2017-18 Usasf Cheer Rules & Age Grid

[BlueCat]

Personally Yth 5 is just a $ maker for comps. They rarely have a team against them. It is the same as a JR R5 skill wise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aren't all divisions basically $ makers for comps? That is kind of the point of hosting competitions isn't it?

I don't mean to be flippant, but I don't see that division's existence being the "fault" of the event producers. If anything, they would rather see fewer divisions with more teams in them.

 

[CookieMomster]

The comments about younger kids on a youth team really a non-issue. There have always been younger kids on youth teams. Now it's just defined with a bottom age along with the top age. CP was 5 and on a Tiny and crossed to a Mini team. When she was 6 she was M2 and crossed to a Y1. She fit in fine. If anything, she was like the team pet. The girls were awesome and loved on her. They also knew and appreciated that she was helping them out because they lost a flyer and she was asked to step in for the rest of the season.

The odds of a 6yr old with a full are rare. M3 used to a division and that was taken away a couple of years ago and we're talking 6-8yr olds with tucks. I'm not seeing many M2 teams this season and if gyms are having a hard time filling M2 teams, I think the fear of a 6yr old with a full can be put the rest.

 

[TheVipersMom]

Aren't all divisions basically $ makers for comps? That is kind of the point of hosting competitions isn't it?

I don't mean to be flippant, but I don't see that division's existence being the "fault" of the event producers. If anything, they would rather see fewer divisions with more teams in them.

I agree, I was thinking the same thing with the comment.
That would mean less winners, meaning less medals and first place jackets so not having a million different divisions would put more money in their pockets. I don't think the y5 division is just for money making. There are gyms that certainly have the athletes to fill those teams and that division is a good stepping stones for those kids to learn on before being on j5 and s5!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cheer25mom]

The comments about younger kids on a youth team really a non-issue. There have always been younger kids on youth teams. Now it's just defined with a bottom age along with the top age. CP was 5 and on a Tiny and crossed to a Mini team. When she was 6 she was M2 and crossed to a Y1. She fit in fine. If anything, she was like the team pet. The girls were awesome and loved on her. They also knew and appreciated that she was helping them out because they lost a flyer and she was asked to step in for the rest of the season.

The odds of a 6yr old with a full are rare. M3 used to a division and that was taken away a couple of years ago and we're talking 6-8yr olds with tucks. I'm not seeing many M2 teams this season and if gyms are having a hard time filling M2 teams, I think the fear of a 6yr old with a full can be put the rest.

That's because those mini aged kids with tucks are flying on j3 for the most part because of the push for tiny flyers, at least at comps we attend.

It isn't about fitting in, it's about how safe it is for these little kids to be attempting level 4 and 5 skills.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cheer25mom]

@cheer25mom @cheermomforever when we began AS in 2010 (age grid below) there was no bottom age requirements with the exception of World's. Back in to 2010, I can only recall a small percentage of kids 10 and below with a layout or above. Now, however, I'm seeing a lot more kids with advance tumbling at a younger age. People tend to focus only on tumbling, however, the heavy and explosive lifting is a concern on growth plates on these higher levels. My point wasn't to defend or not defend certain levels or how it would effect small gyms. It was only to state that I can see how the USASF could have more control over appropriate skills and training not only by level but, also by age. A youth level 4 no longer has to mirror a senior level 4 in stunting, jumps or dance.

The skills grid for y4 and s4 are the same. They are performing the same skills with very few exceptions. If anything the stunts are less safe with youth aged bases.

Its honestly not about division envy for me. I just think that age floors for divisions don't really address a safety issue if a kid can still preform those skills on a younger team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cheermomforever]

Aren't all divisions basically $ makers for comps? That is kind of the point of hosting competitions isn't it?

I don't mean to be flippant, but I don't see that division's existence being the "fault" of the event producers. If anything, they would rather see fewer divisions with more teams in them.

