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

[MissCongeniality]

Interesting. The Super Bowl has professional athletes who are paid to compete. Allstar is supposed to be amateur athletes like college.

Supposed to be...but not all are (but that's another discussion all together). Ok so I was using football because that's what @rulesguy used. Go back to the Olympics comparison then. My opinion... Being a "World Champion" should mean you beat the other teams/competitors doing the same thing in the World, whether you are a skier from Haiti or Austria. The Olympics doesn't create special divisions because some countries don't have snow or have only 1 swimming pool in their entire country. You work with what you have for your chance to compete against the best so that you can call yourself a World Champion. Maybe Worlds should get a new name so it is not so confusing to those outside the sport who are going to have trouble not throwing this into the "how many nationals do you have" discussion. This sport already has a bazillion "national champions" running around every year so why not a couple dozen World Champions?

Again, I see pros and cons. I totally understand the struggle of the small gym versus mega gym... I just don't think "Worlds" (the industry's supposed pinnacle) is the place to be splitting divisions.

 

[MissCongeniality]

Those teams that go to worlds without a paid bid and do well are the exception, not the rule. It's my understanding (and I think @BlueCat has discussed this before) that no team, outside of level 6, has won on an at large bid. And very few have medaled.

And as the exception, should they be relegated to division 2? I don't think anyone's saying that it's a hard and fast rule that paid bid winners are absolutely better than the at-large bid winners, but it's definitely a pretty solid indicator.

California Allstars Sparkle (IO5) did this year

 

[tumbleyoda]

I absolutely love this idea and hope it passes. You have programs that have 1000 athletes, kids flying in from across the country, staying in housing programs competing against small time gyms with 200 kids and a population base of 30,000. There will never be an avenue for the smaller programs to compete in Level 5 if this isn't passed. Kudos to everyone who is behind this.

This is why I have been advocating for something like this on this board and previous boards. With my current demographics there is simply no way I can be as competitive as the top teams in small coed because to do those things (housing, full scholarships, etc) in house would actually cause me to lose customers not keep them.

Kudos for finally not just admitting there is a grossly unfair competitive advantage that has nothing to do with the scoreshet of Smoed or Top Gun(for example only) against my Small Coed team, but for trying to do something to have like teams/programs competing against each other.

@RulesGuy - my suggestion would be is to let the Div II programs compete at Summit. Let them have that event as their World's. This way you are building up the Summit across the board in every division, and you get the chance to showcase the Div II programs in a setting where they have their own spotlight - without incurring extra cost of another venue or adding more division to Worlds weekend.

 

[King]

This is why I have been advocating for something like this on this board and previous boards. With my current demographics there is simply no way I can be as competitive as the top teams in small coed because to do those things (housing, full scholarships, etc) in house would actually cause me to lose customers not keep them.

Kudos for finally not just admitting there is a grossly unfair competitive advantage that has nothing to do with the scoreshet of Smoed or Top Gun(for example only) against my Small Coed team, but for trying to do something to have like teams/programs competing against each other.

@RulesGuy - my suggestion would be is to let the Div II programs compete at Summit. Let them have that event as their World's. This way you are building up the Summit across the board in every division, and you get the chance to showcase the Div II programs in a setting where they have their own spotlight - without incurring extra cost of another venue or adding more division to Worlds weekend.

While the USASF still owes all that money to Varsity it itself cannot organize an event other that Worlds.

 

[BamaCheerGuy]

This is why I have been advocating for something like this on this board and previous boards. With my current demographics there is simply no way I can be as competitive as the top teams in small coed because to do those things (housing, full scholarships, etc) in house would actually cause me to lose customers not keep them.

Kudos for finally not just admitting there is a grossly unfair competitive advantage that has nothing to do with the scoreshet of Smoed or Top Gun(for example only) against my Small Coed team, but for trying to do something to have like teams/programs competing against each other.

@RulesGuy - my suggestion would be is to let the Div II programs compete at Summit. Let them have that event as their World's. This way you are building up the Summit across the board in every division, and you get the chance to showcase the Div II programs in a setting where they have their own spotlight - without incurring extra cost of another venue or adding more division to Worlds weekend.

I like this except, I may be mistaken, you have to do a varsity event to attend the summit. Is that right? Worlds is capable of being attended by all and bids are awarded at IEPs and Jamfest. Am I wrong? I know there are many pinnacles, the one, summit, u a finals etc. this would put us back at square one if this is correct.


