All-Star Age Changes?

[BlueCat]

What other team sport has multiple ability levels that restrict the skills that you can do within the same age bracket? It seems like there are so many age groups / skills levels / team sizes / gender numbers that creates issues when it comes to forming teams. I can think of no other sport where there are nearly this many different classifications you could compete in.

I'm not suggesting we ditch ability levels, just curious. Some of our issues are caused by the fact that there could legitimately be 100+ different divisions to put your team into. (8+ Ability levels, 6+ age groups, multiple team sizes, multiple gender splits, D1/D2 splits, A/B splits). Even with all of these splits, there are still people clamoring for more options. At some point, teams will have to compete against other teams that are not exactly the same as them in every respect. IMO, we can't simply keep splitting up and adding more divisions/classifications. Every event will simply turn into a recital with no one to compete against.

 

[luv2cheer92]

I also think that with so many programs having such small numbers having the larger age spreads then allows athletes to be better placed in the correct level. I would think an incorrect level would be a bigger safety issue for athletes than a larger age gap. I would rather a 7 year old be on a team with a 14 year old then a new to cheer level 1 athlete be placed on a level 3 or 4 team because that's all there is for their age.

 

[SthrnCheerMom]

What other team sport has multiple ability levels that restrict the skills that you can do within the same age bracket? It seems like there are so many age groups / skills levels / team sizes / gender numbers that creates issues when it comes to forming teams. I can think of no other sport where there are nearly this many different classifications you could compete in.

I'm not suggesting we ditch ability levels, just curious. Some of our issues are caused by the fact that there could legitimately be 100+ different divisions to put your team into. (8+ Ability levels, 6+ age groups, multiple team sizes, multiple gender splits, D1/D2 splits, A/B splits). Even with all of these splits, there are still people clamoring for more options. At some point, teams will have to compete against other teams that are not exactly the same as them in every respect. IMO, we can't simply keep splitting up and adding more divisions/classifications. Every event will simply turn into a recital with no one to compete against.

When we first started comp cheer, we did it through a program that first grouped them by age/grade range (K-2, 3-4, etc). Then they competed based on skill level. So you had the appropriate ages on the same team and competing with each other. Then you had the same skills competing against each other. The only time that didn't work was when one team sandbagged and competed down because they knew they'd have no one on their actual level.

 

[Cobalt_Jeron]

I think skill is the first thing that matters. For a small program like ours (30 kids) it's better to place all the athletes with similar skills in the same team regardless of age. This format allows that. The other one didn't.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[5monkeysjumping]

Some gymnastics gyms are like this, too. When I used to coach, our practices were always done by level, so 4/5 came at one time, 6/7at another and 8-10 at another. You could have a 6 year old L4 and a 14 year old L4. It happened. It wasn't a big deal or anything that anyone really even batted an eye at. Granted, the kids were all pretty spread out, working skills on different events, but they were all in the gym at the same time working out.

 

[dat.jpp]

My idea:
Tiny 6 and younger, Mini 8 and younger, youth 6-10, Junior 8-12 and senior 11-18. (With some small gym restrictions)

 

[alpaca]

Some gymnastics gyms are like this, too. When I used to coach, our practices were always done by level, so 4/5 came at one time, 6/7at another and 8-10 at another. You could have a 6 year old L4 and a 14 year old L4. It happened. It wasn't a big deal or anything that anyone really even batted an eye at. Granted, the kids were all pretty spread out, working skills on different events, but they were all in the gym at the same time working out.

Karate will also practice this way. The difference IMO is that gymnastics and karate are individual sports. And they don't require the same kind of team bond. I'm not very familiar with gymnastics, but aren't their teams comprised of the top scores of individual athletes?


This is just my personal experience but this is what I've seen this year. The youngest girls on the senior teams think they are awesome, they are cocky. Their parents are the Susies moms. And these young girls believe that they are friends with the oldest girls. But the oldest girls resent them and while they appreciate that they have the same skills, they treat them like little sisters. Meanwhile, Those younger girls on the senior teams have alienated the other girls at the the gym their own age. And, our younger girls on senior teams have been exposed to very young adult situations this year.

 

[AjfromOpals]

I'm going to be perfectly honest here, I had no idea you didn't have age minimums in the USA. Personally, i'm all for it. It stops younger kids from growing up too fast from influence of their teammates and stops senior/ open age and even the older junior kids from being stuck with kids half their age or size (we have open 1-6 here so there's a lot of teenagers who are still senior age on open teams especially when lv 5 is in question).

In case you're curious, to my understanding the age brackets here are as follows:
Tiny- 5 years and younger
Mini- 6-8 years
Youth- 9-11 years
Junior- 11/12- 14 years
Senior (same as USA?)- 12-18
Open (same as us)- 14+ (with the exception of level 6 which I believe is slightly higher)

I would be very interested in listening to US coaches who use much younger athletes on age inappropriate teams, can anyone shed some light into what sort of thinking goes into that?

 

[catlady]

Throwing maturity and naps aside for a moment (which are very legitimate concerns), narrowing age groups really would limit what any gym, large or small, could do. Once these athletes are divided by level and age, coaches then have to pray they have a good balance of experienced stunt positions, heights and weights. You could take a large gym and the best coach in the world and give them an age group of 9-12 in level 4. If they end up with experienced athletes of 12 backspots, 4 bases, and 6 flyers that all fall within a few inches and pounds of each other, I bet their meltdown would put Suzie's mom to shame.

