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

[Mclovin]

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?

I am definitely NOT in favor of more divisions. So I would agree that IF any kind of splitting occurred it needs to be in a way that other divisions can be combined/eliminated.

Maybe doing a Div 1 and Div 2 would eliminate having subdivisions altogether. So at NCA there wouldn't be small sr 3A, small sr 3B, etc. just small sr 3 div 1 and small sr 3 div 2?

 

[tucknduck]

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.

It would be fair that it should be that way for high school and college but being there are so many schools and money is needed to generate interest and the ability to hold these events, more potential champions are created from multiple divisions to give more teams a chance to win some sort of title. I suppose the same could be said for cheerleading that these multi-divisions within a given level are necessary to keep the sport alive and not exclusive to the very best and biggest teams to compete. At the end of the day, if it's a solution that works, then that's really all that matters.

 

[UCFKnights07]

^ 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.

Took the words right out of my mouth about big east conference. UCF joined the year before it fell apart, the school worked it's butt off to finally get into a good conference and then it fell apart after one season. Granted I'm not complaining now cause we did beat Baylor, But still. People were pissed.

 

[Tosh]

It would be fair that it should be that way for high school and college but being there are so many schools and money is needed to generate interest and the ability to hold these events, more potential champions are created from multiple divisions to give more teams a chance to win some sort of title. I suppose the same could be said for cheerleading that these multi-divisions within a given level are necessary to keep the sport alive and not exclusive to the very best and biggest teams to compete. At the end of the day, if it's a solution that works, then that's really all that matters.

I am not sure how to take this comment about HS and college haveing Divisions "more potential champions are created....." I believe the Divisions exist to make it an even playing field. Please keep in mind that this is different from AllStar because these (HS/College) are not for profit organizations.....you get to pick from what you have. So to have a Jr. college or a HS with only 800 Kids total, compete against a HS with 2500 kids....Obviously the HS with 2500 kids have a much wider base to choose from versus a small HS with only 800 kids.....we can't import athlethes and offer free "tuition" and other perks to bing the best of the best to compete with us....we just have to choose from what we have....JMO

 

[tumbleyoda]

Based on my posts about this subject over the years from ProX boards till now I have advocated the following:

1) Allow there to be Non World's Division Level 5.

It costs lest money to implement
It allows teams to develop their Level 5 program and compete without putting them in the Worlds division
There is no incentive for a World's team to compete in that division to prove anything
It only affects the level 5 division and not Levels 1-4
It allows the Worlds teams to be judged by that standard and against like teams they will probably be competing against at Worlds.
You can move your team from Non World's level 5 to Worlds Level 5 division at anytime, but once there you can not move back for the rest of that cheer year.

***extra benefit - less whining of the ________ team shouldn't of been at Worlds/ ______ had a bad day so they still should of gotten a bid crowd.***

If this was not done then

2) Division I and Division II

Allows gym to chose their division based on their demographics and focus
You can petition USASF to move up from Division II to Division I by October of the year.
Once Division I you can not move down to Division II.
Gym/Franchises can not compete in both Divisions. (You can't be mega for business sake but small for competition sake)
Requires more work to implement but allows gyms to compete against like gyms in every level.

If you use the Division I/II model you keep the small gym division a non Worlds division and the numbers can remain at 75.

You now have provided opportunities for every type of gym. Large and small. Mega and micro. Fan favorite and who the heck are they from all stars. Not to win - but to compete against like teams.

Both ideas allows a gym to plan wisely and chart the path that coincides best with their business plan for themselves.

There are holes in both ideas of course, but that was the main reasons I had behind these ideas.

ETA side note: Two years or so before USASF had a restricted 5 division the small competition company I worked for had a division for Level 5 and 5a. We recognized way back then that there was a difference that was not being recognized and respected. Because small gyms were our key market, we knew their needs and tried to address them as we could. At times it feels like now the only thing a small gym is good for is to try to sell uniforms, shoes, camps and choreography to to try to make them look/act like the big gyms. JMO.

 

[njallday]

Based on my posts about this subject over the years from ProX boards till now I have advocated the following:

1) Allow there to be Non World's Division Level 5.

It costs lest money to implement
It allows teams to develop their Level 5 program and compete without putting them in the Worlds division
There is no incentive for a World's team to compete in that division to prove anything
It only affects the level 5 division and not Levels 1-4
It allows the Worlds teams to be judged by that standard and against like teams they will probably be competing against at Worlds.
You can move your team from Non World's level 5 to Worlds Level 5 division at anytime, but once there you can not move back for the rest of that cheer year.

