All-Star Replacing Athletes With New Athletes...

[tumbleyoda]

At what point should a gym not consider trying a new member (someone just moved or just decided to switch gyms) if it means moving a team member who has been there since tryouts, working hard, and doing a good job? Should loyalty matter or in the end should you always replace if someone else comes along who might benefit the team just a tiny bit more?


Protecting the anonymous since this post

Thanks for tagging me in this and asking my opinion. I believe @oncecoolcoachnowmom has answered most of my positions for your question, so I did not want to be redundant. The only things slightly different to me are:

1.) What is the focus of that team? If it is to get to Worlds/Summit or the season is a bust there is a higher likelihood that they might be replaced. Like it or not this is a scoresheet dictate and if you want the chance to be competitive (not just compete) you have to have the required skills and skill combinations to do that.

2.) What is the focus of the program in general? That tends to dictate the competitive push of the teams and may lead to a quicker replacement. For a program like ours with many athletes having been there over 5 years, loyalty means the world to us. While they still have to have or maintain their skills to remain on whatever team they are on, they chances they will be moved in favor of a newcomer is low. They would be nuggeted or replaced by someone in the house first.

3.) Did the first athlete have the skills when placed on the team? If she/he did and is now inconsistent, then the possibility is raised significantly for replacement. If they did not but I placed them with the hopes they would get the skills in time, they should not be punished for my decision to give them a chance. My preference is every athlete has the tumbling skills at the level they are placed. This is not always possible, especially in smaller gyms. It also usually comes back to bite you in the rear when Carla Can't Do It and Wendy Won't Do It and their parents feel like since they made the team without a BHS, Tuck, Layout, etc then they don't have to get one at all this year.

4.) No athlete is given a team placement solely on what they threw/did not throw at tryouts. Especially our long time athletes. The adrenaline and bribes are high during that season. Once they are taken away the athlete tends to drop back down to their normal skill set. I prefer to watch them over time and compare how they are in tumble classes before I give my opinion on where they should be placed.

5.) We have turned away athletes when we have had full teams and recommended them to other gyms in the area if we felt they were a better competitive fit for them. If the athlete would be a better fit in another program we will tell them and even call the other program to tell them we are sending somebody their way.

6.) There is a vast difference in being able to do a skill in tumble class, vs being able to do it during practice vs being able to do it in a routine vs being able to do it at a local comp vs being able to do it at a major comp with your idol programs all standing around the mat watching you and knowing you are competing against them. Some athletes simply don't perform well under pressure and that must be taken into consideration of placements as well.

So my answer is no. We focus more on the long term objectives than the short term gratifications. Yet there are scenarios where it could happen. I would rather give the athlete a chance that has been with me than the new one that walked in the door. I don't know him/her or their issues yet. I believe I lost a coach in part to this, but the athlete in question totally understood - rather than sulk or quit or look for another gym and continued to push herself to make her "dream team" in our gym the next year, which she did.

 

[cheerisloving]

The one thing that always concerns me with this is: you never know the attitude of said athlete coming in until you've seen them work a bit on the floor.

Sally Flyer coming in from Boonduckie Wherever might be all sunshine and roses and double fulls when she first walks in, but end up being a holy terror in a week or two. Whereas Suzie Jones you kicked off might not be erryday doublin but at least she's got a good work ethic and doesn't bring the team down. I don't know if there would be a way to have them come in for a week or so to see how they fit/have them at an open tumble, and I guess sometimes you need to take a chance, but I'm sure it could very well happen. Then what?

AMEN! For HS we had a girl move in who was crazy flexible, and overall a better flyer than the flyer that she resembled in body shape. We as a team could see was actually insane. Like crazy, full of drama and my coach didn't pull her. She didn't believe it, and said it was all a result of her being new to a town where everyone knew everyone. We all thought she'd grow out of it, but she still continues to be an issue. It will be interesting to see if she'll make mat this year.

 

[King]

At what point should a gym not consider trying a new member (someone just moved or just decided to switch gyms) if it means moving a team member who has been there since tryouts, working hard, and doing a good job? Should loyalty matter or in the end should you always replace if someone else comes along who might benefit the team just a tiny bit more?


Protecting the anonymous since this post

I am guessing you are basing this off your original post? I think the people who were there form the beginning of the year are your highest priority. As long as you chose the team properly someone knew being able to take someone's spot shouldn't really change your placement all that much UNLESS you are level 5 OR someone who was on the team has lost significant skill.