 

[Pebbles49]

Some gymnastics gyms are like this, too. When I used to coach, our practices were always done by level, so 4/5 came at one time, 6/7at another and 8-10 at another. You could have a 6 year old L4 and a 14 year old L4. It happened. It wasn't a big deal or anything that anyone really even batted an eye at. Granted, the kids were all pretty spread out, working skills on different events, but they were all in the gym at the same time working out.

Yes, on a gymnastics team a 7 year old can be practicing at the same time with 14 or older athletes, but I will hardly compare it to a cheerleading team...The gymnastics athlete functions more as individuals who scores are combined with other individuals to make up a team score...Matter of fact, I remembered my daughter's gymnastics squad used to team bond with same age athletes, so the older athletes team bond separate from the younger athletes...(I still remembered my daughter's team going to Chuck E Cheese for fundraisers/team bonding and the older teammates had a different outing that did not include the younger athletes) However, cheer requires their athletes to work together as one, which often requires the athletes to do team bondings, etc... Having 14 years forced to team bond with 5 year olds is a set up for them providing free babysitting service to these 5 year olds parents...

PS: When my daughter was doing gymnastics; she was never forced to team bond with teenagers and I know my now 14 year old, will hate being on a cheer team with very young athletes...jmo!

 

[LoveOnTop]

As a small gym owner, tight age restrictions make it super tough. Last season was my first year ever. I had some older 14/15 year olds with tucks. I also had a 10 year old with a tuck. Thanks to the age grid, I was able to put her on the senior team instead of the youth level 1 team where she definitely wouldn't have been challenged. The team dynamics on my senior team are great! No one cares that she is 10. They respect her and only want the best for their team. She loves being on the senior team, but she doesn't feel cocky at all. She is still friends with the girls on youth.
Another instance is a 5 year old I have. She improved so much, even got her back handspring this year. Well I don't have enough level 2 mini kids to have a mini 2, so next year I will either have a youth 2 or junior 2. I don't feel like that 5 year old should be held back just because she turns 6 in September.
Rules are rules, and I don't think gym owners and coaches should be judged if they end up putting a 5 year old on their junior team. It should be up to the coach to determine whether or not that kid is mature enough to be with the older girls. Maybe it's because we are in a small town, but all my kids are extremely welcoming. If that 5 year old ends up making Y2 or J2, I know my girls will be happy for her!

 

[Nikki Moore]

CP is on a junior team with a few girls really younger than her. CP just turned 14 and one of the youngest just turned 9. CP loves her and they get along very well. The younger girl even invited CP and her other 14 yo friend to her birthday party. We're also a small gym where we can't really split by age and make decent teams...

 

[SL&AM]

I was the mom of the 8 year old (cheer age 7) on a Junior team this year---aged up because she was needed in a specific spot despite the gym having a youth team she could have been placed on (no Mini team). She wasn't the only kid on the team around that age, but because they were mostly isolated during practice by stunt team, she was never afforded the opportunity to really get close to anyone her age. I watched the younger kids alienate her because she was on a different team, while the bulk of her team alienated her because she was so much younger. I was reluctant about her placement, then assured that it seemed to be going okay, but once competition season came it nosedived from that point on. And she was not the only young kid who experienced the same alienation on this team. She's since given up the sport.

So yeah, I realize gyms 'need' a more open age grid and some gyms do the mixing of ages better than ours did, but hindsight is always 20/20 and if I could go back, I would have pulled her for a different gym (or no gym) instead of letting her be aged up with a group who had no business being together.

I can understand having no bottom age on youth and matching the top age to the bottom of senior, but tiny, mini and junior, imo, absolutely should have a bottom age. This gives smaller programs the ability to one older team and one younger team. It may effect the gyms who only have 1 team, but I don't know if they make up enough of a majority to weight that pro and con.

 

[purplecheer]

I'm from a small gym with J1 and S1 teams, 10/12 on each and about 4-5 cross over between both. We have a couple of 7/8/9 year olds on J1 since we don't have a youth, but they work fine. On my Sr team we have ages from 11-17 which also works out with tall backs, medium bases and little flyers. I am 15 and I don't mind having 11-12 year olds on senior, I get along fine with them and they are always energetic and fun! They trust me and likewise, we definitely have a good "sister" relationship.

 

[FamUsM0m]

It's been mentioned in other threads, but the ages were not lowered from what they've been. Technically they've actually been raised as there was no bottom age before and a 0-4 year old could have been on a junior team. But yes, lowered from what the changes were made to a month or 2 ago, those changes were just reversed.

True it was never "specified" before, but I get what they're saying. Specifying the bottom age of 5 opens the door for coaches to take advantage of that and abandon common sense. Now, when you see a small kid on a junior team, no one will bat an eye. I thought that the purpose of the age bracket was not only to ensure that athletes stayed in their appropriate age range, but to do so without limiting them skill wise. So, while yes, Jane has a robhs layout, she's only 6. let's give her at least another year to mature before putting her with kids twice her age. Now, coaches won't hesitate. You'll see a lot more of the big base, tiny flyer teams. I know in some cases, it can't be helped. But why open the door for people to take advantage of it. I also agree this will bring out more Suzie's moms.