***extra benefit - less whining of the ________ team shouldn't of been at Worlds/ ______ had a bad day so they still should of gotten a bid crowd.***

If this was not done then

2) Division I and Division II

Allows gym to chose their division based on their demographics and focus
You can petition USASF to move up from Division II to Division I by October of the year.
Once Division I you can not move down to Division II.
Gym/Franchises can not compete in both Divisions. (You can't be mega for business sake but small for competition sake)
Requires more work to implement but allows gyms to compete against like gyms in every level.

If you use the Division I/II model you keep the small gym division a non Worlds division and the numbers can remain at 75.

You now have provided opportunities for every type of gym. Large and small. Mega and micro. Fan favorite and who the heck are they from all stars. Not to win - but to compete against like teams.

Both ideas allows a gym to plan wisely and chart the path that coincides best with their business plan for themselves.

There are holes in both ideas of course, but that was the main reasons I had behind these ideas.

ETA side note: Two years or so before USASF had a restricted 5 division the small competition company I worked for had a division for Level 5 and 5a. We recognized way back then that there was a difference that was not being recognized and respected. Because small gyms were our key market, we knew their needs and tried to address them as we could. At times it feels like now the only thing a small gym is good for is to try to sell uniforms, shoes, camps and choreography to to try to make them look/act like the big gyms. JMO.

i do not see EP's or USASF using the first option because of the restricted division. i realize they are not the same... but your reasoning for the division was that it "It allows teams to develop their Level 5 program and compete without putting them in the Worlds division." that is exactly what the restricted division was designed to do, so offering both would be silly.

not that your suggestion isn't valid - CEA (and many other gyms, it's just easy to use CEA as an example because they're so open with everything) has had plenty of "world's" teams whose main objective of the season was not worlds. because of their crossover policies, most of those kids were on their "real" competitive team (junior, R5, etc) and the "fun," skill building, senior 5 team. but if they were able to get a bid to worlds in the process, why not take it (if $$ isn't an issue)? the fault lies more in the bid awarding process, than anything, IMO. (and we'll see how next season plays out. it may be "fixed.") the teams i see doing this don't want to be restricted. they want their kid with a double to throw it and they want to compete the more complex baskets and standing fulls, etc.


i do think if the industry chose to adopt the DI/DII system, your suggestions are the only way to make it work fairly. if a small gym wants to compete D1, i say go ahead!! but you can't switch between the two divisions at your leisure or when it's convenient for the jacket or ring. i would also like to see "small gym" divisions done away with and have DI/DII across the board. no division splits within those two splits. ( like how cheersport will have four Large Senior 3 groups. no. all DI's together, all DII's together.) however, it would be interesting to see what percentage of smaller gyms opted to go D1 (if it was too big of a percent, would it even be worth having the split?) and how many worlds athletes DII gyms may lose to DI gyms.

 

[tumbleyoda]

i do not see EP's or USASF using the first option because of the restricted division. i realize they are not the same... but your reasoning for the division was that it "It allows teams to develop their Level 5 program and compete without putting them in the Worlds division." that is exactly what the restricted division was designed to do, so offering both would be silly.

not that your suggestion isn't valid - CEA (and many other gyms, it's just easy to use CEA as an example because they're so open with everything) has had plenty of "world's" teams whose main objective of the season was not worlds. because of their crossover policies, most of those kids were on their "real" competitive team (junior, R5, etc) and the "fun," skill building, senior 5 team. but if they were able to get a bid to worlds in the process, why not take it (if $$ isn't an issue)? the fault lies more in the bid awarding process, than anything, IMO. (and we'll see how next season plays out. it may be "fixed.") the teams i see doing this don't want to be restricted. they want their kid with a double to throw it and they want to compete the more complex baskets and standing fulls, etc.


i do think if the industry chose to adopt the DI/DII system, your suggestions are the only way to make it work fairly. if a small gym wants to compete D1, i say go ahead!! but you can't switch between the two divisions at your leisure or when it's convenient for the jacket or ring. i would also like to see "small gym" divisions done away with and have DI/DII across the board. no division splits within those two splits. ( like how cheersport will have four Large Senior 3 groups. no. all DI's together, all DII's together.) however, it would be interesting to see what percentage of smaller gyms opted to go D1 (if it was too big of a percent, would it even be worth having the split?) and how many worlds athletes DII gyms may lose to DI gyms.