This post is verified by Chad Mulkey!

 

[tumbleyoda]

This is what I posted in a previous thread about this same concept:

I like the conference system like NCAA. I feel like when you look at All Star programs across the country your pretty much see 3 divisions: (A) Super Competitive - Worlds/Summit/All Levels/US Finals or the year is a bust. (B) Competitive but not at the expense of program ideals, values, ethics, etc - Happy to win, but not going to throw a hissy fit if you lose - the experience is worth it. (C) Performance/Intro - welcome to the World of All Star cheer from Rec, other sports, pretty much a beginner All Star program. IMO there is no way you can say it is competition when program type A competes against program type C.

As I have long said I would favor two divisions: One for program type A and one for programs type B and C. Only program A is eligible for Worlds, after all that is what they are after.

Programs B and C are not eligible for Worlds. I would allow those programs to compete their Level 5 teams (if they had them) at Summit/US Finals either as exhibition, or to get a pre determined point total to be eligible to move to the Worlds division the following year. This alone would alleviate the overcrowding at Worlds.

Programs B and C could voluntarily make the jump to the higher division no later than Jan of the competitive year. However they would have to compete at that division for every team in the gym, not just their worlds level teams. Once at the higher level they could not drop back to the lower level of competition. It also affects the entire gym, not just one team. This would cause owners to think long and hard about moving up just to try to go to Worlds.

The downside is program A types would pretty much only compete against like programs which may mean they will only have competition at bigger events. The upside is that every time they compete it will be against somebody who is just as competitive as they are and who are capable of possibly beating them. Just some thoughts. More to come.

I don't think we rank them. I think the owners should know what their plans are and what path they want their gym to take. Honestly if there was another viable option I have coached at least 4 teams that would not of went to Worlds if there was another great option for them. But there was not so they went to Worlds. Did they win? No. Were they an embarrassment, No. Did they hit their routines? Yes. Did they grow by it? Yes. But if I/we had another option believe me we would not of gone.

Which is why I like the option for that smaller competitive program if they want to "play with the big boys" than to let them do so. I think if you make it based on size you will even find among the mega gym models those with really good Level 5 teams and then the rest of the teams within that program are not as strong.​

What this does is allow gyms to build up their programs as you say. Which is what I want to see and not have gyms feel like they have no choice but to merge/close.

http://forum.spiritcompany.com/threads/your-dream-champions-league.32330/ ​

 

[cupieqt]

Now we are getting into the "how to improve worlds" branch of things.

To stay on the topic of this thread what should be the criteria of D1/D2 at worlds? This may actually be happening if Les sees it through. So, fellow small gym owners/coaches, how should we determine the split?


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

 

[CoachTamara]

Now we are getting into the "how to improve worlds" branch of things.

To stay on the topic of this thread what should be the criteria of D1/D2 at worlds? This may actually be happening if Les sees it through. So, fellow small gym owners/coaches, how should we determine the split?


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

Hmmm... I can't decide if this should be based on L5 athletes or entire gym. Yes, you might have a ton of lower aged/level kids, but how do you decide who is considered a L5 and who isn't? You would almost have to go by gym size. I assume that any team producing a L5 worlds team has to probably have about 150 kids in it... Maybe less if you are a worlds team that is closer to a level 4 in reality (although that's another story). When I think of "second tier" gyms, I would say they all fall in the category of having 250 athletes or less... So let's say D2 is 250 athletes or less, and D1 is 250+. All locations contribute to your total.

I'm thinking that major players currently all have 250+ athletes in them, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, just throwing it out there that I would rather split into a D1, D2, D3 thing at events over small team vs large team. Scoresheets SHOULD be able to accurately score a team of different sizes, and there is more of a difference between teams due to gym size rather than team size. LOVE that idea!

 

[tumbleyoda]

Now we are getting into the "how to improve worlds" branch of things.

To stay on the topic of this thread what should be the criteria of D1/D2 at worlds? This may actually be happening if Les sees it through. So, fellow small gym owners/coaches, how should we determine the split?


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

Just throwing a number out for discussion. In no way am I settled on it.

125 enrollment in All Star cheer program. Prep program, tumble classes and other gym classes offered do not count towards this number. Only those enrolled and competing in the all star program. One location only.


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

 

[AndrewSky]

How many athletes (approximately) does Green Bay have?

