Who REALLY has the power in USASF??

Date: Thu Feb 2 11:56 AM, 2006

RE: Who REALLY has the power in USASF??

Date: Thu Feb 2 12:04 PM, 2006

Morton Bergue wrote:

Math Confused,
The answer to the USA giving 3 bids in 2005 is: According to USA numbers from prelims the previous year, they had 240 all star teams. At finals, they had 156 teams. But it is total all star teams that compete, not finals numbers, that count, So, by the rules they can give 3 bids. This is 1 per 100 rounded up.

Here's the results from 2005 USA Nationals, directly from their website.
http://usacamps.com/pdf/nationals/AN_results_05.pdf

They had 106 CHEER TEAM ENTIRES. Now, since we ONLY send CHEER TEAMS to Worlds, that's ALL we count for the 1-100 bid quota, correct? Or do they get to count as "CHEER TEAMS" all the Dance teams, Pom Teams, Solos, Sunt Groups, and Partner Stunts.

The ONLY way I can come up with that 150 # is if I also include Dance, Hip Hop, & Song/Pom in the count. Does anyone else think THAT method of accounting feels a little like "cooking the books"?

Let's say USA did in fact count 240 quote/unquote "teams" at their prelim round. (and I've found no way to independently verify this, since they don't publish that list on their website) When I was in school, 240 rounds down to 200, NOT up to 300. What if they said they had 215, would that still round up? How about 208 or 201?

American Championships (a non Varsity company) had 130 cheer teams (not dance, HS, etc).....actual cheer teams at their Veags comp this year. So if everyone gets the same rules, they should be allowed to offer 2 paid bids next year, correct? Let's see if USASF allows them next season.......if American Championships decides to stay with USASF that is.

Ands what about ACA having 61 teams. How does 61 "round up" to 200 again?

Date: Thu Feb 2 12:12 PM, 2006

Morton Bergue wrote:

Math Confused,
I would like to help all I can, but I do feel some of this, needs to be brought to the USASF directly and not on an anonymous message board. I don’t know how many USASF Board members or staff read this message board. PLEASE send your questions, suggestions and complaints to Jim Chadwick jchadwick@usasf.net directly. He works on this 24/7 and really needs to hear the complaints. Emailing Jim directly will assure all the Board members and staff sees what the gym owners and companies have to say. These problems cannot be solved by a bunch of us on a message board. I want to help, but I feel the best way to get things done is for all of us to get involved and help make change. Thanks.

I would prefer if you would forward this info to them. E-mailing them directly only puts a target on my back. And since I don't have the finances to fight Varsity's $150 million/year revenue, I'd prefer to not.

Me telling USASF who I am doesn't make the things I said "any more" or "any less" true. The truth is out there, and they can deal with it or not. Me standing up and taking a bullet isn't going to change anything.....or maybe it would. But for my and my family’s sake, I'm not getting into the wrestling ring with the proverbial "800-pound gorilla". Doesn't matter how "correct" you are, the gorilla will still kill you.

Date: Thu Feb 2 12:20 PM, 2006

I think what happened with the Cheer Athletics thing and I might be wrong, is that it was the Cheer Athletics Staff that found out from another coach that they had a guy on the team that was over the age limit. They approached the guy, he admitted he lied, then the Cheer Athletic Staff went to Lance Wagers of ACA and told him what happened. So I guess it was Cheer Athletics that turned themsleves in. Lance Wagers made a decision to let them keep the bid as to not punish the other 34 team members. Jody Melton (the owner) and his staff decided not to accept the ACA bid and will try to go to another competition to win the paid bid. Thier ACA Large Coed bid will move to another team. I am not sure what team, ACA will have to figure that one out.

Date: Thu Feb 2 12:23 PM, 2006

Also, Morton. Thank you for actually trying to find answers. You're a good guy.

If the USASF Board was filled with 13 guys/gals like you from various non-affiliated companies that didn't all come from 1 organization, USASF would be COMPLETELY different. Actually, come to think of it........if that was the case, it would be the NACCC. :)

There's a reason organizations should have "conflict of interest" rules. It's not because "bad people" might get in control..............it's because "good people" could become "conflicted" when their "personal interests" are at stake.

Even "if" there wasn't anything going on "wrong" with the USASF Board, having a majority of the Board from one organization just opens you up for scrutiny. Diversify the board if you want to be above reproach. But then, Jeff Webb will never allow that because then his control of USASF would be over and he might as well have left NACCC grow to what it should've become.

