All-Star No More 'nationals'

[AScheer]

I disagree. I completely see cheersport as a nationals championship. My cheersport jacket is one of my most prized possessions. I have so many Jamfest "national champion" jackets that I gave most of them away.

Eta: referring to the comment above about uca and Nca being the only comps people consider nationals.

I was referring to schools. Later I said that in Allstars I think there are really only 4 that people consider prestigious nationals - one of those being Cheersport. And I LOVE my Cheersport jacket! Like you I could care less about all my jamfest "national jam bash blah blah blah" items.

 

[cheernerd5678]

I was referring to schools. Later I said that in Allstars I think there are really only 4 that people consider prestigious nationals - one of those being Cheersport. And I LOVE my Cheersport jacket! Like you I could care less about all my jamfest "national jam bash blah blah blah" items.

:caring:

 

[King]

I think the far greater issue is separating the same division 3 & 4 & 5 times at the same competition.
Do we really need:
Sm Jr 3 A
Sm Jr 3 B
Sm Jr 3 C
Sm Jr 3 Small Gym A
Sm Jr 3 Small Gym B

That is way more of an issue than NCA/UCA/Cheersport/Jammie calling their competition a "National"

That is an issue but it is a solution inherent in the inaccuracies of scoring. The larger the group competing the more inaccurate the scoring currently gets. Because difficulty must be decided mid routine (even though there is a much better tiered system) in the heat of the moment can cause performance and the possibilities of teams later and the bias of what a judge has already scored in their head to affect difficulty scores. As long as we keep difficulty a manual live process there needs to be groups A B and C.

Now, allow judges to score just technique and performance live and have difficulty judges do it by video later and then you can get rid of groups A B C. I talked to the people at Dartfish about my ideas and they said it is all easily plausible and could also package it up and sell to the coach for review later (and parents easily via even cell phones and the app store). Doing difficulty this way would also get rid of coaches feeling they got cheated. Your live technique and performance scores can never be changed or questioned, but if you have an issue with your difficulty you can pay $200 (like gymnastics) for the judges to review the difficulty again. Judges were right they keep your $200. Judges were wrong you get your $200 back (this would keep teams from questioning every teams difficulty). On the scoresheet all skills would be quantified.

But the easier faster fix to our system is banning the word nationals. As well if a team from out the US competes its incorrect anyway.

 

[King]

:caring:

Lawd bless the caring continuum.

 

[coachrah]

For the record UCA states its comp in Orlando in 2 weeks as an International Championship lol

What makes it International?

 

[King]

What makes it International?

Teams from other countries competing.

 

[Aussiekat]

Teams from other countries competing.

If there's a standard set for how many states/percentage of teams represented to make a competition a legit "nationals", would the same sort of idea follow through for international/worlds/universe competitions? Would LAG winners, for example, be legitimate world champs or just the very best grand supreme national champs in your opinion?

 

[kristenthegreat]

If there's a standard set for how many states/percentage of teams represented to make a competition a legit "nationals", would the same sort of idea follow through for international/worlds/universe competitions? Would LAG winners, for example, be legitimate world champs or just the very best grand supreme national champs in your opinion?

As it stands, most senior divisions would be national champions. Only IOs really compete against others right now. I suppose since the whole competition has international teams, it's Worlds for the sake of less confusion? Would it be difficult to understand two teams from the same gym winning the same competition but one being a 'World' champion and another being a 'National' champion? It's not like teams CAN'T compete in those divisions, they just don't have the right ages...yet.

 

[FierceandFearless]

Me likey.

 

[tumbleyoda]

Having worked for a smaller EP I can tell you that many times prospective customers told us they would NOT attend certain events UNLESS it was a Nationals. They wanted to give that opportunity to their athletes to at least be competitive - not necessarily win an event. Many times these were programs that many of us would not even know existed, yet are very solid as a gym although largely not known in the land of Fiercebordia. So in some ways it is a case of some EP's catering to what their prospective customers are asking.

Now here is my mish mash of assorted ideas to throw away. Still thinking thru it to make it more cohesive.

1.) USASF becomes totally separate and self sustaining from Varsity. I don't want to feel like that in order to support one, (USASF) I have no choice but to support the other. (Varsity)

2.) USASF creates 2 competitive tiers - Division 1 and Division 2. This gets rid of the small gym division and lets gyms enter a division based on their own competitive ability. I don't believe this will lessen competition since this is already happening anyhow. Gyms know they won't have a chance against certain programs, they find another event. It may not be popular but it happens.

3.) Gym must officially register their competitive division for the year by certified mail by September 30th. Now it is tracked as to when it was sent, by whom and who signed for it - regardless if it is the system or not! No USASF sanctioned competitions can be held before that time. (Safety) A gym can not split teams in one or the other. This prevents gyms from abusing the crossover rule - since we won't fix it - to dominate both divisions, which IMO is at the heart of the small gym issue. If it is a gym with multiple locations they must pick one division for the entire program. (This will not be popular but gets rid of the crossovers from one location, stocking a weaker location's team at prominent events, or a gym loading their Level 5's onto a level 2 team just to win a jacket)

4.) If a gym wants to change Divisions they can do it by Jan 1, but it will cost them $1000.00 to do so. Once again it is the entire program, not just one team.

5.) EP's can have their own Nationals, but only one in order to be USASF sanctioned. Call them what you want, give away what you want, but only one National Championship per year, per EP.

6.) EP applies to be a Div 1 or Div 2 vendor based on their market and client base. You may exhibition only at a different Div event but not compete for awards, trophies, bids, whatever. Based on event history an EP may petition USASF to run both divisions at that event. This would cover events that have had major small gym attendance in the past.

7.) EP can create their own competition structure about how they will adapt to Div 1 and Div 2. This way they can adapt to their market and their customers in a way that they don't lose business.

8.) World's bid events and Worlds's are Division 1.

9.) Summit is Division 1 and US Finals is Division 2. This would allow the newer, building up level 5 programs to actually have a strong, attainable, desirable end of year goal rather than Worlds or bust mentality which is the common indu$try push. This by itself would lesson the # of At Large bids at Worlds - which IMO is one reason why Varsity/USASF has fought against it. Less money for them of teams chasing a dream.

 

[tumbleyoda]

^^^^ By no means do i think the above is perfect and there are holes in it. But to me not doing anything is not an option either.

 

[King]

What if any two day event without restrictions to how many states can participate is a nationals. The adjective you put in front of that nationals is what is determined by event size?

 

[King]

So:

Events with no state restrictions that are 2 days: Nationals

150+ teams are: power nationals

500+ teams are: grand nationals


Sent from the Fierce Board App

 

[quietmom]

As long as they include special needs teams and treat them well like the current EPs do, I will go along with your demands.

 

[5-6-7-8]

...

9.) Summit is Division 1 and US Finals is Division 2. This would allow the newer, building up level 5 programs to actually have a strong, attainable, desirable end of year goal rather than Worlds or bust mentality which is the common indu$try push. This by itself would lesson the # of At Large bids at Worlds - which IMO is one reason why Varsity/USASF has fought against it. Less money for them of teams chasing a dream.

The only part I am leery of is #9 (unless you are assuming that the Summit and US Finals become USASF events like Worlds, not Varsity / Jam Brands.)

Otherwise, we need to start somewhere, and waiting to develop a perfect system means we wait forever. I get a new system will have its issues, but I'd rather deal with issues if it means moving in the right direction.