All-Star Kill The Youth Division?

[newcheerdad]

Yes, that's exactly what the goal was... to keep the teams age-appropriate and level the playing field... no more little ones on big teams.

I don't know that you can make that a hard and fast rule, though. In soccer, we do let kids "play up" rarely, but I think the difference is that when you play up, it's usually up one age group - so maybe the great 8-year-old soccer player doesn't play U9, but maybe U10 or U11.

I think the better approach would be more age groups, not less. And that maybe there needs to be a floor on the level an athlete can compete at - I think gymnastics has that already. Maybe you have to be 7 to compete on a level 3, 9 to compete on a level 4, 11 to compete on a level 5 team, etc. Not sure how it would work, but hopefully you get the basic idea.

 

[NJ Coach]

I see what you're saying, coming from a small gym as well. However, you're talking about such a small percentage of kids in most cases. Let them move to a program that fits their needs, and keep your majority where they belong... according to age and skill. I can tell you that this would solve a lot of issues that I have at my gym with younger kids being added to older teams just because they have tumbling skills and nothing else or flying skills and nothing else. It would force us to train 14 and 15 year olds to fly... our kids are going to be better conditioned, and it allows new opportunities for potentially talented flyers who simply don't get the chance to learn because you're going to end up putting younger kids in those flying spots.

Again, every gym is different, but i dont see that hurting my very small gym (I've mentioned in other threads that we are less than 60... I believe our current count is 52)

It hurts my gym (we're right around 60). Like I said, I agree that I don't like seeing little ones on senior teams, but at the same time, I really hate seeing people leave the gym because we can't put them on a level they belong. Why would I ever (if I'm an owner) turn people away from my business? That's just bad sense. If a 9 yr old walks in with all level 3 skills (tumbling, stunts ect), but I only have a youth team at level 1 I'm supposed to tell her to go find another gym? I'll be putting myself out of business.

Since WC isn't that far, I'll use them as an example. They have a team at pretty much every level and age. My gym, suzie allstars has a youth, junior, and senior team. Youth is level 1, Junior is 2 and Senior is 4. I struggle to keep my kids in the gym because there's a "name" around the corner. "Jane" is a kick butt little 9 yr old. She's got all her level 4 skills. Unfortunately, Jane is too young for Seniors. She's also bored out of her mind on level 1. She's not challenging herself, and not progressing in her cheer because she's being held back. I tell her that level 1 is the only option for her, and that if we can't meet her needs, WC can because they've got more levels. Jane leaves, as does her sister. Next week, Jane's friends leave too. Suzie allstars just closed because we lost our kids.

Why, as a business owner, would I want to turn away business? Yes, I'm here for my kids, I love them and I want what's best for them, however, it's also my business. I'd be potentially putting myself out of business. Now, since I'm not an owner but just a coach, I also see it as dilluting competition. If all the small gyms lose their talent to big gyms (this time because they're refusing them instead of just losing them), the gyms that survive will be even smaller. Big gyms will have to travel that much more to find competition.

 

[newcheerdad]

It hurts my gym (we're right around 60). Like I said, I agree that I don't like seeing little ones on senior teams, but at the same time, I really hate seeing people leave the gym because we can't put them on a level they belong. Why would I ever (if I'm an owner) turn people away from my business? That's just bad sense. If a 9 yr old walks in with all level 3 skills (tumbling, stunts ect), but I only have a youth team at level 1 I'm supposed to tell her to go find another gym? I'll be putting myself out of business.

Since WC isn't that far, I'll use them as an example. They have a team at pretty much every level and age. My gym, suzie allstars has a youth, junior, and senior team. Youth is level 1, Junior is 2 and Senior is 4. I struggle to keep my kids in the gym because there's a "name" around the corner. "Jane" is a kick butt little 9 yr old. She's got all her level 4 skills. Unfortunately, Jane is too young for Seniors. She's also bored out of her mind on level 1. She's not challenging herself, and not progressing in her cheer because she's being held back. I tell her that level 1 is the only option for her, and that if we can't meet her needs, WC can because they've got more levels. Jane leaves, as does her sister. Next week, Jane's friends leave too. Suzie allstars just closed because we lost our kids.

Why, as a business owner, would I want to turn away business? Yes, I'm here for my kids, I love them and I want what's best for them, however, it's also my business. I'd be potentially putting myself out of business. Now, since I'm not an owner but just a coach, I also see it as dilluting competition. If all the small gyms lose their talent to big gyms (this time because they're refusing them instead of just losing them), the gyms that survive will be even smaller. Big gyms will have to travel that much more to find competition.

I would think that kids like "Jane" are the exception, rather than the rule. And normally the exceptions tend to gravitate towards gyms with a higher level of competition and talent anyway. That isn't any disrespect to Suzie Allstars, which is a great gym for what they do, but I'm not sure the answer should be to keep the athlete at all costs. Not every program can be World Cup or Top Gun.

But that being said, I don't support an outright ban on young kids from senior teams, because there will be scenarios where that might be appropriate. But I think reasonable limits (seriously, does a 7-year-old need to be on a level 4 team of any kind?) on the levels an athlete can compete on based on age is appropriate.

