated though, if you don't have multiple teams at that level then you can't even fill in for injuries.

Still provides enough flexibility to have crossovers and cover injuries and make money without the opportunity to create completely crossover sand bag teams, 5 kids aren't going to make a huge difference

Click to expand...

Again, I don't care what the rule is, I just want one. To think 5 kids doesn't make a difference is naive though. If this is the rule then you can't argue 5 lvl 5 kids on a lvl 2 team.

I'd like to see a total per gym, 5 per 100 kids (under 100 get 5). If a gym wants to use 5 kids to spread out or put on one team that's their choice.

Ha I just came up with that off the top of my head, I really like 5 per 100. Allows for all gyms equal use. I know the "small gyms need crossover" argument and I don't disagree. But I also think "small gyms" don't abuse crossovers is overlooked and i feel that it happens small, medium, large. I say abuse bc that's my opinion but all are within current legal guidelines. Anyone that looks and sees one kid switch from a 4 to a 2 doesn't cause alarm but idc what your size is when I see more than 3 kids switch teams it raises flags IMO.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

Any gym small or large can abuse the crossover rule. My biggest peace was seeing an athlete on 3 or 4 teams. Crossover once. I have seen a mega gym have. Team of crossovers drop 2 levels and win. If we take care of the registering first then we can set limits on crossovers. We have to fix problems from top down. First show where the money goes for registration. Then have all kids registered and certified. Then set limits on crossovers. It's like breaking a leg and it bleeds. You don't put the band aid on first. You fix the leg. Lol


This post is verified by Chad Mulkey!

O

yojaehs said:

Again, I don't care what the rule is, I just want one. To think 5 kids doesn't make a difference is naive though. If this is the rule then you can't argue 5 lvl 5 kids on a lvl 2 team.

I'd like to see a total per gym, 5 per 100 kids (under 100 get 5). If a gym wants to use 5 kids to spread out or put on one team that's their choice.

Ha I just came up with that off the top of my head, I really like 5 per 100. Allows for all gyms equal use. I know the "small gyms need crossover" argument and I don't disagree. But I also think "small gyms" don't abuse crossovers is overlooked and i feel that it happens small, medium, large. I say abuse bc that's my opinion but all are within current legal guidelines. Anyone that looks and sees one kid switch from a 4 to a 2 doesn't cause alarm but idc what your size is when I see more than 3 kids switch teams it raises flags IMO.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

Click to expand...

Of course they will help the team, but a huge difference? Probably not going to change a 5th to 1st but maybe a 5th to 3rd.

It is still abusable, but leaves enough room for crossover based gyms to work it out.

But this is coming from a gym, who has never started the season with crossovers, but I also don't remember making it through an entire season without using at least one at some point in the season

CGAcheer said:

O

Of course they will help the team, but a huge difference? Probably not going to change a 5th to 1st but maybe a 5th to 3rd.

It is still abusable, but leaves enough room for crossover based gyms to work it out.

But this is coming from a gym, who has never started the season with crossovers, but I also don't remember making it through an entire season without using at least one at some point in the season

Click to expand...

I've stated publicly that I HATE crossovers. I have used them and my gym uses them. We don't start a season that way but it happens. HOWEVER, if the rules stated we couldn't use them we would make it work.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

One thing that I see helping besides the registration mandating is the implementation of what is a gym. Gyms with multiple locations have to decide to be under an umbrella or individual. Outside of Level 5 this will be an immediate impact. I can name several gyms this will affect.