All-Star Division I And Division Ii At Worlds - Big Gym Separation

[BlueCat]

OK - I feel I may need to apologize for my original post that included the above statement. I feel this may have been misinterpreted or more likely not worded in the best possible way and I take full responsibility and apologize to any of the "top, elite, large gyms that may have found this offensive. I haven't read all of the pages on this thread but I have read most. I noticed that Jody (Bluecat) felt this was implying that large gyms do not get a voice in this conversation and that is not what I intended at all. I was hoping my first and last sentence in the above quote was enough of a disclaimer but after reading it again from a large gyms standpoint, I can see the unintended slight. I can also promise you that I NEVER called any of the large gyms "evil" as it has been interpreted. My only point was I know many conversations in this industry are dominated by the top gyms and I am really interested in getting plenty of feedback from EVERYONE in the industry. So, again, I apologize to Bluecat and anyone else who felt this was an inappropriate comment.

I can tell you that we are having some great conversations about this at the Regional Meetings. I hope you all are having a great and safe summer.
Les

While I personally think this idea will not be good for USASF, Worlds, or the industry for several reasons, I completely agree that all sides need to be heard from.

When I look back at some of my posts, they seem a bit overdramatic at times. I'll try harder to restrain myself.

 

[kristenthegreat]

What if it was you must compete at a nationals who had over X number of different gyms the previous year? That way you're proving you can hang with a large group of people, but it doesn't necessarily have to previously been a 'bid comp'.

 

[cheernerd5678]

What if it was you must compete at a nationals who had over X number of different gyms the previous year? That way you're proving you can hang with a large group of people, but it doesn't necessarily have to previously been a 'bid comp'.

Still could be hard for gyms in some areas. I think a minimum score (% of perfection?) at a USASF event is fair and proves you can "hang with a large group" if they pick the right score. It would weed out the teams scoring 140 at worlds and push teams to really think about if the team should be r5, if they're never going to score the minimum.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

 

[quitthedrama]

@RulesGuy can you provide an update as to where this proposal stands? Thanks!

 

[DJ]

@RulesGuy can you provide an update as to where this proposal stands? Thanks!

I expect we'll here something definitive soon.

 

[as1rico]

USASF Member Update
Worlds Division I & II Proposal
Last June, Les Stella, Vice President of Rules, Safety and Judging, brought an idea to the USASF Board of Directors proposing new Divisions at Worlds. The idea would split Small and Medium Senior and Small and Medium Senior Coed into Divisions I and II based on gym size as a way to address two specific requests from Worlds participants: 1) to reduce the number of teams in the four largest cheer divisions, and 2) to create an avenue for smaller gyms to maintain athletes and to be more competitive at Worlds. The Board asked Les to take the idea to members for input and feedback and bring a proposal to the October Board Meeting.


Coaches and owners who attended USASF Regional Meetings over the summer participated in discussions with Les about Divisions I and II. He also presented and discussed the idea with the Worlds Advisory Board, The National Advisory Board, the Sanctioning Committee, the NACCC Board of Directors and Executive Committee and finally the Division II committee, created specifically to vet the idea from all angles. On the October 10th Board Conference Call, Les presented the results of all meetings.



Overall support is positive across the industry for Division II at Worlds. There also is caution being voiced for taking the time to carefully plan and roll out this new program in a manner that will be successful for all participants. After discussion, the Board unanimously agreed that, while in support of Division II, the concept is not fully ready to implement in 2014. The Board further agreed that it will continue discussions at the November, 2013 meeting with the goal of focusing on the potential of including Division II for Worlds, 2015.

 

[chyeeaaa69]

I'm curious whether instating a Division II into Worlds would actually deter athletes from leaving their smaller programs for bigger programs. Personally, I believe if an athlete is going to leave, the chance of them becoming "Division II World Champions" isn't something that will keep most athletes at the programs they intend to leave, but I'd be interested to see if something like this actually does one of the things it is intended to do.
Also a question behind the logic of part of this. Though Division I and Division II would reduce the size of those 4 divisions, it would not reduce the amount of participants at Worlds, so what's the point? I can see that less competition would make the chances of winning Worlds/being more successful at Worlds a little higher for a few teams, but how much will it actually impact how well most teams in those divisions do? (Again, something that would not be fully realized until AFTER it is instated).
Out of curiosity, how many of the top 10 in those four divisions from 2013 were from "small gyms"?

 

[Ashley]

I'm curious whether instating a Division II into Worlds would actually deter athletes from leaving their smaller programs for bigger programs. Personally, I believe if an athlete is going to leave, the chance of them becoming "Division II World Champions" isn't something that will keep most athletes at the programs they intend to leave, but I'd be interested to see if something like this actually does one of the things it is intended to do.
Also a question behind the logic of part of this. Though Division I and Division II would reduce the size of those 4 divisions, it would not reduce the amount of participants at Worlds, so what's the point? I can see that less competition would make the chances of winning Worlds/being more successful at Worlds a little higher for a few teams, but how much will it actually impact how well most teams in those divisions do? (Again, something that would not be fully realized until AFTER it is instated).
Out of curiosity, how many of the top 10 in those four divisions from 2013 were from "small gyms"?

