All-Star Devil's Advocate: Will The Move To 30 Really Create More Competition?

[MomOf2ThatsMe]

Next year we just have Medium (30) and no large (36). the big 3 go to medium. do all the teams that were in medium this year leave medium because of the intimidation factor or do they stay?

I think that with only having two sizes (small and medium) in the all girl senior 5 division, gyms (particularly smaller ones) would probably realize that the stakes are even higher in that division than before, and would be picking their teams even more wisely. I think this could perhaps be the demise of the flyers who are less than senior age. If you have 26 girls with fulls and doubles, and 20 of them are senior age, you have to cut out the younger ones. A lot of gyms that are not mega-sized have trouble attracting boys, and most of those gyms would probably not be able to field a co-ed 5 team in addition to an all-girl 5. I honestly think that changing the ball game regarding the all girl 5 divisions would probably strengthen other non-level 5 divisions, particularly youth and junior 3,4,5, and senior 3,4, and R5.

 

[King]

I think that with only having two sizes (small and medium) in the all girl senior 5 division, gyms (particularly smaller ones) would probably realize that the stakes are even higher in that division than before, and would be picking their teams even more wisely. I think this could perhaps be the demise of the flyers who are less than senior age. If you have 26 girls with fulls and doubles, and 20 of them are senior age, you have to cut out the younger ones. A lot of gyms that are not mega-sized have trouble attracting boys, and most of those gyms would probably not be able to field a co-ed 5 team in addition to an all-girl 5. I honestly think that changing the ball game regarding the all girl 5 divisions would probably strengthen other non-level 5 divisions, particularly youth and junior 3,4,5, and senior 3,4, and R5.

Don't we always hear that too many teams are level 5 when they shouldn't be and there are too many teams at worlds?

 

[The Sixth]

This is in reference to a post King made on another thread, and rather than hijack that thread I created a new one:



My question: is some of the reason that medium is hot this year is because those teams know they don't have to compete against the big three? And when they move down to 30, will we see a fair number of those teams drop back to small simply because they think a high world's finish is more attainable?

In short, is the increase in the teams in the medium division a short-term phenomenon based on competitive factors - rather than a long-lasting paradigm shift?

I didn't see this discussed specifically in another thread, so if it was, I apologize in advance and will be happy to have all of you tell me to use the search bar.

Only if (when?) large senior goes away, ,will anybody be able to say for sure the success of medium. But personally, I think it is and always has been, simply a numbers game. A gym can either field a strong team of 36 or it can't, and fields a strong team of 20 instead.

I don't think it was an intentional slight, but from a competitive point of view, I would be just as intimidated by the top 3 small teams, as I would the "big three".

 

[BlueCat]

Only if (when?) large senior goes away, ,will anybody be able to say for sure the success of medium. But personally, I think it is and always has been, simply a numbers game. A gym can either field a strong team of 36 or it can't, and fields a strong team of 20 instead.

The gap from fielding one of 20 and fielding one nearly twice as big (36) was insurmountable for most gyms. That is at least part of the reason why there was rarely "new blood" in the large division. Teams were leaving, but weren't being replaced.

I'm not sure how I feel about whether large should stay or not. Part of me says that divisions with 3-4 total teams nationwide should probably merge with other divisions. However, I would also be interested to see which of this year's medium teams could turn around and make the jump from 30 to 36 next season.

 

[MomOf2ThatsMe]

Don't we always hear that too many teams are level 5 when they shouldn't be and there are too many teams at worlds?

That was basically my point, in not so many words. Reducing the size of senior 5 divisions would essentially redistribute some of the talent back to the younger/other senior divisions, thus making those divisions more competitive, due to the excess athletes. Being a senior 5 might go back to being an honor, not an expectation.

 

[MomOf2ThatsMe]

Oh, and yes, it would probably make worlds a more manageable size.

Sorry, I hate posting from my phone. I get discombobbled.

 

[The Sixth]

The gap from fielding one of 20 and fielding one nearly twice as big (36) was insurmountable for most gyms. That is at least part of the reason why there was rarely "new blood" in the large division. Teams were leaving, but weren't being replaced.

I *think* we're in agreement here, but to clarify I agree! I guess it was what I was trying to infer "in between the lines", that the dwindling numbers from large was just a numbers game for gyms, rather than an issue of competitive edge (or lack thereof) as the TS suggested. And medium just helps bridge that gap.

I'm not sure how I feel about whether large should stay or not. Part of me says that divisions with 3-4 total teams nationwide should probably merge with other divisions. However, I would also be interested to see which of this year's medium teams could turn around and make the jump from 30 to 36 next season.

FWIW, I'm pro merge. There a variety of factors at play which affect the numbers game from year to year. I'm not for killing off large per se, but at some point you can only extend the lifeline so much for a division that the industry indicates as dying. If it can rebound and sustain itself on a consistent basis, great. I would however still be against 3 divisions, unless it was *hugely* popular across the board.