|
Post by oudrummer on Apr 21, 2017 14:09:02 GMT -5
Based on your take already, the answer is no. No amount of explaining will change your view on this.
Those girls (and guys) have worked their asses off for years and as part of that have fulfilled commitments to athletics while receiving virtually no support from them, and preparing themselves for national competition where they have represented the university incredibly well. It's a slap in the face to say "we're going to combine two things that have nothing to do with one another to improve the game day experience."
Know what would improve the game day experience? Winning. Consistently. That's not on the cheer/dance/band/grizz gang.
The outrage lies in athletics thinking that those athletes who have dedicated their time and asked for nothing back are not good enough. How does this new spirit squad work? What are they doing different? The answer will be nothing. They're going to be glorified marketing interns running around bringing fake hype. This is a bush league move by athletics and I hope it bites them in the ass. Maybe they should have suported those teams better and if they didn't like the job they were doing have notified them instead of telling them they're done.
|
|
|
Post by grizzlies2011 on Apr 21, 2017 17:41:43 GMT -5
I just want to better understand what's going on here.
No one is questioning how hard the teams work. And with the addition of male cheerleaders, I've seen better performances in my opinion from that side. And I don't think anyone would blame the spirit squads for the gameday experience.
But obviously something is going on behind the scenes that no one knows about that brought on this decision. I find it far fetched that Athletics just decided to combine them just to combine them. It sounds like the only thing they are taking away are Nationals so maybe that was interfering with their other responsibilities, classes, etc. Nationals are not sponsored in any way by the NCAA and therefore not by Oakland. The fact that they have to fundraise for an unsponsored event doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Every NCAA-sponsored team at Oakland has to fundraise.
And just because no one knows what this looks like yet doesn't make it a bad thing. It's just a new thing. What sort of different routines can be made be combining talented dancers and cheerleaders. I don't know but it sounds like a good show to me.
All I'm saying is that I think this is being blown a little bit out of proportion as no one is cutting their programs. As with most things, I think we just need to wait and see what this becomes before the outrage meter goes through the roof.
|
|
|
Post by oaklandad on Apr 21, 2017 17:59:09 GMT -5
Hello everyone,
Not to poke fun at politics, but please be aware there is a lot of false news on this. And to be fair, Athletics made several missteps in communicating this change in vision. It is simply that, a change in vision. There will still be cheerleaders and dancers. Dancers will dance. Cheerleaders will cheer. They have been stellar in their team participations and will continue to be in my opinion. But they will do it from one integrated perspective with a Head Coach and Asst. Coach, and each will have expertise in either the cheer or dance elements. Funding is not cut. It will be enhanced for this squad. The student-athletes on this integrated team will have a large say so in the ultimate direction of the squad, from their name to their performances to their uniforms, etc. But the vision will be united through a united coaching staff, and the participants will be in lock step with each other and we think with more impactful performances. The end game is to assist the game day. These squads play a tremendous role as well as our fantastic pep band, and student section.
So why the change?
We are attempting to provide these student-athletes that ultimate control over their student-athlete experience. As you know, cheerleaders and dancers both exist in the performance based space as well as competition. Those are the main two reasons they choose to participate. This group I just described that is primarly athletically funded will focus on the former. We are working through what the competitive solution will be for competitive cheer and/or competitive dance on campus. And Athletics will look to be a partner with these groups as well in some form or fashion. There will be opportunities for those with interest to compete in these sports. And participation will not be mutually exclusive. Those that want to be more performance based can work under the new vision on game day, and those that want to focus on competition will have the opportunity to do that, and those that want to do both, can do both.
The quotes and messaging on this have been off from the initial reporting. I feel bad for the current cheerleaders and dancers that lived this weird media accounting of the change and poor initial rollout by athletics. So I have got personally involved and have tried to explain the above as I have met with several dancers/cheerleaders the past two days. In fact, I will have a lengthy meeting with both teams next week so there is absolutely no misperceptions of what we are attempting to do. I want to answer every question they have and work through issues they find troubling.
I mean logically, why would anyone want to eliminate cheerleading or dance from the game day? That makes no sense. I want it enhanced. I want it better that the great things they are already doing. I think this vision can make that element better, and can align the participants with their true interests moving forward.
I hope that helps. I know the messaging has been very strange. I don't know how it got fragmented so quickly. You can choose to agree or disagree but I would rather interested parties discuss elements of what the vision actually is seeking to do.
Thanks,
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by PantherU on Apr 21, 2017 19:42:31 GMT -5
This definitely doesn't seem like one of those instances where the parties involved were consulted. Had they been, they would have been out there on social media defending Jeff's decision publicly.