Date: Thu Feb 2 12:26 PM, 2006

Math Confused,

I will definitly forward all of this onto Jim Chadwick or at least send him an email to look at this message board. Thank you for your interest and comments. Hopefully with your inquiries and suggestions we can make the USASF something everyone will want to be a part of and proud of.

Date: Thu Feb 2 12:27 PM, 2006

Math Confused,

You sound quite confident on an anon. message board. If you feel so strongly about this and feel you have been wronged in any way, than I, too, agree with Morton. Talk to the people who are in charge. Although it makes for great reading and cheergyms.com is getting a great amount of web site traffic from this debate, you are acting quite cowardly to not be able to take this to the "big man".

If, as coaches or adults, we encourage our all stars to talk to us when they feel wronged, what example are you sending out to them now?

Stop hiding behind a pseudo-name.

Date: Thu Feb 2 12:30 PM, 2006

Wow this topic is HUGE. 43 responses and the sad part is that USASF is such a positive thing. Again I think the NACCC has its place as well as the USASF. So what if its for profit. What does that remark accomplish or even state? "Gym Owner" , you can stay independent of USASF, but I think in 2007-2008 you are going to have to become a member of USASF in order to compete at many of the competitions and your coaches are going to have to be certified. Seriously, parents will flock to gyms where they know there kids are going to be safe. I hate to say it, but MANY coaches are just h.s. kids or a little bit older who were asked to coach. Now the more established gyms have coaches that are certified and have more extensive knowledge of safety and training. I would pick the more established programs with certifications and not what you see in most warm up rooms. 16-21 year olds who just cheered for a few years , had a good attitude and were asked to coach jr. prep and mini's because they work well. The USASF is establishing similar guidelines and consistency in our sport. I say KUDOS to them and the whole idea. Varsity was a huge part of it and to this point I have always liked Varsity (UCA, NCA and USA events).

Date: Thu Feb 2 12:38 PM, 2006

Morton Bergue wrote:

Lance Wagers made a decision to let them keep the bid as to not punish the other 34 team members.

Not punish the other 34 kids??? What about not punishing the other teams that did not cheat, and deserved that bid?

Cheer Athletics had no choice BUT to decline the bid. What worries me is that Lance Wagers wouldn't have come to that same conclusion.

"Don't want to punish the 34 because a teammate messed up" If that same teammate would've "messed up" and fell down on his double full, would it be punishing the other 34 by them not winning? NO. You win "as a team", and you lose "as a team".

I can't believe (no, actually I can) that Lance was actually considering letting them keep the bid. Rules on cheating should be black and white, so NO ONE will ever be tempted to let that happen. You have to enforce rules equally, even when it mean punishing your friends.

Can I blame Cheer Athletics? Yes. Here's why. You are supposed to have documentation with you on all your competitors, in case you're challenged on age. This "age-problem" should've been discovered by THEM weeks or months before this competition, to protect the whole team from exactly this. If I was on that Cheer Athletics team, yes I'd be mad at that cheater kid.............but I'd also be mad at the "adults" (staff) who should have had that checked ahead of time. Why put your whole team at risk by "taking a kid's word for it"? NEWSFLASH: Kids lie. VERIFY everything yourself.

All this incident does is put in question the Cheer Athletics team that won a paid bid at the American Grand in Vegas. Since Cheer Athletics admittedly does NOT verify their own competitors age, how do we know that the paid bid in Vegas wasn't "stolen" either?

Cheer Athletics not performing the "due diligence" has tarnished their reputation. This will take a LONG time for people to forget. It will always be a lingering question in the back of people's minds.

Date: Thu Feb 2 12:45 PM, 2006

And how long ago did Cheer Athletics get that Bid? So long ago that it has been posted on the Worlds site and we know that it take them some time to do that. My understanding is, per their own team member, they just made the decision last night. If the guy admitted that he wasn't "legal"; and this only happened after a coach turn him in, then why did it take so long to decline the Bid. As I read on CA's site, this all came to light at the competition itself. What were they waiting on? It should have been declined at the time it was given. Then it could have been passed on to another team. Gloss it over all they want, something was happening there.

Date: Thu Feb 2 12:54 PM, 2006

The Cheer Athletic team that won the Bid at Amer. Grand wasn't thrown under the bus by a coach from another team like what happened to the Wildcats. Being that they weren't in the own back yard, who would know if there was an age issue or not. Well, maybe now they'll compete outside of Texas more often. If Wildcats were at the Am. Grand., they'd still have their Bid! Don't ask, don't tell. Good job to the coach who outted them at ACA.

Date: Thu Feb 2 1:03 PM, 2006

intrigued reader wrote:

Although it makes for great reading and cheergyms.com is getting a great amount of web site traffic from this debate, you are acting quite cowardly to not be able to take this to the "big man".

