All-Star Cali Ghost Recon Lost Their Paid Bid?

[MomMomMamaMom]

Exactly. And technically the bid isn't awarded until the team accepts it. There's a reason USASF doesn't update their bid list right away.

Where I see the issue of "unfair" application of rules is if Cali did accept the bid, and then was allowed to give it back, after the 72 hour period. Which I have no way of knowing if it happened, so is just speculation.

ETA: I'm not speculating that Cali did this, just that this is why I would understand the debate.

 

[Ashley]

So let's say that those Blops athletes weren't on Ghost Recon when they got their AL bid. That's the bid they're going to worlds on. They're allowed 8 substitutions for worlds. Are they forced to use some of those subs to put the blops athletes in? There's absolutely nothing in the USASF rules about that. How does USASF tell a gym that they have to use these X athletes in their allowable substitutions? Now USASF is going all God mode and making stuff up.

These are two very different bids and how they compete at worlds needs to be decided based on the bid they attend worlds on. The eligibility rules at worlds are very specific.

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

It was within 72 hours. But even if they did give it back after 72 hours, so what? Macs will still get it. Money always gets passed down.

I can see that if a rule works, then it's all good! Lol. But this is also where I see that bigger name gyms get the benefit of being able to play the rules to their favor because they aren't bound by technicalities... So I can see where an argument could be made that by accepting the bid, they were bound by the rules, even if they chose later that they didn't want to go that route.

All in all, I think that since the rule ended up serving its purpose it's pretty much a moot point.,

 

[NJ Coach]

USASF, when writing this rule, did what it does best...ambiguity. In my mind, a bid isn't earned until it is yours. Therefore, once you have filled out all paperwork and accepted the bid, within the 72 hour window, it's yours and you've earned it. The EP announcing your name as the bid winner is just them announcing that you were their choice. If Ghost Recon declined the bid within the 72 hours, it's not their bid. It goes to the next team in line.

A few thoughts...if Cali was unaware of the rule, shame on them...BUT, I'm going to make an assumption that they either were informed or discovered the rule sometime within the 72 hour window. They declined in order to make the BLOPS kid(s) still eligible for BLOPS.
It could be that they didn't think GR would get a paid bid, so therefore just threw kids on the team who could fulfill whatever role was needed.

For future reference...Once a team has received, and accepted a paid bid...those athletes are ineligible for any other bid seeking team...unless you are willing on taking the chance of losing them off their original team.

 

[SL&AM]

Curious, did GR actually give the bid bad within the 72 hour window? The bid was earned on 3/13, so 72 hours should be 3/16 yet it's now only coming out? Did this actually happen in the alloted time period---in which case, I can understand why the BLOPS kids can go back to BLOPS OR did 72 hours go by, then they realized it an then gave it back, in which case, those athletes shouldn't be allowed to return to BLOPS without getting a new bid, imo.

 

[Beans100]

Curious, did GR actually give the bid bad within the 72 hour window? The bid was earned on 3/13, so 72 hours should be 3/16 yet it's now only coming out? Did this actually happen in the alloted time period---in which case, I can understand why the BLOPS kids can go back to BLOPS OR did 72 hours go by, then they realized it an then gave it back, in which case, those athletes shouldn't be allowed to return to BLOPS without getting a new bid, imo.

I was wondering the same thing. I looked around on Twitter and it's surprisingly silent over there. I wonder if this means that Cali made the error. No way would they air their own mistake on social media.

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

USASF, when writing this rule, did what it does best...ambiguity. In my mind, a bid isn't earned until it is yours. Therefore, once you have filled out all paperwork and accepted the bid, within the 72 hour window, it's yours and you've earned it. The EP announcing your name as the bid winner is just them announcing that you were their choice. If Ghost Recon declined the bid within the 72 hours, it's not their bid. It goes to the next team in line.

A few thoughts...if Cali was unaware of the rule, shame on them...BUT, I'm going to make an assumption that they either were informed or discovered the rule sometime within the 72 hour window. They declined in order to make the BLOPS kid(s) still eligible for BLOPS.
It could be that they didn't think GR would get a paid bid, so therefore just threw kids on the team who could fulfill whatever role was needed.

For future reference...Once a team has received, and accepted a paid bid...those athletes are ineligible for any other bid seeking team...unless you are willing on taking the chance of losing them off their original team.

Well put! I do know that the one athlete I know of specifically stated she would be competing with ghost for their bid comp, so I'm guessing they were hoping to win the bid. It was somewhere around a week before the comp, and she stated she was filling in for someone else. I'm okay to give Cali the benefit of the doubt that they weren't trying to be shady... Because she certainly didn't try to hide it. But am shocked that no one in the program knew the rules well enough to foresee the potential issue!

ETA: and I do honestly see, how they might have thought that this athlete would be the permanent replacement if the other athlete wasn't able to return... But given how into her team she is, I am not sure about that.

 

[pochantas22]

The male athlete that is on Ops did compete with Ops when the GR got their ATL. Not sure about the girl.

USA Nationals was not on GR's comp schedule. They went for the full paid bid.

Going back to eating my popcorn....

 

[njallday]

From what I was told, the people that were put on Ghost Recon were there due to an injury and a conflict in scheduling not allowing an athlete compete. The kids from ops were needed last minute. I do not believe they were aware of the rule at the time... why would they spend that much money and take the time to go the competition with the risk of losing their bid in the first place?

There was never a risk of losing their bid by competing with BLOPS athletes (as long as it was 4 or under crossovers); losing the bid was cali's choice when they realized the risk of losing some valuable BLOPS team members to GR.

 

[SuzieQ]

I'm not saying it is an excuse, I just dont think the rule was made with the thought of replacing for injuries. That is something unavoidable and unforseeable.

