All-Star Should They Be Going To World's?

[shadow]

Being able to say you have a worlds qualifying team may attract customers, but once those customers understand what that really means and what that team should look like their decision might change.
I personally think a lot of these teams will benefit from attending worlds. I know it opened my daughters eyes. Her first gym did local competitions most of the time and rarely had anyone competing against them. Once she qualified for worlds she and I both came to the same conclusion, there is making it to world and there is competing at worlds. Lots of teams make it there but very few are there to compete.
Gym owners take a risk. Getting to worlds maybe just the thing that makes a kid decide they don't just want to just get to worlds they want to be on a team that will make it to day 3.

 

[SparkleSpankies]

OK, all in all, money or not, worlds should be exclusive... There needs to be a score bottom tier on which at large bids are cut. That just is my opinion. Cheerleading is more about $$ anymore and less about skill set and it's frustrating. Anywhere you go, you can be a national champion and you can get a worlds bid for your level 5's. I know the idea is to try hard to compete for a "paid" bid, but seriously, somewhere not everyone under the sun needs to be included.

 

[as1rico]

OK, all in all, money or not, worlds should be exclusive... There needs to be a score bottom tier on which at large bids are cut. That just is my opinion. Cheerleading is more about $$ anymore and less about skill set and it's frustrating. Anywhere you go, you can be a national champion and you can get a worlds bid for your level 5's. I know the idea is to try hard to compete for a "paid" bid, but seriously, somewhere not everyone under the sun needs to be included.

Well not everyone under the sun is included ...there are teams that competed for bids and did not get them....This is your idea of what worlds should be....I don't think it effects the paid bid winners and the top teams that are in the running for a globe one bit if smaller, newbie gyms participate thru a at-large bid, with the only goal of making it to day2, as many people have said success and reached goals come in many different ways...go get a soda or slice of pizza if a teams 2 and 1/2 minute routine is so offensive to you. This will be our gyms 4th time at worlds(we are a 5 year old program) the first 2 years we didn't make day2...last year we placed 7th in small coed....ya gotta start somewhere....this year our restricted 5 team planned all year to add some age eligible junior5 kids and compete for a bid at a close to home bid competition, we received a at large bid so this year we are giving 2 teams in our gym the opportunity to compete, our small coed is going on a paid bid...so I see both sides. The team going on the at large has several seniors that would never otherwise have this chance...they are thrilled...there are younger kids on there that most likely will be on our "regular" worlds team down the road... what great experiance for them to have "under their belt"...next year is promised to no one, we are happily taking this chance as it presented it self...

 

[bestbackspot]

I think there should be a minimum score that teams have to reach. I understand that some teams want to go just to get the expierence and memories of going to Worlds, but it's a lot of money for parents to put up. And some gyms don't even find out their going until a month or so before Worlds.

 

[retiredl5cheer]

I started level 5 when it was still difficult to get a bid. I was on a pretty good small senior 5 team in 2006 that placed third at Jamfest Super Nationals behind Stingrays and USA Wildcats and 5th at Cheersport Nationals. We placed relatively well at all major competitions but didn't get a bid that year. When we did finally get a bid in 2007, it was because we were ready. We advanced to finals and placed 9th in the small senior division. Those were the days when at large bids still had merit because the amount of bids given wasn't as huge.

If that had been now we would have been given at large or even paid bids at both events. Were we ready for Worlds though? Absolutely not and I'm glad my first appearance at Worlds was when my team was truly ready because then I got the FULL experience.

 

[kristenthegreat]

I think the problem is that some people are 'confusing' "Knowing they don't have a shot at winning and still going for the experience and to improve" and "Super-awful-bad-DANGEROUS and should never have blinked at level 5 in the first place". What will separate that? All bid-giving events MUST judge teams on the Worlds score sheet and MUST have a minimum score (seeing as the worlds sheet is 'universal' we could therefore have a minimum score). If the minimum score is something a decent team can achieve but a truly poor, out-of-level team can't, you can add teams that are more 'experience and growth' and keep out 'just for the Worlds logo' teams.

Also- you must consider what division those at-larges are in and where they're from- Stingrays sent an IOC6 team (which often DOESN'T get paid, like ever) and won a bronze. CA competes in a talent-saturated area with few bids, and often doesn't leave the state so the chances of paid aren't always super-high. I don't necessarily consider it the same as a team out in the midwest where there are TONS of bid-giving events and enough teams to go on paid without really being in the same caliber as other teams who go on at-large.

 

[allstar87]

Why do people care so much? If a team received a bid, has the money, and would like to go for the experience even when they know they won't make it very far... who cares? How does it affect you? If you feel they aren't good enough then just beat them out there on the mat. Some teams possibly have a lot of seniors who want to experience Worlds for once in their life before they end all-star cheerleading forever.

 

[cupieqt]

Why do people care so much? If a team received a bid, has the money, and would like to go for the experience even when they know they won't make it very far... who cares? How does it affect you? If you feel they aren't good enough then just beat them out there on the mat. Some teams possibly have a lot of seniors who want to experience Worlds for once in their life before they end all-star cheerleading forever.

I think people are bothered by the fact that it's supposed to be exclusive to the top performances of the top teams. Worlds was started as a meet for the best of the best. Now it's turning into an anyone can go event with teams going on bids that were passed down from these top teams. It's like the Miss America pageant with all the contestants from the local regional pageants showing up to compete when it should be just the queens representing their title. I would love to compete in the Miss America pageant just for the experience but sadly I don't qualify just bc I'm a QT.
; )

 

[12stepCheermom]

I haven't read the whole thread, so if someone has already posted this same thing-I agree with you!