If, as coaches or adults, we encourage our all stars to talk to us when they feel wronged, what example are you sending out to them now?

Stop hiding behind a pseudo-name.

I don't see it as cowardly at all. I can see why someone wouldn't want their name out there questioning the "big boy". I own a Gym, and I agree with much of what math confused said. I'm just glad he's saying it and not me. :) I know I've got a lot to lose if any of the "big boys" wanted to make my life miserable.

What happens in the corporate world to "whistle-blowers" who go public? They have to get million dollar rewards from the government because they'll never be able to work in their industry again. The "big boy" can be proven wrong, but they'll still punish the "whistle-blower" eventually.

As long as Morton is taking the concerns to the USASF, I don't see what the big deal is. The only reason to want to know who someone is, is if you want to attack "the person" and not "the information".

I think if someone has a good response/answer to the questions posted....post your reply. That's what's great about living in a free country.

Thanks for having this message board Morton!!!! Prove everyone wrong and don't let USASF pressure you to delete this topic once they find out about it. :)

Date: Thu Feb 2 1:19 PM, 2006

MATH CONFUSED wrote:

Morton Bergue wrote:
Lance Wagers made a decision to let them keep the bid as to not punish the other 34 team members.

Not punish the other 34 kids??? What about not punishing the other teams that did not cheat, and deserved that bid?

Cheer Athletics had no choice BUT to decline the bid. What worries me is that Lance Wagers wouldn't have come to that same conclusion.

"Don't want to punish the 34 because a teammate messed up" If that same teammate would've "messed up" and fell down on his double full, would it be punishing the other 34 by them not winning? NO. You win "as a team", and you lose "as a team".

I can't believe (no, actually I can) that Lance was actually considering letting them keep the bid. Rules on cheating should be black and white, so NO ONE will ever be tempted to let that happen. You have to enforce rules equally, even when it mean punishing your friends.

Can I blame Cheer Athletics? Yes. Here's why. You are supposed to have documentation with you on all your competitors, in case you're challenged on age. This "age-problem" should've been discovered by THEM weeks or months before this competition, to protect the whole team from exactly this. If I was on that Cheer Athletics team, yes I'd be mad at that cheater kid.............but I'd also be mad at the "adults" (staff) who should have had that checked ahead of time. Why put your whole team at risk by "taking a kid's word for it"? NEWSFLASH: Kids lie. VERIFY everything yourself.

All this incident does is put in question the Cheer Athletics team that won a paid bid at the American Grand in Vegas. Since Cheer Athletics admittedly does NOT verify their own competitors age, how do we know that the paid bid in Vegas wasn't "stolen" either?

Cheer Athletics not performing the "due diligence" has tarnished their reputation. This will take a LONG time for people to forget. It will always be a lingering question in the back of people's minds.

Actually they did have a choice, and Cheer Athletics, in my opinion took the right one. Now they made one mistake so you opened up the flood gates for them to be questioned. I would question your motives and what you really want? Yes its a free country and you can spell out information, but the way you word your arguments is OPINION, not FACT. By the way, what does Cheer Athletics have to do with the USASF. CA made the mistake , not USASF. Put the blame where it lies. In any form of government or system, its easy to point out mistakes. The point is that we learn from them. You seem to be finger pointing without much positive resolution.

Another gym owner, I have never heard of getting a Thank you card for joining an association. When you join a membership the benefit of being a member , is being a member. LOL I know its cliche, but its the truth. Yes some association might take the extra time and put out cute cards, but thats not mandatory.

Date: Thu Feb 2 1:20 PM, 2006

Math confused, so what really are you trying to accomplish. The only thing you really have said is that USA shouldn't be giving out 3 paid bids and that USASF is for profit. Those 2 points really don't amount to much since they are both public fact.

Date: Thu Feb 2 1:35 PM, 2006

Cheerleading Fan -- your "so what if it's for profit" and you not seeing the possible conflicts of interest that are going on here, and your preaching of how gyms who decide to break away or not join will probably lose members is scary. If all of us thought the way you did, the sky's the limit as to how much money and power could be achieved by an organization that is supposed to be there to protect all of us in the long run. I believe there are people on that board who really care about changing things for the better; I'm just afraid they might be outnumbered by the folks who think like you.

Morton, I don't know you, I've never met you, but I'm glad folks like you, Elaine, and Math Confused are around to keep things in check! We absolutely need that.