I think the rule was made without foreseeing the possibility of a team turning down a Paid Bid. I mean, who does that? In the usual course, if you have an At Large, you are looking to move up to a Paid. And if you already have a Paid, you are not listed as in the "running" for the Paid Bids at that completion. The wording of the rule should be changed for next year to make it clear that if a team accepts a Paid Bid, that is when it kicks in that athletes are now bound to the second team and cannot go back to the first team with the Paid Bid.

It is the first year of this rule, so I can see how this happened (innocently or not, I don't know). But the lesson is -- if you have an injured team member when the team is going for a Paid Bid, you need to look for substitutes from "lower" teams (not teams with Paid Bids already). Once an athlete earns a Paid Bid, they should be hands-off for substituting at bid events. That may mean the team going for the bid needs to use a sub from a non-worlds team, even a L4 athlete. Or the other option is to not use a sub, and re-work your routine. In prior years, coaches were able to grab a substitute from another Worlds team at their gym. This is no longer the case.

So, knowing why this rule was instituted and what it is meant to prevent, do you think next year we will see some teams trying to get around it by having some athletes be on Team B early and get a Paid Bid, and then go to Team A and get a Paid Bid, tying them to Team A, which is what they want because Team A is known to be the better team? In other words, reverse of what we expect to happen. The "lesser" Worlds team at a gym getting a Paid Bid first, and then the "flagship" team from that gym getting a Paid Bid later?

 

[CheerBank]

I think the rule was made without foreseeing the possibility of a team turning down a Paid Bid. I mean, who does that? In the usual course, if you have an At Large, you are looking to move up to a Paid. And if you already have a Paid, you are not listed as in the "running" for the Paid Bids at that completion. The wording of the rule should be changed for next year to make it clear that if a team accepts a Paid Bid, that is when it kicks in that athletes are now bound to the second team and cannot go back to the first team with the Paid Bid.

It is the first year of this rule, so I can see how this happened (innocently or not, I don't know). But the lesson is -- if you have an injured team member when the team is going for a Paid Bid, you need to look for substitutes from "lower" teams (not teams with Paid Bids already). Once an athlete earns a Paid Bid, they should be hands-off for substituting at bid events. That may mean the team going for the bid needs to use a sub from a non-worlds team, even a L4 athlete. Or the other option is to not use a sub, and re-work your routine. In prior years, coaches were able to grab a substitute from another Worlds team at their gym. This is no longer the case.

So, knowing why this rule was instituted and what it is meant to prevent, do you think next year we will see some teams trying to get around it by having some athletes be on Team B early and get a Paid Bid, and then go to Team A and get a Paid Bid, tying them to Team A, which is what they want because Team A is known to be the better team? In other words, reverse of what we expect to happen. The "lesser" Worlds team at a gym getting a Paid Bid first, and then the "flagship" team from that gym getting a Paid Bid later?

Boom. Huge loophole exposed. I don't think that ever occurred to anyone.

 

[Ashley]

Boom. Huge loophole exposed. I don't think that ever occurred to anyone.

I suppose it's possible, but there's still a limit to how many crossovers you can have on a team, and it's much harder to get a paid bid earlier in the season than later.

 

[5-6-7-8]

I think the rule was made without foreseeing the possibility of a team turning down a Paid Bid. I mean, who does that? In the usual course, if you have an At Large, you are looking to move up to a Paid. And if you already have a Paid, you are not listed as in the "running" for the Paid Bids at that completion. The wording of the rule should be changed for next year to make it clear that if a team accepts a Paid Bid, that is when it kicks in that athletes are now bound to the second team and cannot go back to the first team with the Paid Bid.

It is the first year of this rule, so I can see how this happened (innocently or not, I don't know). But the lesson is -- if you have an injured team member when the team is going for a Paid Bid, you need to look for substitutes from "lower" teams (not teams with Paid Bids already). Once an athlete earns a Paid Bid, they should be hands-off for substituting at bid events. That may mean the team going for the bid needs to use a sub from a non-worlds team, even a L4 athlete. Or the other option is to not use a sub, and re-work your routine. In prior years, coaches were able to grab a substitute from another Worlds team at their gym. This is no longer the case.

So, knowing why this rule was instituted and what it is meant to prevent, do you think next year we will see some teams trying to get around it by having some athletes be on Team B early and get a Paid Bid, and then go to Team A and get a Paid Bid, tying them to Team A, which is what they want because Team A is known to be the better team? In other words, reverse of what we expect to happen. The "lesser" Worlds team at a gym getting a Paid Bid first, and then the "flagship" team from that gym getting a Paid Bid later?

Another reason I am in favor of eliminating crossovers.

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

Curious, did GR actually give the bid bad within the 72 hour window? The bid was earned on 3/13, so 72 hours should be 3/16 yet it's now only coming out? Did this actually happen in the alloted time period---in which case, I can understand why the BLOPS kids can go back to BLOPS OR did 72 hours go by, then they realized it an then gave it back, in which case, those athletes shouldn't be allowed to return to BLOPS without getting a new bid, imo.

The bids weren't announced until March 14 though. Mac's announced their bid publicly evening of March 18. The timing seems about right...given that USA would probably have a bit of a turnaround time to decide who was next in line, and notify Mac's.

 

[SL&AM]

The bids weren't announced until March 14 though. Mac's announced their bid publicly evening of March 18. The timing seems about right...given that USA would probably have a bit of a turnaround time to decide who was next in line, and notify Mac's.

Then it sounds like Cali is in the clear even with the loophole we all so clearly found in the rules.

I'd be singing a different tune if they had accepted the bid, but for now, hopefully USASF writes a clear dictation for next season.