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

[ryann3794]

So correct me if I'm wrong: with what you just said, with a split, your gym/team would still be very competitive if you were split into the small program because you faired well this year with your first World's team as you earned a paid bid this year and did well enough to make it to finals. I'd consider this to be a successful premiere at Worlds. Congrats, by the way, I'm impressed!


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

I'm against the split because yeah maybe with a split vizion could have placed in the top 3 in the small division but they wouldn't be competing against the best of the best. It's not a true win.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[Mclovin]

vizion is in Michigan but goes to very few in state competitions, they got their bid at cheer power and competed against a good amount of worlds teams, they were NOT just handed that bid. Yet worked EXTREMLY hard for it. My main point was they ended up in finals so it doesn't really matter where they're from, who they competed against, Etc because they competed against all the big names at worlds.



The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

I did not realize they made finals...congrats!!! That is an amazing feat!!

I certainly didn't want to come across like they didn't earn their bid although I feel like I did. I apologize for that. I was just trying to get some idea as to the circumstances behind the paid bid so as to determine if my argument was valid.

 

[Audrey]

I've also said this for years....keep things as they are but require large gyms to compete in the large division, medium sized gyms in the medium division and small gyms in the small division. Doing it this way would at least ensure large senior and large coed to have more depth.

I can't see this happening but if it did, it would be so epic. I'm just picturing the 36 absolute best athletes from all of the "mega gyms" battling it out against each other.
Can this be a thing for just a year purely so we can watch?

 

[jcheermom]

I'm against the split because yeah maybe with a split vizion could have placed in the top 3 in the small division but they wouldn't be competing against the best of the best. It's not a true win.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

I'm seeing this as a win, because it is still an impressive feat what you have accomplished this year with such a new program. However, I do see your point.
In the end, if you do globe in that split, I would hope those teams from that split would receive the same recognition as those in the large gym split. In a perfect system, the answer would be YES, but somehow I think it may take some time for this to come around.
I guess you have made me see both sides of this situation, and honestly, I'm not sure where I stand. CP came from a small program, but is now at a large one, so I can see both points of view.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[gymcatmomx2]

shortened your post for space. i'm not really for this idea, as i think there are enough splits already but your post is an interesting idea. so for those top 20 gyms that would have to compete against each other, what if their teams are in different divisions? or does this require they all be large senior? or does team size or coed/all girl makeup not matter and they just compete against one another anyway? would you want this applied across the board, levels 1-6, or are we only talking worlds, here? if 1-6, again how would the different divisions work?

The reason i am not for this is because of the smaller gyms slowly rising to the top of the rankings in recent years. Gyms like MACs, GBE, South Elite, LACF, Cheer Eclipse, Pro Cheer, Cheers and More, HotCheer, Vizion, All Star Revolution, etc are all smaller gyms who made top 10 or higher this year alone and are encroaching upon the podiums, taking spots from "big gyms."

does location, population, wealth of the surrounding areas, school rules, etc all factor into a gym's success? probably. but at the same time most of the big names are reaching or have already surpassed their 20th season. these new gyms haven't been around as long and they'll get there, IMO.

I think we need to define exactly what we mean when we refer to a gym as "small". To me, small is defined as 75 athletes or less. I do not know now many athletes those gyms that you referenced have, but it seems like some of them have more than 75 athletes. I think the demographics of where a small gym is located makes a huge difference. Our gym is going on its 15th season and has on average about 65 athletes. The majority of the cheerleaders in our area started out at our gym as show, minis, level 1, etc. They learned and honed their skills at our gym....and once they obtained level 5 skills promptly moved to the large/mega gyms that are all within 30 minutes of our gym (CA, SOT, Excite, Champion, Pro Spirit, etc). Have we had level 5 teams? Absolutely! Have we been serious World's contenders? Absolutely not! If we had been able to compete fairly and kept the athletes that our gym trained, then yes we would be EXREMELY competitive. The DFW area is drenched in all-star gyms. In fact, another new gym just opened in the metroplex. This year we have fielded a strong R5 team where every athlete has a full and some of them are working on their doubles. I just hope they don't "jump ship".

 

[tucknduck]

Why don't we just let every team win worlds?

Unfortunately, in today's world, it has come to this. Everybody has to win to make them feel adequate. A long time ago, my 9 yr old son once got a participation trophy for baseball and asked me what it was for since his team didn't win any league championships and were a .500 team that year and got eliminated in the league playoffs. He wanted to throw away the trophy at the fields since it meant nothing other than showing up to play but I just told him to take it home and can do what he wants with it then.

Why dumb Worlds down? The small gym gimmick already used in lower levels. It doesn't belong at the Worlds level teams. Why not let it be survival of the fittest. That's what brings out a champion.