Date: Thu Feb 2 1:39 PM, 2006

Profit wrote:

Cheerleading Fan -- your "so what if it's for profit" and you not seeing the possible conflicts of interest that are going on here, and your preaching of how gyms who decide to break away or not join will probably lose members is scary. If all of us thought the way you did, the sky's the limit as to how much money and power could be achieved by an organization that is supposed to be there to protect all of us in the long run. I believe there are people on that board who really care about changing things for the better; I'm just afraid they might be outnumbered by the folks who think like you.

Morton, I don't know you, I've never met you, but I'm glad folks like you, Elaine, and Math Confused are around to keep things in check! We absolutely need that.

Well yes, I would think most business minded people think like me since we do live in a capitlalistic society. The USASF is not exspensive at all. $500 bucks for your whole gym to join a company that provides instruction, clinics, and other resources is not very much. The problem is some gyms do not choose wisely what to spend there money. I am not out to "rape" parents, kids or gyms for money, I am saying use your money wisely and look at the positive things. Hello.. I am supporting the USASF. It is people like YOU who consistently looking for something negative in every aspect. The whole reason for the USASF is for people like me who like to see change in cheerleading for the direction of safety and consistency in cheer.

Date: Thu Feb 2 1:49 PM, 2006

To math confused wrote:

Math confused, so what really are you trying to accomplish. The only thing you really have said is that USA shouldn't be giving out 3 paid bids and that USASF is for profit. Those 2 points really don't amount to much since they are both public fact.

WHAT I WANT:

- I want people to know the whole truth and make their own decisions

- I want a fair market system where Varisty brand companies are not treated "more fairly" by the USASF Board because it is comprised of Varsity influenced people.

- I want a USASF Board that is more diversified (less Varsity people filling the 13 seats) and is as free as possible from "conflicts of interest". (It will never be completely, but it could be WAAAAAAY better than it is now.)

- I want the "best" competition companies, who put on the "best events" for the kids & parents to be the companies that flourish.

- I want a system that rewards the best Gyms, best Coaches, & best Competitin Companies, regardless of if their CEO sits on the Board of USASF.

In short, I want a free market system where the customers (kids & parents) will get the best.............because companies "beat" each other by providing better product/service/price to the customer. Companies should not "beat" each other because their CEO is one of the rule makers (USASF Board Member).

If it's a Varsity company.........fine. As long as it's because they were the best, not because someone made "more fair rules" for them to operate under.

The "real customers" (the kids) deserve nothing less.

Date: Thu Feb 2 2:18 PM, 2006

WHAT I WANT:

- A BMW 7 Series
- A Big beautiful House in next to the Golf Course
- A seven figure pay check

Unfortunately, I won't get it by posting anonymously on this board...darn

Date: Thu Feb 2 2:18 PM, 2006

I think everyone needs to take into consideration that while Varsity owns UCA, USA, NCA, etc. These companies are run independently and to be honest Varsity does very little to influence their businesses. In my opinion Varsity should take a more active role in shaping the way some of these companies do business, but in reality they don't. For example there have been previous comments about the drop off in attendance at USA competitions recently. If Varsity was really "controlling" USA, like you say, they would have stepped in and done something about it. Nothing of the sort is happening, USA is a family started and family oriented business and nothing Varsity says or does will change their foundation. All of these companies are there to look our for their best interests and for the best interests of their customers, regardless of who they're affiliated with. So yes more than half of the USASF representatives "work for Varsity" but they do not all share the same interests and goals for their respective companies.

Date: Thu Feb 2 3:00 PM, 2006

First off, the person that came to us after the competition to tell us about the ineligible athlete made no threat to tell ACA or anyone else. They were simply informing us of what they knew. We went immediately to ACA with the information. ACA was in an awkward position because their rules only apply if a rival coach protests prior to the awards. They didn't have anything in their rules/bylaws for someone turning themselves in after the competition was over.

Did it take us "too long" to make the decision to refuse the bid? You could probably make that argument if you wanted too. Given that getting that bid was so important to the team, it was difficult to turn it down, but we eventually came to what I feel is the right decision. The paid bid moved to Texas Lonestar Small Senior, the same as it would have if we had told them the same day.

Should we have had copies of everyone's birth certificates on file? Probably so. We certainly will in the future. We have sent hundreds of teams to competition and this issue has NEVER come up. By the way, in the world of scanners and photoshop, a copy of a birth certificate isn't exactly rock-solid proof either. I'm not sure what the best way to handle age-verification without any controversy.

We are not trying to make ourselves out to be saints in the situation. However, we did what we felt was right given the circumstances, as I'm sure most other coaches would do. This was an all-around messy situation with no real winners.