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

[Cheeranswers]

If you are going to test if gym size is correlated to results, don't just use "Big" or "Small" as your values for gym size - use actual estimates of enrollment numbers if that is available.

i did use actual numbers of athletes to the best of my ability. I went to their websites/facebook pages and looked for specific numbers, and if those werent openly available i did an educated guess based on the number of teams. if they have 10 teams, chances are they arent fitting the "small gym" of 75 or 150 or whatever they decide, since some teams could be large, medium etc, but if they were all small, its still over the number. some gyms had things like "with over 750 athletes" which was very helpful

 

[Deleted member 15]

I'll see what I can get. Please be patient as the person most likely to be able to pull this and I won't both be in the country on the same day for a couple weeks.

 

[kristenthegreat]

I'll see what I can get. Please be patient as the person most likely to be able to pull this and I won't both be in the country on the same day for a couple weeks.

No worries- I'm glad they've bumped it 'til at least 2015. Gives time for data collection!

If possible- can you amend my numbers selection to include all divisions? I'm aware that it would include a much larger pool of data and therefore make it more difficult. If it's easier to start with the initial divisions requested (seeing as those are the ones in discussion) and add the others in later, that works for me. I know it's a lot- but I feel it's incredibly beneficial.

 

[idrive]

I love this idea. Having two separate divisions at Worlds. One for the big gyms and one for the ones who want to be in DII or try for DI.

http://usasf.net.ismmedia.com/ISM2//Board/USASF_Board-Notes_13-JUN.pdf

Last topic. Thoughts?

I like it because it gives some teams who are currently a victim of geographics / smaller markets a way to feel as if they are competing for something other than simply going "for the experience". This sport has grown and continues to grow and it may simply be necessary to create some division to help it continue and not become an exclusive sport.

 

[BlueCat]

I assume everyone knows that multi-facility "mega-programs" would be entering those divisions also.

 

[King]

I assume everyone knows that multi-facility "mega-programs" would be entering those divisions also.

Until they define what a gym/program is I had assumed as much. And then we can actually define what is a gym.

 

[CoachTamara]

Ok, has the small gym number of 75 been discussed as the actual break? Because I just assumed it wouldn't be, but maybe I'm wrong. The number of 75 is great for lower levels and national competitions, but for worlds? Yeah right. I figured the break would be somewhere around 200 athletes, where there are probably numerous gyms both above and below this number that attend worlds.

 

[Bombmom]

I was kind of anti this, but after hearing the actual demographics of what the cut off May actually be it doesn't seem to really effect the outcome - done of the gyms that consistently perform well at Worlds will still fall into the small gym category. So yeah, I'm all good with it now


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

 

[BlueCat]

Until they define what a gym/program is I had assumed as much. And then we can actually define what is a gym.

I can't see a way to define it that gyms can't easily (and legally) get around. It would actually encourage and enable some of the mega-gyms to open smaller, satellite programs in different locations. They could now have more "Worlds" teams that would not have to compete against each other.

I would caution some to be careful what they wish for.

 

[Mclovin]

I assume everyone knows that multi-facility "mega-programs" would be entering those divisions also.

True, but if they did, they would not be able to "share" athletes from their larger locations, correct?

 

[King]

I can't see a way to define it that gyms can't easily (and legally) get around. It would actually encourage and enable some of the mega-gyms to open smaller, satellite programs in different locations. They could now have more "Worlds" teams that would not have to compete against each other.

I would caution some to be careful what they wish for.

I imagine there would end up being NCAA style regulations. Coaches cannot be coaches at different programs, but can be hired out as consultants. Then coaches cannot be in the warmup room unless they are with their team (which that is coming anyway). And then in the registration system you can only be part of teams that you officially coach.

Electronic system management of teams and gyms and programs is coming either way and is going to change the way cheer does the books. Look at what is all coming just this year. There is only more and more coming.

 

[King]

I can't see a way to define it that gyms can't easily (and legally) get around. It would actually encourage and enable some of the mega-gyms to open smaller, satellite programs in different locations. They could now have more "Worlds" teams that would not have to compete against each other.

I would caution some to be careful what they wish for.

Also from a health insurance standpoint I think most gyms should make smaller and smaller staffs and locations to avoid having to provide health insurance. As well make sure employees are not full time or are just contracted out.

 

[Ashley]

Also from a health insurance standpoint I think most gyms should make smaller and smaller staffs and locations to avoid having to provide health insurance. As well make sure employees are not full time or are just contracted out.

You don't have to offer insurance unless you have the equivalent of 50 full time staff members. Does Cheer Athletics even have that?

 

[quitthedrama]

I can't see a way to define it that gyms can't easily (and legally) get around. It would actually encourage and enable some of the mega-gyms to open smaller, satellite programs in different locations. They could now have more "Worlds" teams that would not have to compete against each other.

I would caution some to be careful what they wish for.

Why can't it be considered the same gym if it is the same name, same tax id and/or same ownership/staff?

 

[CheerBank]

I assume everyone knows that multi-facility "mega-programs" would be entering those divisions also.

Until they define what a gym/program is I had assumed as much. And then we can actually define what is a gym.

Then what is the point of all this Div 1/Div 2 talk if a mega-gym can also compete as Div 2 because their satellite gym has smaller numbers than the determined cut-off? I thought that one of the deciding factors was not only the number of athletes at a gym but if a gym had multiple locations or satellite gyms as well. Reading that post from @BlueCat makes me feel like the proposed split is now a just big game for the mega-gyms to play so that they can have Worlds teams not competing against each other.