All-Star Placed By Age Or By Skill?

[darlingsmomx4]

What is the common practice? I always thought that you would be placed by skill followed by the age group but our gym is automatically placing by age, with the younger kids, even if their skill set is at another level.

 

[dawgshow]

It really depends on the gym's culture. I've seen both. Most gyms around here try to match the two as closely as possible.
Team placement is really more of an art than a science. I don't think there's any real formula.

 

[Keep_Believing]

Sometimes a younger kid with high skills will be placed by age because it is a small gym and there aren't enough kids that age with that skill level to field an appropriate team.

 

[cheer25mom]

This happens at our gym too, but you have to realize the skill shouldn't be the only factor in team placement, and that skill encompasses more than just tumbling. Just because an 8 year old has a layout, that doesn't necessarily mean they are a level 4 athlete. They gym should look at wether they can also stunt, jump, and dance at level 4 and wether they can mentally and emotionally keep up on that level. Do they have the ability to learn and retain that level of choreography and do they have the emotional maturity to handle the pressure.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[oncecoolcoachnowmom]

Ideally you want those to match, but I've always tried to go with skill when the most age-appropriate team is not available. We did not always have something closest to the age-appropriate team and my theory is that I want them to be challenged.

Ex: If a kid has Level 3 skills all around and solidly, and could (age-wise) be on Youth 1 or Junior 3 and Youth 1 is our only Youth option at the time, I would place Junior 3 as it is skill appropriate and we clearly do not have a Youth 3.

 

[cheer25mom]

Ideally you want those to match, but I've always tried to go with skill when the most age-appropriate team is not available. We did not always have something closest to the age-appropritate team and my theory is that I want them to be challenged.

Ex: If a kid has Level 3 skills all around and solidly, and could (age-wise) be on Youth 1 or Junior 3 and Youth 1 is our only Youth option at the time, I would place Junior 3 as it is skill appropriate and we clearly do not have a Youth 3.

That is a good example, but what would the decision be if the options were say, between youth and senior? Many of the smaller gums in our area cannot field a youth or junior team over level 2 most years. I honestly don't have a problem with youth aged on a junior team, but I think it becomes more dicey when you are talking about 10 year olds and 18 year olds on the same team.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[MissCongeniality]

Depends on the kids themselves. Some 10 year olds do fine with 18 year olds...some don't. Mine was 9 on a senior team (different rules then). Our rule for her was no "babying"...as in no playing the team mascot...being carried around etc. We were fortunate that the older girls on that team were very welcoming and CP fit in seamlessly. The parents, on the other hand, were less than welcoming.

My take on this looking back.... It's more fun to be with your own age group. What are your ultimate goals in cheer? To have fun or to make it to a certain level as fast as you can? (Sounds snarky...but I mean it in the kindest light possible) And are the goals the athletes or the parents?

 

[oncecoolcoachnowmom]

^^^^It would very much (for me) depend on the kid as well and on her coachability and attitude. Especially when they are at a certain level but age-wise, could be Youth, Junior or Senior. (Ex: Solid level 3 but could be placed in any age group.)

I have changed my opinion on young kids and senior teams over the time I have been coaching. I used to be totally opposed. As of today, I know that the average Senior kid who is in say, high school is typically used to having younger kids on teams and is typically very respectful of younger kids, if you can believe it. So the "inappropriate conversation" factor isn't something I consider.

I look at whether a kid is ready to be coached like a Senior kid is coached. I am not saying that every kid on a senior team is being ripped a new one every practice. However, if you are on Youth 2, and crying every time someone gives you a correction on a stunt, you are not going to fare well on Senior 3 when the expectation is that you will do what is asked of you without crying or whining.

Or if you're that Youth kid who makes a mistake and is pretty much DONE for the rest of practice, you are not Senior team ready. You know that kid. She drops a stunt and while she will not ry, she will be on the verge of tears the entire practice and allow that one fall to carry over into tumbling mistakes, etc.

 

[MissCongeniality]

^^^^It would very much (for me) depend on the kid as well and on her coachability and attitude. Especially when they are at a certain level but age-wise, could be Youth, Junior or Senior. (Ex: Solid level 3 but could be placed in any age group.)

I have changed my opinion on young kids and senior teams over the time I have been coaching. I used to be totally opposed. As of today, I know that the average Senior kid who is in say, high school is typically used to having younger kids on teams and is typically very respectful of younger kids, if you can believe it. So the "innapprorpaite conversation" factor isn't something I consider.

I look at whether a kid is ready to be coached like a Senior kid is coached. I am not saying that every kid on a senior team is being ripped a new one every practice. However, if you are on Youth 2, and crying every time someone gives you a correction on a stunt, you are not going to fare well on Senior 3 when the expectation is that you will do what is asked of you without crying or whining.