 

[cheer25mom]

I don't have a problem with it regardless of age or level. I don't care if it's October/ jan/ if Mary is busting her tuck often on j3 and you have a kid you can replace her with. A new kid that can do the skill 100 percent of the time then the kid had ample opportunity to get it right. I'm sure feelings would be hurt but I wouldn't want my kid to bring the team down. So replace them on that team and place them on a team they can be successful even though it would likely be a lower level.


My problem comes from threats, don't tell the girls on the team over and over they will be replaced and never replace them. If you are going to say it then do it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What about a child who is performing the skill set for the team well, but is bumped for a kid who comes in mid season with a slightly better tumbling pass or slightly better execution? I thought that is what we were talking about, replacing a competent kid with one that has a flashier skill set and comes in after tryouts. I think that a child not performing required skills is another discussion altogether, and what about the domino effect? You replace Suzy on j4 and move her to y3. That means someone on y3 has to go to y2 and so on. Someone ultimately loses their spot altogether.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[oncecoolcoachnowmom]

I'm sure it's different for everyone. To me, I think "not pulling your weight" would be significantly regressing from where you were when you made the team. If you were landing solid two to fulls at tryouts but now are suddenly busting it or straight up not throwing it, that would put them in the danger zone for getting replaced. After extensive discussions with the athlete, of course.

This. When I talk about replacement, I'm not talking Suzie and Replacement Girl are equal. That almost NEVER happens for me. My teams are under max and there is no real reason for me to replace perfectly good kids when I almost always have room for one or 2 more.

When I talk about replacing kids, I'm talking:

Girls who are solid Level 3s at evals, but are now losing or have lost skills. I'd like to think that I place on-level most of the time but laziness/mental blocks/etc. happen. I cannot justify keeping you in a a spot where you are not able to perform the skills when I have someone who can.

The girl who started out great but for whatever reason is not hitting a critical element of the routine after repeated attempts to remediate, etc.

The girl who is flat out not taking correction, being whiny, etc. (I would like to think that I select teams to avoid that, but every now and then some does a total 180 on me in the middle of the season and her attitude overshadows her value to the team in terms of skill.)

Or someone who in a nutshell is now unable to meet the team's needs for one of the above reasons.

Like I said before, I generally do not remove kids COMPLETELY from my roster, but a new kid coming in places anyone in the above categories in the position to be switched from flying to basing/backing/to another spot in the jump sequence/a nugget in the back/you get the idea.

 

[cheerKT]

This. When I talk about replacement, I'm not talking Suzie and Replacement Girl are equal. That almost NEVER happens for me. My teams are under max and there is no real reason for me to replace perfectly good kids when I almost always have room for one or 2 more.

When I talk about replacing kids, I'm talking:

Girls who are solid Level 3s at evals, but are now losing or have lost skills. I'd like to think that I place on-level most of the time but laziness/mental blocks/etc. happen. I cannot justify keeping you in a a spot where you are not able to perform the skills when I have someone who can.

The girl who started out great but for whatever reason is not hitting a critical element of the routine after repeated attempts to remediate, etc.

The girl who is flat out not taking correction, being whiny, etc. (I would like to think that I select teams to avoid that, but every now and then some does a total 180 on me in the middle of the season and her attitude overshadows her value to the team in terms of skill.)

Or someone who in a nutshell is now unable to meet the team's needs for one of the above reasons.

Like I said before, I generally do not remove kids COMPLETELY from my roster, but a new kid coming in places anyone in the above categories in the position to be switched from flying to basing/backing/to another spot in the jump sequence/a nugget in the back/you get the idea.

I agree with everything here. If someone has regressed and lost skills, I think it's important to speak with them about their position on the team. You can tell as a coach if the athlete is putting in the effort to regain those skills. Picking up extra classes, working harder at practice, coming to open gyms, etc. That definitely gets taken into consideration. To me, the athlete most in danger of being replaced are the ones who lose skills are are ok with that. They become complacent and rest on their laurels knowing they are already on the team. It's very important that the effort is there.

(I'm rattling off all this info like I'm a coach, haha. I'm actually currently not coaching anywhere, so my opinion probably doesn't matter. This is just what would be important/fair to me)

 

[Ally13]

I agree with what most people have said. If it's outlined in the beginning and you're not keeping up skills, bad attitude, etc. I think it's okay.

But, for Worlds teams, I think a replaced athlete should be able to replace the gym in a sense. If they're taken off the team and want to go somewhere else, I think they should be able to without any release drama. I remember reading that on here somewhere, but I think it should go both ways.