This is something we discussed earlier in the thread. I can't say for sure if it will work or not, but like I said then, I know a bunch of girls who were DIII college national champions and I know they don't view their title as any less legitimate because it's not DI or IA.

 

[blunchin]

i hope for the continued delay of the implementation of this new division.

 

[kristenthegreat]

This is something we discussed earlier in the thread. I can't say for sure if it will work or not, but like I said then, I know a bunch of girls who were DIII college national champions and I know they don't view their title as any less legitimate because it's not DI or IA.

Do you think the setup of college nationals is similar to the current setup of allstar or different? College divisions confuse me because it seems like there's 25 divisions and they don't seem particularly deep..

 

[Ashley]

Do you think the setup of college nationals is similar to the current setup of allstar or different? College divisions confuse me because it seems like there's 25 divisions and they don't seem particularly deep..

It's really based on football divisions, but I don't think the divisions are that shallw. At NCA they recently split all girl into D1 and D1A like coed is. The old D1 All-girls had close to 20 teams in it (or more?). A few years before that they split D2 into D2 and D3, they were combined before that. Then there's the intermediate divisions, but that's clearly not of the same caliber.

ETA: I would add more but I'm on my phone and tapatalk is cropping my text box so I can't see what I'm typing right now.

ETA2: Okay so here's what I meant to say. If divisions are split by an objective decider - gym size - then I think over time a win in D2 won't seem like a such a consolation prize. HPU could hang with a lot of the teams in D1, but because of the size of their school they're in D2. That doesn't stop people from wanting to go there. But it has to be objective, and you can't have the option to move up to D1 - or else D2 will seem like a second class win.

And look, obviously a team winning D1 at college nationals is almost certainly better than the team that wins D3, but that doesn't mean that a D3 win should be qualified with "Yeah, we won, but it was only D3."


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

 

[L5cheermom]

I am encouraged that they have decided to table the idea for 2014 to allow for further discussion and consideration. I think it shows an awareness on the part of the USASF of the need to consider all those affected before proceeding with a proposal that would significantly impact the sport. Seems like a bit of a change in strategy for them.

 

[12stepCheermom]

It's really based on football divisions, but the divisions I don't think they're that shallow. At NCA they recently split all girl into D1 and D1A following the football team splits. The old D1 had close to 20 teams in it. A few years before that they split D2 into D2 and D3, they were combined before that. Then there's the intermediate divisions, but that's clearly not of the same caliber.

ETA: I would add more but I'm on my phone and taps talk is cropping my text box so I can't see what I'm typing right now.



The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

Does that to me too, I think its @kings way of keeping me from posting too much


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

 

[Coach Troy]

Since the powers that be are discussing this proposal, does anyone know how us common folk can officially put our 2cents in??
After all membership means we get a voice right

 

[redshark]

It's really based on football divisions, but I don't think the divisions are that shallw. At NCA they recently split all girl into D1 and D1A like coed is. The old D1 All-girls had close to 20 teams in it (or more?). A few years before that they split D2 into D2 and D3, they were combined before that. Then there's the intermediate divisions, but that's clearly not of the same caliber.

ETA: I would add more but I'm on my phone and tapatalk is cropping my text box so I can't see what I'm typing right now.

ETA2: Okay so here's what I meant to say. If divisions are split by an objective decider - gym size - then I think over time a win in D2 won't seem like a such a consolation prize. HPU could hang with a lot of the teams in D1, but because of the size of their school they're in D2. That doesn't stop people from wanting to go there. But it has to be objective, and you can't have the option to move up to D1 - or else D2 will seem like a second class win.

And look, obviously a team winning D1 at college nationals is almost certainly better than the team that wins D3, but that doesn't mean that a D3 win should be qualified with "Yeah, we won, but it was only D3."


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!

The difference I see with all-star and college divisions though is that in college, your division is set by college size, where only a fraction of the population is cheerleaders vs. gym size, where everyone cheers. So yes, HPU is a D2 team that could be very competitive at the D1 level, but I don't think this is comparable to the proposed USASF divisions because HPU's competitiveness attracts strong athletes to go to HPU and try-out for the team; these additional hopefuls aren't enough to impact their college size or athletic program enough to change their division Conversely, if it were an all-star gym that did great in D2 and their competitiveness attracted more people to go to that gym and try-out for their Worlds team, any sizeable growth from their success would push them into DI.
I guess what I'm saying is that gym size and success would be a lot more elastic than college size and success. The limit on what divides a gym from being Division I from Division II would have to be very carefully determined.