Changes in the Big D.

Discussion in 'Discussing the Cheerleading Industry' started by allgoodpeople, Aug 19, 2010.

  1. allgoodpeople

    allgoodpeople Cheer Stalker

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    837
    Shimmys Received:
    0
    It will be interesting to see what happens with divisions and team size. If USASF becomes too restrictive on the teams, it could be an opening for a major player with a tendency towards independence to come up with an alternative Worlds.

     
  2. King

    King Is all about that bass Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,091
    Shimmys Received:
    19,108
    Web:
    Twitter:
    fierceboard
    I am a(n)...:
    Coach
    Verified Member:
    King Harrison
    Georgia Tech Coach
    So I am guessing you are referring to team sizes of large teams?
     
  3. King

    King Is all about that bass Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,091
    Shimmys Received:
    19,108
    Web:
    Twitter:
    fierceboard
    I am a(n)...:
    Coach
    Verified Member:
    King Harrison
    Georgia Tech Coach
    Let me add I really have no idea if you are bringing up an old topic or referring to what is currently going on in Dallas, so I am being honest when I am guessing what you are referring to.
     
  4. Mclovin

    Mclovin Slow your roll, Sparkle.

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,756
    Shimmys Received:
    3,228
    Location:
    Shouterville, OK
    I am a(n)...:
    Coach
    Well, my opinion on that is there are about 10 gyms in the whole country that would go to an alternate worlds just because large teams were limited to 30. The rest of the country would probably gladly welcome it!!
     
  5. allgoodpeople

    allgoodpeople Cheer Stalker

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    837
    Shimmys Received:
    0
    Currently. I really think the push is 24 per team in one larger division. It does not matter to me from my pov, I prefer 32 actually, but better minds than mine will prevail. The teams that use 36 will be just fine, in fact better at 24. I don't think it has anything to do with anything except limiting the number of divisions. Being not in the know, I will bet anything it is about money, and getting say 200 senior all girl teams with 24 each (4800 total) vs 15 with 36 and 75 with 20 (2040 total at say $250 an athlete). More money and wider participation. Seems logical. My point is not that this is anything but a consensus meeting for what is best for everyone in cheerleading but other consequences. When things like that happen, unintended consequences occur for the entities pushing change. I speculate it may induce other companies to consider alternatives. Who knows, but 10 high profile teams in alternative divisions could evolve quickly into a very viable alternative, without all the helter skelter of a weekend at the Milk House.
     
  6. King

    King Is all about that bass Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,091
    Shimmys Received:
    19,108
    Web:
    Twitter:
    fierceboard
    I am a(n)...:
    Coach
    Verified Member:
    King Harrison
    Georgia Tech Coach
    I am not a huge fan of 24, but it will bring more competition and it will force a lot more boys into the industry. And if the USASF athlete credentialing is pulled off with events and the insurance stuff it will be very hard to go anywhere else. And if the USASF took any sanctioning gym status if you competed at non-sanctioned events then you are going to be hard pressed for any gym to go to a alterna-worlds for their level 5 team if it completely 'screws' all their lower levels from having competition.

    I still say push for 30 while you still can, otherwise it will be 24.
     
  7. allgoodpeople

    allgoodpeople Cheer Stalker

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    837
    Shimmys Received:
    0
    As has been the plan all along I suppose, rules and regulations control freedom of choice and allow the predictable collection of fees for required services. Makes sense. Always a benefit/cost analysis for the individual. I see good and bad in the changes, more than anything else, the 800lb gorilla becomes 2 tons. Change may or may not be good here, but if placing bets go with what the gorilla wants to happen. I think it is inevitable.
     
  8. King

    King Is all about that bass Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,091
    Shimmys Received:
    19,108
    Web:
    Twitter:
    fierceboard
    I am a(n)...:
    Coach
    Verified Member:
    King Harrison
    Georgia Tech Coach
    Why not just say: You cannot stop change anymore than you can stop the sun setting.

    To which I follow with: Don't let the fact that change is uncomfortable stop you from changing for the better.
     
  9. allgoodpeople

    allgoodpeople Cheer Stalker

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    837
    Shimmys Received:
    0
    Oh Kingston, I understand progressive minds and thinking pretty well. I suggest you always at least consider the conservative POV, as I tend to always try to consider the progressive for balance and best outcome. That said, change is almost always wrapped in good ideas and intention. As stated above, the key is anticipating the unintended consequences and having appropriate contingency plans and flexibility to deal with them. That plus an open mind and effective evaluation of the change and consequences over time leads to effective change. But enough philosophy.

    I think this has more to do with control of the dollar than anything else, and if with power comes cautious and benign control, than positive change is very achievable. I do think arguing against the term "sport" with it's inherent categorization on local and state level concerning policy and sanctioning makes more sense in the picture being painted. We'll see, but for me, to this point, it has been a fun and productive ride. I hope money does not pollute the sport too much. But I can see this leading, to say, sanctioned gyms buying only one manufacturer of uniforms, going to certain camps, and competitions. If you can say where you can go, you can say what you have to buy and where you have to stay. AND, if that type of heavy hand prevails, you will see alternatives sprout and thrive in fertile soil.
     