I feel that there needs to be two changes made to Worlds in regards to bids being given:
1. Only full paid bids. No more at large. You have to be good enough to earn the full paid.
2. There needs to be a minimum qualifying score to get that full paid bid, and it needs to be the same at every comp (again, this would require a universal score sheet).

The above two regulations ensure that the skill level will be the highest, and that teams who aren't quite there won't be unnecessarily spending the money on a trip to worlds.

Worlds needs to be more exclusive.

I totally agree with the minimum score. That will weed out the Janktastic Allstars who got their bid from Uncle Owens backyard cheer off. My only concern with the at large bids are the processes in place to get them. There is subjectivity in that process and that needs to get standardized.

For example, our gym is in its third year. We have a sm sr coed 5 this year (our first year for a 5) and we competed at cheersport. Of the 70+ teams going for the 8 full paids, our brand new baby lv 5 finished 7th overall. We got an at large.

I get that cheersport can give them to whoever they want to give them to, but that's a problem if you're going to advocate for eliminating at larges. The subjectivity needs to be mitigated. We didn't get that bid, not because they didn't deserve it, but because no one knows who we are. We're brand new to level 5 and the gym is only in its third year. Had we had a recognizable name at this point, our kids might've gotten credit for finishing in the top 8.

As it is, we're going to worlds on an at large and I don't think we're not qualified to be there, we're also very realistic about what the competition looks like but feel like we earned the right to be there.

 

[Deleted member 1556]

I'd love to see some statistic of the amount of level 5 teams who consistently compete for a bid vs. the amount of teams who are competing at Worlds. I bet it's pretty close number wise.

 

[cheer coach k]

This is not a post to point fingers at any particular program or team...more to pose questions about scenarios that I see on the up-rise.

It's looking to me that as the season comes to a close and we get down to the last few bid competitions of the season and just from watching videos and seeing a few teams in person I'd have to say the skill level of a good number of these teams is Restricted 5 AT BEST.

So I'm thinking from a few different perspectives:
-Is it safe for some of these athletes who aren't ready (skill wise) to be pushed into this competitive Worlds arena?
-With the economy the way it is, is it fair for a gym to push Worlds on a team who (skill wise) is not ready, will most likely go on an at large bid and facing reality for several teams not make it into finals?
-Where does the USASF stand on situations like this? They want a safer cheer industry (progression) but clearly they also want the registration money and package kick back from these teams going to Worlds.

Please don't take offense to this as I do believe in everyone having a right to compete(Hell, I'm the father of Open 4 lol) I just really wonder if the allure of Worlds has jaded some coaches and owners into what may be best for their program or athletes.

Thoughts?

I think something that would help so much is if you had to place top 3 or maybe top 5 to get the bid or score over a certa in amount of points. I think its ridiculous that a last place team will get a bid Just because every other level 5 team already had one. Top scores means top scores, and if youre not a top score, you shouldnt get a bid.
Worlds in getting out of control and IMO there are teams that Just shouldnt be' there.

 

[Deleted member 1556]

I think something that would help so much is if you had to place top 3 or maybe top 5 to get the bid or score over a certa in amount of points. I think its ridiculous that a last place team will get a bid Just because every other level 5 team already had one. Top scores means top scores, and if youre not a top score, you shouldnt get a bid.
Worlds in getting out of control and IMO there are teams that Just shouldnt be' there.

Exactly. I hate that there's no universal scoresheet and standards, because you can't make a certain point value to hit to get a bid. I'd love for there to be a minimum percentage of the score you have to hit- like in school taking a test. If you get at least an 80%, you get a B-. Something like that would be a step in the right way. If you're getting low C's or D's, you can't be in AP classes...or Worlds.

 

[travnation80]

Agree completely. But the one answer to your questions is (as you stated to someone else in here) MONEY (the driving force so many and so much in All Star Cheerleading)

This is not a post to point fingers at any particular program or team...more to pose questions about scenarios that I see on the up-rise.

It's looking to me that as the season comes to a close and we get down to the last few bid competitions of the season and just from watching videos and seeing a few teams in person I'd have to say the skill level of a good number of these teams is Restricted 5 AT BEST.

So I'm thinking from a few different perspectives:
-Is it safe for some of these athletes who aren't ready (skill wise) to be pushed into this competitive Worlds arena?
-With the economy the way it is, is it fair for a gym to push Worlds on a team who (skill wise) is not ready, will most likely go on an at large bid and facing reality for several teams not make it into finals?
-Where does the USASF stand on situations like this? They want a safer cheer industry (progression) but clearly they also want the registration money and package kick back from these teams going to Worlds.

Please don't take offense to this as I do believe in everyone having a right to compete(Hell, I'm the father of Open 4 lol) I just really wonder if the allure of Worlds has jaded some coaches and owners into what may be best for their program or athletes.

Thoughts?

 

[MissBee]

I totally agree with the minimum score. That will weed out the Janktastic Allstars who got their bid from Uncle Owens backyard cheer off.

They compete on Tatooine, against the Star Wars All Stars, right? See, you can get an At Large ANYWHERE!

 

[brandnewstyle]

For example, our gym is in its third year. We have a sm sr coed 5 this year (our first year for a 5) and we competed at cheersport. Of the 70+ teams going for the 8 full paids, our brand new baby lv 5 finished 7th overall. We got an at large.

I get that cheersport can give them to whoever they want to give them to, but that's a problem if you're going to advocate for eliminating at larges. The subjectivity needs to be mitigated. We didn't get that bid, not because they didn't deserve it, but because no one knows who we are. We're brand new to level 5 and the gym is only in its third year. Had we had a recognizable name at this point, our kids might've gotten credit for finishing in the top 8.

Cheersport scores are also subjective to the division that you're in. You might score higher than some teams but your judges may have just been scoring high. You can't compare different divisions to each other.