After reading his post, it does seem like a lot of hullabaloo over nothing. I wouldn't worry about it moving forward.
|
|
|
Post by Grizzfan1 on Apr 21, 2017 22:39:28 GMT -5
Hello everyone, Not to poke fun at politics, but please be aware there is a lot of false news on this. And to be fair, Athletics made several missteps in communicating this change in vision. It is simply that, a change in vision. There will still be cheerleaders and dancers. Dancers will dance. Cheerleaders will cheer. They have been stellar in their team participations and will continue to be in my opinion. But they will do it from one integrated perspective with a Head Coach and Asst. Coach, and each will have expertise in either the cheer or dance elements. Funding is not cut. It will be enhanced for this squad. The student-athletes on this integrated team will have a large say so in the ultimate direction of the squad, from their name to their performances to their uniforms, etc. But the vision will be united through a united coaching staff, and the participants will be in lock step with each other and we think with more impactful performances. The end game is to assist the game day. These squads play a tremendous role as well as our fantastic pep band, and student section. So why the change? We are attempting to provide these student-athletes that ultimate control over their student-athlete experience. As you know, cheerleaders and dancers both exist in the performance based space as well as competition. Those are the main two reasons they choose to participate. This group I just described that is primarly athletically funded will focus on the former. We are working through what the competitive solution will be for competitive cheer and/or competitive dance on campus. And Athletics will look to be a partner with these groups as well in some form or fashion. There will be opportunities for those with interest to compete in these sports. And participation will not be mutually exclusive. Those that want to be more performance based can work under the new vision on game day, and those that want to focus on competition will have the opportunity to do that, and those that want to do both, can do both. The quotes and messaging on this have been off from the initial reporting. I feel bad for the current cheerleaders and dancers that lived this weird media accounting of the change and poor initial rollout by athletics. So I have got personally involved and have tried to explain the above as I have met with several dancers/cheerleaders the past two days. In fact, I will have a lengthy meeting with both teams next week so there is absolutely no misperceptions of what we are attempting to do. I want to answer every question they have and work through issues they find troubling. I mean logically, why would anyone want to eliminate cheerleading or dance from the game day? That makes no sense. I want it enhanced. I want it better that the great things they are already doing. I think this vision can make that element better, and can align the participants with their true interests moving forward. I hope that helps. I know the messaging has been very strange. I don't know how it got fragmented so quickly. You can choose to agree or disagree but I would rather interested parties discuss elements of what the vision actually is seeking to do. Thanks, Jeff Thanks Mr. Konya for the explanation. It is much appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by ougradbob on Apr 24, 2017 8:58:27 GMT -5
Hello everyone, Not to poke fun at politics, but please be aware there is a lot of false news on this. And to be fair, Athletics made several missteps in communicating this change in vision. It is simply that, a change in vision. There will still be cheerleaders and dancers. Dancers will dance. Cheerleaders will cheer. They have been stellar in their team participations and will continue to be in my opinion. But they will do it from one integrated perspective with a Head Coach and Asst. Coach, and each will have expertise in either the cheer or dance elements. Funding is not cut. It will be enhanced for this squad. The student-athletes on this integrated team will have a large say so in the ultimate direction of the squad, from their name to their performances to their uniforms, etc. But the vision will be united through a united coaching staff, and the participants will be in lock step with each other and we think with more impactful performances. The end game is to assist the game day. These squads play a tremendous role as well as our fantastic pep band, and student section. So why the change? We are attempting to provide these student-athletes that ultimate control over their student-athlete experience. As you know, cheerleaders and dancers both exist in the performance based space as well as competition. Those are the main two reasons they choose to participate. This group I just described that is primarly athletically funded will focus on the former. We are working through what the competitive solution will be for competitive cheer and/or competitive dance on campus. And Athletics will look to be a partner with these groups as well in some form or fashion. There will be opportunities for those with interest to compete in these sports. And participation will not be mutually exclusive. Those that want to be more performance based can work under the new vision on game day, and those that want to focus on competition will have the opportunity to do that, and those that want to do both, can do both. The quotes and messaging on this have been off from the initial reporting. I feel bad for the current cheerleaders and dancers that lived this weird media accounting of the change and poor initial rollout by athletics. So I have got personally involved and have tried to explain the above as I have met with several dancers/cheerleaders the past two days. In fact, I will have a lengthy meeting with both teams next week so there is absolutely no misperceptions of what we are attempting to do. I want to answer every question they have and work through issues they find troubling. I mean logically, why would anyone want to eliminate cheerleading or dance from the game day? That makes no sense. I want it enhanced. I want it better that the great things they are already doing. I think this vision can make that element better, and can align the participants with their true interests moving forward. I hope that helps. I know the messaging has been very strange. I don't know how it got fragmented so quickly. You can choose to agree or disagree but I would rather interested parties discuss elements of what the vision actually is seeking to do. Thanks, Jeff Thanks for the explanation, Jeff.
|
|