Event producers will take anything! Wild Cards were the best $$ maker for Summit.
If I was a parent going against no one 90% of the time, especially say Dallas or Summit......why have it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cheermomforever]

I have to say with parents/coaches rushing kids and all the tiny flyers....I truly enjoyed Northern Lights SR 4 at RI this past weekend. Flyers were athletic older girls and the team consisted of very tall girls. Not the "norm".
Amazing to watch!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[quitthedrama]

Event producers will take anything! Wild Cards were the best $$ maker for Summit.
If I was a parent going against no one 90% of the time, especially say Dallas or Summit......why have it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are several other divisions that have little or no competition - both in terms of # of teams and/or lack of quality. Senior 1, Y3, Y4, Mini 2, Open 6 for example hardly ever have more than 1 team in their division, so why is Y5 any different? Many times the International divisions have little or no competition too; or there are only 1 or 2 teams in the division that truly have the level skills. Y5 had two teams at the competition last weekend, but it was a great example of quality over quantity. Both teams were amazing and both had the skills required to be competitive in that division. Personally I would much rather see that then 5 teams who can't come close to hitting a routine and/or barely compete skills required for the level.

 

[CookieMomster]

That's because those mini aged kids with tucks are flying on j3 for the most part because of the push for tiny flyers, at least at comps we attend.

It isn't about fitting in, it's about how safe it is for these little kids to be attempting level 4 and 5 skills.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are the odds of a 6yr with L4 or L5 skills really that high? Some 8yr olds yes, but younger?!? In my area a mini with a tuck would be on a Y3 team. I think for the most part we overstate and draw dramatic conclusions for a reaction. The point I was making wasn't about junior teams. It was in relation to the youth comments and in particular y5. A few comments were about 6yr olds on youth teams with 8-11 yr olds.

 

[5-6-7-8]

Thinking out loud, just wonder what folks think:

I wonder if people would go for Worlds teams having "high school" age parameters?

Ex: 13/14 - 18/19.

Ive always though the age groups should be closer to school age groups. K-3, 3-6, 6-9, 9-12 (or thereabouts).

 

[Ashley]

What is honestly the point of adding Extra Small Coed and Extra Small Senior when they can't even go to worlds (according to CheerUpdates)?

I get the point of adding the division but not when it's not a worlds division...

It's not a worlds division next year. Doesn't mean it won't be in the future.

 

[luv2cheer92]

Yea, both small limited coed and semi-limited coed were divisions before they became divisions at Worlds. So they've done that before.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[Ashley]

There are several other divisions that have little or no competition - both in terms of # of teams and/or lack of quality. Senior 1, Y3, Y4, Mini 2, Open 6 for example hardly ever have more than 1 team in their division, so why is Y5 any different? Many times the International divisions have little or no competition too; or there are only 1 or 2 teams in the division that truly have the level skills. Y5 had two teams at the competition last weekend, but it was a great example of quality over quantity. Both teams were amazing and both had the skills required to be competitive in that division. Personally I would much rather see that then 5 teams who can't come close to hitting a routine and/or barely compete skills required for the level.

Agreed! I've frequently competed against no one in IOC6, doesn't mean it's not worth having (and IO6 is even worse). At least now we have worlds bids to go after, so you're competing for something. Youth 5 has the same thing with Summit.

 

[Ashley]

Exactly.. My Cp is on a Small 5 AG and while we have more than 15 currently, that could change next year as we are a smaller gym. Our first year as SS5 we only had 13-14 girls and made it to Worlds, but according to the grid, you cannot be eligible and therefore my guess is that most girls will go elsewhere if they can't be worlds eligible. Could be very bad for small gyms.

I think this must be a typo. The current age grid has the Small, Medium, and Large divisions all with a minimum of 5 athletes. You could take a team of 15 and compete Large All girl if you wanted to.

I can't imagine they would make an XS division that isn't eligible for worlds, while simultaneously putting a minimum of 15 athletes on the Small Senior division (and only the Small Senior, not the Small Coed, that makes no sense).

There has to be a line somewhere and you can't simply create a bunch of new divisions for every imaginable situation. It makes the most sense to put that line between "Coed" and "All Girl" as having at least 1 male on your team.

(Note, I am not making an attempt to define "male". Good luck USASF with negotiating that minefield.)

They already have a policy: US All Star Federation

 

[smoq17]

It's been like that for several years now, 3-4 maybe?

Thanks! I just always thought of it as y5 not yr5