Or if you're that Youth kid who makes a mistake and is pretty much DONE for the rest of practice, you are not Senior team ready. You know that kid. She drops a stunt and while she will not ry, she will be on the verge of tears the entire practice and allow that one fall to carry over into tumbling mistakes, etc.

Amen!

 

[CheerBank]

Our gym does both. By age if you just want to do one team (with the team level as close to your skill level as possible) and then your second team if you want to crossover can be by skill. Last year cp was on a jr 3 and a sr 4. This year a jr 4 and sr 5. Had she chosen to be on one team this season, it would have been the jr 4 regardless of her overall skill level.

 

[Carriejoe]

This happens at our gym too, but you have to realize the skill shouldn't be the only factor in team placement, and that skill encompasses more than just tumbling. Just because an 8 year old has a layout, that doesn't necessarily mean they are a level 4 athlete. They gym should look at wether they can also stunt, jump, and dance at level 4 and wether they can mentally and emotionally keep up on that level. Do they have the ability to learn and retain that level of choreography and do they have the emotional maturity to handle the pressure.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes.

I find in the larger gym we are at now, they try very hard to keep athletes with their age but in a large setting, that is more doable. In a small gym, you are going to have lots of younger girls on Sr teams. It is just the way things work.

As this poster said, there is SO MUCH more than tumbling that makes up a levelled athlete.

 

[SL&AM]

What is the common practice? I always thought that you would be placed by skill followed by the age group but our gym is automatically placing by age, with the younger kids, even if their skill set is at another level.

Honestly, I think the best placement is sorta in the middle. I was on the phone with my mom today and I was talking about try-outs; with my CP's birthday she could be placed on a Tiny's team again this year (this year she would have aged off if the age didn't change) or be placed on Mini's. She made a comment about what if her BHS was better and I said no, in our gym that would equal a Youth Team. We don't have, and as far as I can tell, there is no interest in a Mini 2 team at our gym. She is 6, almost 7----no way on Earth would I ever be okay with placing her on a youth team.

The thing about team placement is there is something to be said about being with your peers and skill doesn't equal maturity. The older teams are coached differently, they sometimes have more competitions (true for us, Mini has 4 and I believe Youth has 7)...etc.

So I applaud gyms that look at age over skill because developmentally it's better for the athlete long-term. The kids who get fast tracked younger tend to be those who quit because they get burnt out.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

I honestly don't have a problem with youth aged on a junior team, but I think it becomes more dicey when you are talking about 10 year olds and 18 year olds on the same team.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Truthfully I'd rather have a 10 year old around 18 year olds. The things 18 year olds talk about are boring. The things 13-14 year olds think are OK to say are just [emoji33] [emoji15] [emoji33] [emoji15] [emoji33] [emoji15]

This is not to say that I love having 10 year olds on senior teams. It's more to say that the normal argument of thinking 18 year olds are talking about these shocking horrible things in front of these little ones is not actually accurate. For real, 7-9th graders are sooooooo much worse than 11-12th graders.

 

[SL&AM]

Truthfully I'd rather have a 10 year old around 18 year olds. The things 18 year olds talk about are boring. The things 13-14 year olds think are OK to say are just [emoji33] [emoji15] [emoji33] [emoji15] [emoji33] [emoji15]

This is not to say that I love having 10 year olds on senior teams. It's more to say that the normal argument of thinking 18 year olds are talking about these shocking horrible things in front of these little ones is not actually accurate. For real, 7-9th graders are sooooooo much worse than 11-12th graders.

The 16-18 crowd are generally self aware enough that if they're going to talk about something dicey, to do so away from young ears.

The 6th graders on my two daughter's bus are not self aware enough not to crack a "This one time in band camp..." (and yes, they finished it with the flute part) jokes while I'm physically on the bus getting younger CP out of a carseat. That is ignoring all of the cursing and other stories you don't even want to know. And why my children are never riding a school bus again...

10 on a senior team is bleh to me because it make fast tracking more likable and fast tracking is often bad for the sport.
But a 6 or 7 year old on a youth team or a 9 year old on a junior team....oh no, no, no....those kids are so much worse.

 

[mecheermom]

The 16-18 crowd are generally self aware enough that if they're going to talk about something dicey, to do so away from young ears.

The 6th graders on my two daughter's bus are not self aware enough not to crack a "This one time in band camp..." (and yes, they finished it with the flute part) jokes while I'm physically on the bus getting younger CP out of a carseat. That is ignoring all of the cursing and other stories you don't even want to know. And why my children are never riding a school bus again...

10 on a senior team is bleh to me because it make fast tracking more likable and fast tracking is often bad for the sport.
But a 6 or 7 year old on a youth team or a 9 year old on a junior team....oh no, no, no....those kids are so much worse.

Yes- this 100% - I agree from personal experience. CP was 8 on a Junior team and 10 on a Senior team. The conversations were much more PG on the senior team. 13-14 year old kids do not know how to sensor themselves as well as 16-18 year olds.