 

[tumbleyoda]

I am not sure how many Green Bay has, I would have an exemption for any program that wanted to be D1 regardless of their numbers.

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

 

[kristenthegreat]

You are assuming if someone doesn't do this other stuff will be fixed. Presume this exists in a box. Nothing else will be done if this is not done. Should this still be done?

I don't know if it should be in the exact way described. In my perfect hypothetical: some Summit-type event is run by USASF, and teams that are D2 should be competing at that end-of-the-season event (assuming they qualify). D2 teams should also be competing D2 all year.

I was thinking about this in between my show today-This will become ANOTHER thing we have to explain to people in a sport that seems as confusing as heck to outside people already. Personally, I think D2 should NOT be called a World Champion. Maybe a Grand National Champion? That way, if they want the big title they have to compete D1, but still get a more cohesive national championship title along with their 'happy fun worlds experience.'

 

[NewbCoach]

Hello Everyone,
If you think about college football (it's just an example so don't go off on a college football rant), they have Div 1A, Div II, etc... and all of their divisions have championships. There are plenty of details to work out so stay tuned.

edit: Sorry for the length....just kept going lol

In keeping with you CFB comparision, FBS vs football subdivision teams have nothing to do with size. Schools like Noter Dame (8300 undergards) or U of Miami (10 300) can compete at the FBS level if they choose to against the OSU's Alabama's or other 50K plus schools. The teams choose which division to compete in. It works specifically because the teams choose where to compete. Size has nothing to do with it.

Furthermore, big schools that compete in the Football Subdivision don't dominate - the top kids don't want to compete their so they will go to the lower level FBS schools and try to upset the big dogs before going to the subdivision. Basically the lower division are for teams that just are not there and know they are not going to be there and they are good with a lower level championship.

IMO the problem with limiting D1 based on gym sizes is that you will basically have athletes leaving small gyms for the chance to compete in D1 at worlds. This can only serve to hurt small programs who will have an even harder time trying to grow a high level program. This will just serve to feed the established teams and hurt the small up and coming gyms.

I am new to the cheer world, so I don't know how big GBE, PCM, Mac's etc are but from how they are talked about they would seem to be smaller programs than the big names but it would be wrong not to have them competing, they are great teams that could easily win and only seem to be getting better - that would stop pretty quickly if they were told they had to compete in D2 and half their athletes left for a D1 team. Can't blame the athletes, they are doing what the rules force them to do to compete at the highest level.

This will also not only effect level 5 teams, any parent who has a younger CP that shows the promise to reach L5 will go to a big name gym first because if they can make it to that level (even if they can't), because those are the only gyms that will compete in D1. There will be a ripple effect down to the lower levels as athletes are driven to the top gyms even more.

The big will get bigger and the small will struggle on more than they already do if you force small gyms into D2 based soley on arbitrary numbers. If you just want to status quo with the top 10-15 gyms remaining dominant this is a great idea, if you want to build the sport beyond those team I think you have to let the small gyms compete in D1 if they choose.

If teams are putting themselves in the wrong division the market will take care of it - no parent is going to want to put their kid on a team that gets destroyed at D1 worlds when they should be in D2 and conversely, I would hope that most athletes (and likely parents) would not be satisfied winning D2 when they know they should be in D1. Given the parents are still footing the bill this should be self correcting for gyms.

 

[AndrewSky]

edit: Sorry for the length....just kept going lol


I am new to the cheer world, so I don't know how big GBE, PCM, Mac's etc are but from how they are talked about they would seem to be smaller programs than the big names but it would be wrong not to have them competing, they are great teams that could easily win and only seem to be getting better - that would stop pretty quickly if they were told they had to compete in D2 and half their athletes left for a D1 team. Can't blame the athletes, they are doing what the rules force them to do to compete at the highest level.

I am curious to how big Green Bay is too.
But PCM isn't a small program at all. They have 25+ and five/six worlds teams.

 

[CoachTamara]

I have no problem allowing a team that is under the number of athletes CHOOSE to compete in D1. If you want to play with the big dogs, go for it! I just think there needs to be a place for gyms that cannot logically field a team to compete against gyms with 500+ kids.
Also, we don't want to explain to people about more world champions? I don't think people call a DII school that wins less of a champion... They are simply the best against teams of their same size and caliber. I don't care what people outside of all-star think... It's not a sport anyway.