 

[njallday]

i think, no matter what, this is a policy that needs to be clear from the get-go. if no one's spot is ever safe and everyday is a tryout, it should be well known.

personally, i believe that if the athlete is consistently bringing the skills that they tried out with, that they belong on that team. if they were a tryout champion or have lost skills since, a re-evaluation is perfectly reasonable, IMO. but if you thought the skills they brought to the table were good enough for your team in April, that should stand true 2/4/6 months from now. if a new skill, such as a new stunt, is not meeting your expectations and a replacement is becoming a consideration, I think a meeting with parent, child, and coach/owner is necessary. it should NOT be a surprise and the athlete should be given an opportunity to fix the problem before they are replaced.

 

[WinstonsGirl]

If Susie 2 doesn't have a full, isn't that not pulling her weight? Obviously it sucks to get pulled from a team if someone better comes along... But if you are a weak link on the team, I feel like you should be aware of that and it shouldn't be a complete shock to you. It will still hurt... But it's not like it's not a justified change.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

I do see where you're coming from, but I've only ever cheered level 6. I grew up doing cheer before all-star even existed in my area. Half of my team doesn't tumble and never will. We grew up in a time where school competitive cheer was the only thing offered, and due to liability issues, gymnastics/tumbling was never scored high as not all school were allowed to do it.

These girls however are tanks to stunt with and that is where their strength to the team is. The team in I mentioned had 7 girls pulled who don't tumble, but are amazing stunters to be replaced by tumblers solely to up their tumbling score. It happened 2-3 weeks before Worlds with no prior notice. These girls were pulling their weight, they just had a different role on the team than the tumblers did.

If this is something that was clear to the team from day 1, I'm much more ok with this happening, but these kids had no warning. I guess I've always seen level 6 as a bit different from other all-star levels due to the nature of older athletes who didn't necessarily grow up in the all-star system

 

[dawgshow]

If Susie 2 doesn't have a full, isn't that not pulling her weight? Obviously it sucks to get pulled from a team if someone better comes along... But if you are a weak link on the team, I feel like you should be aware of that and it shouldn't be a complete shock to you. It will still hurt... But it's not like it's not a justified change.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

Depends on why she was put in the team to begin with. If she got put on because she was an amazing jumper or a beast base, then tumbling skills shouldn't come into play after the fact, in my opinion. I'm not a fan if changing the rules when it benefits me. Make a choice and accept those consequences, good or bad.

 

[Cheer Dad]

I am guessing you are basing this off your original post? I think the people who were there form the beginning of the year are your highest priority. As long as you chose the team properly someone knew being able to take someone's spot shouldn't really change your placement all that much UNLESS you are level 5 OR someone who was on the team has lost significant skill.

Yes off my original post which was on behalf of someone who wishes to remain anon.


Protecting the anonymous since this post

 

[Cheer Dad]

For the sake of discussion let's assume the current team member has maintained or bettered their skills from tryouts and the newcomer is just a bit better.


Protecting the anonymous since this post

 

[catlady]

I don't think there is a pat answer to this question, because things happen on a team that continually affect the ratio's....just like any job. Sometimes employers can afford to make concessions, because they have people to pick up the slack. Other times they have to let go of the weak links, even when they are loyal and work really hard, for the benefit of the team.

 

[cheernerd5678]

For the sake of discussion let's assume the current team member has maintained or bettered their skills from tryouts and the newcomer is just a bit better.


Protecting the anonymous since this post

What would they do with the original athlete if they replaced him/her? It seems unfair to me in this case if the athlete is improving/maintaining and has level appropriate skills. I feel like new athletes shouldn't come in expecting to be put on a certain team - if she really wants to cheer, she'll go where there's space so she's not replacing anyone, or she can be an alternate until next season. It's not the gym or original athletes fault that the new athlete showed up late. The new athlete could've come to tryouts (or done a video in a case where the new athlete moved) if they wanted that spot.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[Cheer Dad]

What would they do with the original athlete if they replaced him/her? It seems unfair to me in this case if the athlete is improving/maintaining and has level appropriate skills. I feel like new athletes shouldn't come in expecting to be put on a certain team - if she really wants to cheer, she'll go where there's space so she's not replacing anyone, or she can be an alternate until next season. It's not the gym or original athletes fault that the new athlete showed up late. The new athlete could've come to tryouts (or done a video in a case where the new athlete moved) if they wanted that spot.


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

I'm assuming the replaced athlete would be offered a spot on a lower level team with potential of being an alternate.




Protecting the anonymous since this post