  10. King

    King Is all about that bass Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,091
    Shimmys Received:
    19,108
    Web:
    Twitter:
    fierceboard
    I am a(n)...:
    Coach
    Verified Member:
    King Harrison
    Georgia Tech Coach
    As a democrat growing up in the south I have had no choice but to try and look at things from a conservative perspective (otherwise you get in a lot of arguments and have few friends). While we come at it from different positions, we both want the same thing: the best for cheerleading. In my eyes keeping the number at 36 or maybe even 40 makes the most sense to keep Rays an extremely dominate gym in all levels in all areas. Few would be able to match our numbers and our success would keep people coming in the door.

    But, there would be plenty of people avoiding our gym by avoiding competitions we go to (more so than do now already). The sport itself would suffer from us (Rays) being overly successful (just as Top Gun scared out pretty much all the unlimited competition out of the division save a few teams). So I have to step back and not ask myself what helps the large gym with worlds winning teams, but what helps the little guy so that I have plenty of people to compete against. While I do not like 24 if that meant suddenly each division had 100 teams to compete against at Worlds I cannot believe that would be a bad thing. While the top dawgs would remain near the top, it would be less a case of 2 or 3 teams going for it, but more a case of 15 teams going for it (I would say similar to the NCAA basketball tournament). A Standard size might even lead itself more to the college realm and the NCSTA (TERRIBLE NAME BTW... PLEASE DEAR LORD CHANGE IT. I THINK IT LOOKS LIKE NC STATE EVERY TIME I READ IT.... whoah my caps lock got excited there) and lead to a natural progression from allstar to college.

    If the industry is successful and thriving and there is tons of competition for all then I think that is a good thing. Maybe the argument is do you think the industry needs adjusting? I see problems. Other coaches see problems. It was mentioned at a meeting by Les that lack of competition is a huge issue for coaches and their programs. Does keeping large 36 really promote competition?
     
  11. Mclovin

    Mclovin Slow your roll, Sparkle.

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,756
    Shimmys Received:
    3,228
    Location:
    Shouterville, OK
    I am a(n)...:
    Coach
    Allgoodpeople, I really wish I could understand your posts because I try so hard to see your POV, but they are always so over my head! lol Can you take what you just said and interpret that for those of us that need simpler explanations??

    I'm of the opinion that it is the coaches desiring this change, not the USASF. So why would the USASF be the entity being accused of trying to make a monopoly or trying to make more money? I'm assuming that's what you were trying to say.
     
  12. CGAcheer

    CGAcheer When all else fails.... I shimmy

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    1,395
    Shimmys Received:
    798
    Location:
    Brunswick, Ga
    Web:
    I am a(n)...:
    Gym Owner
    I really hope we don't end up going with 24.

    It will have the opposite of the intended effect. Small gyms that put out small teams (10 to 15) will combine their teams, thus reducing teams and competition. I think that this will happen far more often than large teams splitting to make two 24 teams
     
  13. allgoodpeople

    allgoodpeople Cheer Stalker

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    837
    Shimmys Received:
    0
    I was a progressive when I was at UNC and before, so I know where you are coming from growing up in rural NC.

    For big gyms with regional appeal, having a limited number of slots on Worlds teams will have a definite effect. That is one of the unintended consequences I talked about. I do think the reason a lot of kids are at SRs and CEA are the staffs and the product, so they will still want to come in great numbers, question becomes, how do the owners adjust to keep them happy.

    This makes logical sense, and is a reasonable assumption, but there is speculation involved. If the end result is not what is predicted, one must rapidly change. I do think the industry is doing as well as it is with the present model. It could get worse, not better.

    I do not think there is anything wrong with having a large and small division in All Girl 5. 32 and 20 seems fine to me. Then you get the best of both worlds, large gyms can have spots for 52 level 5 athletes in All Girl and smaller gyms can choose either or for their turnout of athletes.

    Maybe keeping multiple competition companies is better than 2 or 3 buying them all up. Hard to say. I think the smaller company owners cashed out when they could, and I know that some have had second thoughts. IF the industry does not buy legislation that demands a certain set of rules and regulations, entrepreneurs will quickly fill the void with choice.
     
  14. allgoodpeople

    allgoodpeople Cheer Stalker

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    837
    Shimmys Received:
    0
    It passed, 24 on the team.
     
  15. ACEDAD

    ACEDAD Named "Best Veteran" meaning "Most Attractive". National Champion

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    7,605
    Shimmys Received:
    17,973
    Location:
    Hoover, AL
    Web:
    Twitter:
    billpresson
    I am a(n)...:
    Retired From Cheer
    Verified Member:
    Bill Presson
    USASF Hall of Fame Member
    What do you mean it passed? Voting isn't until January.