 

[MadstarRocksAmerica]

Am I the only ones who like the age ranges right now?! Where I come from the most you will EVER find in a national competition in 6, and that was Junior L3. Scotland itself Only has maybe 3 L5 teams, 1 doesn't compete in Scotland, 2 don't bother competing at L5, and move down so they can have a bit of competition. Changing the rules in Scotland would SLAUGHTER the competition <3

 

[NJ Coach]

I would think that kids like "Jane" are the exception, rather than the rule. And normally the exceptions tend to gravitate towards gyms with a higher level of competition and talent anyway. That isn't any disrespect to Suzie Allstars, which is a great gym for what they do, but I'm not sure the answer should be to keep the athlete at all costs. Not every program can be World Cup or Top Gun.

But that being said, I don't support an outright ban on young kids from senior teams, because there will be scenarios where that might be appropriate. But I think reasonable limits (seriously, does a 7-year-old need to be on a level 4 team of any kind?) on the levels an athlete can compete on based on age is appropriate.

While I agree that kids like Jane may be the exception, lower the skill set a little, and it becomes more reasonable to believe. Instead of level 4 skills, insert level 3. I think, at least from what I've seen lately, that there are less babies flying on senior teams. I think it's great. However, I'm not for limiting a gym with a "Jane". Whenever you lose one kid, it never stays one kid. Forcing a kid to go to another gym because you can't offer them a spot opens you up to losing a whole lot more than that one kid. Siblings, cousins, friends all start following that 1 kid. Some gyms can handle a hit like that, but most can't. Most gyms have a no cut policy, and have a place for everyone. It's not always a spot on a team they want, but that's the coach and owners discretion.

I also think that having babies on your team can be just as much of a disadvantage. Personally, I think it lowers the overall appeal and difficulty to a certain extent. Not to mention, most babies have "little flyer" syndrome. They are used to flying on bigger girls, and feel like they don't have to work as hard. Creates some of the worst habits and drives me up a wall.

Now, if we can do something about idiotic coaches who are putting unsafe routines out there, I'm on board.

 

[SharkDad]

Deductions. . .

 

[newcheerdad]

Deductions. . .

Is that your answer to everything?

 

[NJ Coach]

Deductions. . .

Agreed. I'm tired of seeing kids throw skills in a routine they clearly aren't ready for. It's scary, and what gives us a bad name. We want to become a legitimate sport, but then you see routines like that

 

[SharkDad]

Deductions. . .

Is that your answer to everything?

It's the best way I have seen for coaches to comply with legalities, safety, level rules etc. If teams lose a few times or actually start getting disqualfied, bet you'll see them make sure they are doing it right and teaching proper technique.

This implies standardized, competent judging or course.

 

[Num1Stunta]

It hurts my gym (we're right around 60). Like I said, I agree that I don't like seeing little ones on senior teams, but at the same time, I really hate seeing people leave the gym because we can't put them on a level they belong. Why would I ever (if I'm an owner) turn people away from my business? That's just bad sense. If a 9 yr old walks in with all level 3 skills (tumbling, stunts ect), but I only have a youth team at level 1 I'm supposed to tell her to go find another gym? I'll be putting myself out of business.

Since WC isn't that far, I'll use them as an example. They have a team at pretty much every level and age. My gym, suzie allstars has a youth, junior, and senior team. Youth is level 1, Junior is 2 and Senior is 4. I struggle to keep my kids in the gym because there's a "name" around the corner. "Jane" is a kick butt little 9 yr old. She's got all her level 4 skills. Unfortunately, Jane is too young for Seniors. She's also bored out of her mind on level 1. She's not challenging herself, and not progressing in her cheer because she's being held back. I tell her that level 1 is the only option for her, and that if we can't meet her needs, WC can because they've got more levels. Jane leaves, as does her sister. Next week, Jane's friends leave too. Suzie allstars just closed because we lost our kids.

Why, as a business owner, would I want to turn away business? Yes, I'm here for my kids, I love them and I want what's best for them, however, it's also my business. I'd be potentially putting myself out of business. Now, since I'm not an owner but just a coach, I also see it as dilluting competition. If all the small gyms lose their talent to big gyms (this time because they're refusing them instead of just losing them), the gyms that survive will be even smaller. Big gyms will have to travel that much more to find competition.

No offense... BUT... My previous gym was in the same position, in terms of losing kids to WC every year. I think there comes a time when you have to say, with or without this age cap, can I really offer this kid what they need? If a 9 year old has a choice of Senior 4 at a small gym, or Junior 4, even youth 3, at world cup... which is the better choice? Obviously World Cup! As a parent, I would think neither scenario- a youth 2 or a senior 4- would fit the child, so I would be looking for a program that fit my child's needs.

I am sorry, but I've never felt badly about any of my old kids leaving for WC. Even now, I run into them at competition and it's very friendly. I don't fault them for choosing a larger program that can cater to more specific needs than a smaller team. I'm thinking, DAMN this kid is 12 and throwing her 1 1/2 through to double and she was on my youth 2 team 3 years ago. Where would she have been if she stayed at my little gym?