 

[Mclovin]

Unfortunately, in today's world, it has come to this. Everybody has to win to make them feel adequate. A long time ago, my 9 yr old son once got a participation trophy for baseball and asked me what it was for since his team didn't win any league championships and were a .500 team that year and got eliminated in the league playoffs. He wanted to throw away the trophy at the fields since it meant nothing other than showing up to play but I just told him to take it home and can do what he wants with it then.

Why dumb Worlds down? The small gym gimmick already used in lower levels. It doesn't belong at the Worlds level teams. Why not let it be survival of the fittest. That's what brings out a champion.

So would it be fair to say that this should be the case for high schools and colleges too? Not sure why people think a "small gym" champion is any less of a champion. I am all for competition. Trust me. Our gym of a little more than 150 total athletes has been able to beat many top mega gyms in various divisions. But at the end of the day, when mega gyms are getting even bigger, and small gyms are struggling to survive, I think separating by size is not a bad idea. Will people max out the Milkhouse to watch the small gym world champions compete? Nope. But you don't hear much about the division II champs from NCA college nationals either. Doesn't make them any less of a champion.

 

[icame2WERQ]

It is not about letting everyone win/ everyone being a winner, it is about having fair competitive competition.

 

[ACEDAD]

I'm not necessarily interested in seeing a split based on size but more on "design" for lack of a better word. For example, the FBS and FCS aren't separated on size of the schools but on the goals and desires and resources of the schools.

So if a smaller gym wanted to step up and compete in Division I then they can.

But to make this work, there would have to be requirements and rewards for Division I that are significant from Division II.


The Fierce Board: If you're gonna be talked about, shouldn't you at least be here to defend yourself?

 

[gofriars610]

I'm not necessarily interested in seeing a split based on size but more on "design" for lack of a better word. For example, the FBS and FCS aren't separated on size of the schools but on the goals and desires and resources of the schools.

So if a smaller gym wanted to step up and compete in Division I then they can.

But to make this work, there would have to be requirements and rewards for Division I that are significant from Division II.


The Fierce Board: If you're gonna be talked about, shouldn't you at least be here to defend yourself?

^ This. It's kind of reminiscent of the Old Big East / New Big East blow up that happened in basketball last season/this season. All of the football schools basically peaced out of the conference, leaving Big East 2.0 as only the schools who are more focused on basketball. I think it worked out best for everyone in the end.*


*yes I realize I'm incredibly biased because there's no way in heck that my school would have won the old big east tournament and we did this year buuuuuut in the long run I think it's better to have a basketball-centered conference.

 

[luv2cheer92]

^ This. It's kind of reminiscent of the Old Big East / New Big East blow up that happened in basketball last season/this season. All of the football schools basically peaced out of the conference, leaving Big East 2.0 as only the schools who are more focused on basketball. I think it worked out best for everyone in the end.*


*yes I realize I'm incredibly biased because there's no way in heck that my school would have won the old big east tournament and we did this year buuuuuut in the long run I think it's better to have a basketball-centered conference.

Wahh I miss the old Big East Haha, I like to think being in that conference was the reason my alma mater was really good at sports and was pretty dominant my first 3 years of undergrad and now sucks at everything.

 

[gofriars610]

Wahh I miss the old Big East Haha, I like to think being in that conference was the reason my alma mater was really good at sports and was pretty dominant my first 3 years of undergrad and now sucks at everything.

Ooh who's your alma mater?

 

[luv2cheer92]

Ooh who's your alma mater?

WVU!


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[Mclovin]

I'm not necessarily interested in seeing a split based on size but more on "design" for lack of a better word. For example, the FBS and FCS aren't separated on size of the schools but on the goals and desires and resources of the schools.

So if a smaller gym wanted to step up and compete in Division I then they can.

But to make this work, there would have to be requirements and rewards for Division I that are significant from Division II.


The Fierce Board: If you're gonna be talked about, shouldn't you at least be here to defend yourself?

So this would be kinda like someone posted earlier...having a non worlds level 5 division that isn't R5. But having this option for all levels? Am I understanding correctly? I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to this idea.

 

[ACEDAD]

So this would be kinda like someone posted earlier...having a non worlds level 5 division that isn't R5. But having this option for all levels? Am I understanding correctly? I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to this idea.

I think so. I would want to see an overall reduction in divisions because this would increase the overall total number of divisions.

But it would almost allow a decision to compete in Division I or II. Also all locations of a gym would have to be locked in to the same division, however that needs to happen. Maybe logo or whatever. And a franchises location counts.


The Fierce Board: if a team cheers and isn't talked about, does it still get a medal?