I see your point with the restricted division. My issue with it is that while some gyms use it as a building step to developing a true and strong World's 5 division team (for sake of discussion) other gyms use it as a staging ground for athletes that are truly good enough to be on Worlds 5 teams but because a gym has so much other talent on those teams there is no where else for them to go. They have true level 5 skills all the way around but they just missed the cut for some reason. They have the tumbling and stunting. So effectively they serve as a bench for the Level 5 teams in that gym. (This just might be a good problem to have - I will probably never know...lol) Then when you add in the gyms that drop their World's level 5 teams into that division not because they have to but just to make sure they beat out local competition it can be hard to tell who is who. I realize some of this goes off into the crossover/stacking/sandbagging issues but it is still there regardless. Eliminate the crossover issues then I could see taking my point one off the table completely and going soley on the DI/DII

 

[BlueCat]

Is it the USASF's job to keep athletes from leaving one gym and going to another?

 

[tumbleyoda]

Is it the USASF's job to keep athletes from leaving one gym and going to another?

I don't think so. Even though they have tried with the Release issue to try to stop the fly in of years ago. And the release issue hasn't really stopped it, just made people more proactive about changing gyms earlier in the year.

 

[BlueCat]

I don't think so. Even though they have tried with the Release issue to try to stop the fly in of years ago. And the release issue hasn't really stopped it, just made people more proactive about changing gyms earlier in the year.

I meant after the end of a season.

 

[Ashley]

Out of curiosity, what part of the country is Vizion in? Rural? Large metropolis? Rich in all things cheer? Does your state allow high school kids to do all star? Are there other sports in your area that are more popular than cheer? Just because you have successfully gotten a full paid bid in only 4 years doesn't really mean anything. What competition did you guys land that bid? I'm guessing it wasn't at a comp where you had 20+ worlds teams from larger gyms attending. Not trying to be argumentative. Just trying to figure out if your part of the country is as "deep" as others in all stars. You might feel differently if you were in an area very rich in cheer and had mega gyms constantly beating you out for those full paids...OR you might be in one of those areas and are just the exception to the norm.

Here's the stats from that comp: Cheer Power Midwest World Bid National Championship

ECE M5 and GymTyme Rouge also got paid at that competition. It's not exactly NCA, but there were a TON of teams there.

 

[tumbleyoda]

I meant after the end of a season.

No.

 

[TraumaRNcheermom]

Agreed. I'm all for making our sport better and advancing it but I feel if you can't hang with the best if the best, then you don't belong. Worlds is turning into just another nationals competition... How about we limit the amount of bids given out? That will solve both problems. There won't be divisions with 87 teams in it and only teams whole really belong there will be there. Not Podunk extreme stars that has one full and can do a fake tic toc.

I love this idea! As often as I think most gyms cant compete with large gyms like Top Gun and Cheer Extreme, I also feel the best is the best! They should limit the number of bids in each category and maybe even make it a little more technical, such as overall scores for x number of competitions get the bids, not Podunk extreme stars who had one good day when Cali smoed, Rays, Brandon and wildcats all had off days and dropped stunts.

 

[TraumaRNcheermom]

I think this only reinforces one division being better than the other. If they do it strictly by gym size, similar to how high school nationals separates by school enrollment, you get competitive teams in both divisions. The problem with this is that there are small gyms who I'm sure would prefer to be in DI with the big dogs. But to me that would just be something that has to come along with this change and that gyms will have to deal with. Separating by score and/or giving gyms the choice of division lessens the caliber of DII any way you spin it.

I totally agree with you vs cheer spectator. If you cut off the scores for div 1 and div 2 or allow the gyms to choose which div they are in it will make a mockery of worlds. The teams that know they will place in the bottom of division one will dumb their routines down just to assure placement in division 2 and a win. It just needs to be a set rule with no fluctuation this way the best of the smaller gyms win and the best of the big dogs win

 

[Official OWECheer]

Anyone who thinks high school football isn't a business doesn't know Texas high school football. It is HUGE! Schools in Texas spend a good portion of their budgets on the football programs because it is a money-making business. Every 2 years the UIL, which is the governing body for high school sports in Texas performs a realignment where they verify the student enrollment numbers for every high school in Texas. Our high school's goal was to drop down from 5A Division 2 to 4A Division 1. If a student did not reside in the school zone was transferred back to the school they were zoned to. Even if a student had an official transfer but had failing grades, tardiness, high absenteeism, they were also transferred out. This strategy paid off since we won the state championship in the smaller division. The larger high schools have been accused and found guilty of recruiting football players by offering parents jobs, free rent, etc. You won't convince a Texan that high school football isn't a business.

This is shocking.