The point is, if a kid is gonna leave, they're gonna leave. If their friends wanna leave, let them leave. I'd rather have kids that fit well together than have a huge gap in age and skill for my teams. From a business standpoint, i don't know that 5-10 kids would make or break anything for you. If the kids who stay are happy and having a successful season, won't that just generate more word-of-mouth directing people to your program?

 

[nccheerdad]

While I agree that kids like Jane may be the exception, lower the skill set a little, and it becomes more reasonable to believe. Instead of level 4 skills, insert level 3. I think, at least from what I've seen lately, that there are less babies flying on senior teams. I think it's great. However, I'm not for limiting a gym with a "Jane". Whenever you lose one kid, it never stays one kid. Forcing a kid to go to another gym because you can't offer them a spot opens you up to losing a whole lot more than that one kid. Siblings, cousins, friends all start following that 1 kid. Some gyms can handle a hit like that, but most can't. Most gyms have a no cut policy, and have a place for everyone. It's not always a spot on a team they want, but that's the coach and owners discretion.quote]

I truly understand the point you are making and the challenges of the small gym owner. How is this any different for a 9-yr-old than a 13-yr-old who has advanced skills? The odds are, if they have outgrown or are at a higher entry point than the small gym can offer, they are going to move along anyway. I don't think it has anything to do with their age. Newcheerdad said it best, "Not every program can be a WC." Is it right to limit gyms like WC, just to allow everyone a chance to try and catch-up?

 

[nccheerdad]

Sorry for the confusion!!!! Second paragraph of my above post was what I said, not NJCoach! I apologize.

 

[NJ Coach]

No offense... BUT... My previous gym was in the same position, in terms of losing kids to WC every year. I think there comes a time when you have to say, with or without this age cap, can I really offer this kid what they need? If a 9 year old has a choice of Senior 4 at a small gym, or Junior 4, even youth 3, at world cup... which is the better choice? Obviously World Cup! As a parent, I would think neither scenario- a youth 2 or a senior 4- would fit the child, so I would be looking for a program that fit my child's needs.

I am sorry, but I've never felt badly about any of my old kids leaving for WC. Even now, I run into them at competition and it's very friendly. I don't fault them for choosing a larger program that can cater to more specific needs than a smaller team. I'm thinking, DAMN this kid is 12 and throwing her 1 1/2 through to double and she was on my youth 2 team 3 years ago. Where would she have been if she stayed at my little gym?

The point is, if a kid is gonna leave, they're gonna leave. If their friends wanna leave, let them leave. I'd rather have kids that fit well together than have a huge gap in age and skill for my teams. From a business standpoint, i don't know that 5-10 kids would make or break anything for you. If the kids who stay are happy and having a successful season, won't that just generate more word-of-mouth directing people to your program?

I like the playing the role of devils advocate, so not that I disagree with your suggestions, I just like looking at it from the other side as well. At my former gym, we lost kids every year to WC. Some left on good terms, some not so much. We also gained kids from WC, but that's a different story. To those that have said that not everyone can be a WC or TG, I know that. But isn't that part of why you opened your business. Isn't that what most dream to be? Every time the rules process comes up, it's the little gyms that are fighting to stay in business, and fighting to keep things fair. Not every gym can field the amount of teams that the bigger named gyms can, but they all want to be able to do that. You have to start somewhere, and telling talent that walks in the door you can't use them is shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[Num1Stunta]

I like the playing the role of devils advocate, so not that I disagree with your suggestions, I just like looking at it from the other side as well. At my former gym, we lost kids every year to WC. Some left on good terms, some not so much. We also gained kids from WC, but that's a different story. To those that have said that not everyone can be a WC or TG, I know that. But isn't that part of why you opened your business. Isn't that what most dream to be? Every time the rules process comes up, it's the little gyms that are fighting to stay in business, and fighting to keep things fair. Not every gym can field the amount of teams that the bigger named gyms can, but they all want to be able to do that. You have to start somewhere, and telling talent that walks in the door you can't use them is shooting yourself in the foot.

I definitely see your point... I guess I'm in a whole different situation altogether. I know my program will never be WC, so I just want to keep it small and strong, and continue outscoring those larger gyms

 

[newcheerdad]

I like the playing the role of devils advocate, so not that I disagree with your suggestions, I just like looking at it from the other side as well. At my former gym, we lost kids every year to WC. Some left on good terms, some not so much. We also gained kids from WC, but that's a different story. To those that have said that not everyone can be a WC or TG, I know that. But isn't that part of why you opened your business. Isn't that what most dream to be? Every time the rules process comes up, it's the little gyms that are fighting to stay in business, and fighting to keep things fair. Not every gym can field the amount of teams that the bigger named gyms can, but they all want to be able to do that. You have to start somewhere, and telling talent that walks in the door you can't use them is shooting yourself in the foot.

I don't want to speak for the gym my cp goes to, but I never got the sense (even though it's a pretty good sized program) that our goal was to compete with the World Cups and Top Guns. It was about being the best we could be while developing some pretty awesome young athletes and people. Which is, for me, what youth sports should be about.