A recent article posted on the Tuscaloosa News online web site by Alabama gymnastics beat-writer Christopher Walsh outlines two new rules under consideration for the 2011 competitive season that would change the landscape of collegiate gymnastics as we know it. The first rule change would eliminate the 'Super Six' Championship format:
If proposed rule changes are approved, the University of Alabama and every other collegiate gymnastics program will only have one more shot at the Super Six, when the national champions are determined.
Instead, the NCAA Women's Gymnastics Committee has recommended only four teams advance to the teams finals at the national meet, eliminating byes and two rotations, and making it more television friendly.
The only roadblock remaining is the Championships/Sport Management Cabinet, which must approve the suggestions.
Walsh quotes NCAA Women's Gymnastics Committee chair Paul Plinske (the athletics director at Wisconsin-Whitewater, which has never been in the Super Six) explaining that the motivation behind the change is to improve the chances of getting the NCAA gymnastics championship on live TV (the event has heretofore always been tape-delayed):
'Our goal is to get this on live on CBS... We needed to get it down to less than two hours, and (the Super Six) wasn't going to fit in the time frame allotted for us.'
There is no question that having the championship on live TV would be a vast improvement over the current canned, stale, tape-delayed championship broadcast. Truth to tell, going to a live broadcast would likely be the only result the fans would find acceptable for making such a jarring change. However, if the NCAA's broadcast partner, CBS, has given any assurances that it will actually put the championship on live as a result of the change, there is no mention of it in the article.
The second major rule change would be going to a 'Six Up/Six Count' format for the championship season (regular season and, presumably, conference championships would still be Six Up/Five Count). The reasons given for this change are more vague, and the benefits less clear - again Plinske from Walsh's article:
'It originated with the concept that all sports have drama, all sports have split-second decisions that the coaches need to make, and all competitors have values,' said Plinske, comparing it to having a softball or basketball player who didn't count toward the scoring. 'You have one athlete who can basically be a mulligan...We felt that the sport needs some drama to bring some fans into the stands.'
At first blush, especially considering that the reason given for changing from six to four teams in the championship final was to get the event under two hours for TV, it may seem odd that the committee recommended changing to a 'Six Up/Six/Count' scoring system rather than a 'Five Up/Five Count' scoring system. After all, not only would it take less time, counting only five would have the added benefit of retaining some measure of continuity in the scoring as compared to the past system. However, there was some concern that both changes under consideration could have the effect of limiting opportunities for gymnasts to compete in college:
'Taking away the opportunity to compete is not in the best interest of teams, individuals or the sport in general. Therefore, I support the Southeastern Conference Senior Woman Administrators in recommending that the format currently used to determine the NCAA Women's Gymnastics National Champion not change.'
- Walsh quoting SEC Commissioner Mike Slive
With all this change being contemplated, it wouldn't be surprising at all if the average fan started wondering: Why this, why now? Happily, one of, if not the, moving force behind the changes, Utah Head Coach Greg Marsden, is 'on the record' about that. Here's Coach Marsden on the changes, as quoted by Dan Rasmussen the the Deseret News:
"What I'm pleased about...is that the committee obviously embraced the concept that our coaches' association put forward that we need to make some changes (and) that we need to try and do some things to create more interest in our sport...If we don't start selling out arenas, if we don't get on live television and create more interest in our sport, we're gonna lose it"
Of course, as we at GymGemz.com have gone to some lengths to explain in the past, the motivations given for the contemplated changes will have almost nothing to do with solving the real problem: diminished participation in nearly all men's and some women's collegiate sports due to the insidious effects of Title IX, as currently enforced.
There were few objectors to the proposed changes among the coaches, but one of the most vocal was Florida Head Coach Rhonda Faehn, who asked a couple of pertinent questions in an Inside Gymnastics Magazine Online article:
“I have that fear, as does everyone else: What if we do this and it takes away opportunity and doesn’t bring about the changes we’re hoping for?...“What happens if we’re worse off?”
Apparently that objection, along with those of other coaches in the SEC, impressed Commissioner Slive enough for him to send the comments mentioned above to the committee considering the changes, which they then passed despite them. Coach Marsden, it's fair to say, was upset by what he saw as undue interference by the SEC in a matter that the coaches had already decided:
"The SEC is a very powerful conference and for them to write a letter to our committee during meetings carries some weight with the NCAA...It's frustrating because most of us voted in support of changes and a couple people have gone and circumvented the process. It's pretty frustrating."
-reporter Lya Wodraska quoting Coach Marsden in the The Salt Lake Tribune
Be that as it may, the Commissioner of the SEC doesn't answer to the NCAA or Coach Marsden - or even to the coaches in his own league. He answers to the presidents of the SEC schools. It should surprise no one that the commissioner of the conference that last season produced five of the six participants in the Super Six should object to taking two of those opportunities away.
...
Just a couple of 'takes' from all this. First, if there were no Title IX (not that I am advocating that), would there be fewer or more women participating in college gymnastics than there are now? Second, if you could go right now to the TV people and tell them they could only show one women's sport at the next Olympics, which one would they choose?
