DCI partnering with Varsity Performing Arts to launch "SoundSport Scholastic" events

[N.E. Brigand]

20 hours ago, garfield said:

Anyone read the whole complaint?  I have.  Here's the link:  http://courtweb.pamd.uscourts.gov/courtwebsearch/ctxc/KX330R32.pdf

For those of you who are curious about this notion that Varsity awarded points for teams using Varsity gear, it's not quite that way.  A couple of paragraphs out of 93 pages of the actual legal complaint addresses this contention with this language:

Page 31 shows that teams were allowed to use any suppliers "props" (pom-poms, etc) but non-Varsity suppliers were not allowed to sell their wares at Varsity events.

I'm not seeing this on page 31 (or elsewhere). Can you point to the specific text that you believe says this? I may just not be looking in the right place.

[N.E. Brigand]

22 hours ago, garfield said:

Anyone read the whole complaint?  I have.  Here's the link:  http://courtweb.pamd.uscourts.gov/courtwebsearch/ctxc/KX330R32.pdf

For those of you who are curious about this notion that Varsity awarded points for teams using Varsity gear, it's not quite that way.  A couple of paragraphs out of 93 pages of the actual legal complaint addresses this contention with this language:

[...]

Page 32 shows, and I quote: "During the 'spirit' portion of the competition [evidenced elsewhere in the claim as the one minute period at the beginning of competitions where teams were rewarded for inciting excitement in the crowd] cheerleading teams were awarded for using props, such as pom poms, sold by Varsity Brands; [elsewhere in the claim is evidence that other suppliers sold props and teams were allowed to use those props]; the more props the team uses, the more points that team receives."

There was never any restriction to use only Varsity gear and nothing in the judging rubric (found on the Varsity website itself) that states using Varsity gear awards additional points.

I have bolded the passage that is central to our discussion, but unfortunately, the judge is not clear. Does anyone have a link to Webb's actual testimony about this?*

Here's why it's not clear: there are two ways to read that line.

Let's put the relevant paragraph from which you you cite here in its entirety, with that particular sentence underlined:

"As was true with the UCA’s competitive events, Webb did not believe that his NCA competitions would eventually establish a sport that would, some day, be recognized by athletics organizations such as the NCAA. Instead, he envisioned NCA competitions as a further promotion of his cheerleading supply business. Indeed, testimony at trial revealed that the NCA’s scoring system was intertwined with the promotion of Varsity Brands. During the 'spirit' portion of the competition, cheerleading teams are awarded points for using props, such as pom poms, sold by Varsity Brands; the more props a team uses, the more points that team receives. Webb testified that he was not averse to competitive cheerleading eventually becoming an independent sport. Still, as a sideline cheerleading purist, Webb wants competitive cheer to be distinguished from traditional sideline cheer out of concern that competitive cheer will threaten his competitions – for instance, competitive cheer might annex certain moves and routines from sideline cheer – and lead to confusion about the difference between the two forms of cheerleading. Webb did not think that the rise of competitive cheer would hurt his business, however. On the contrary, he welcomed its emergence, believing that the creation of new competitive cheer teams at high schools, colleges, and universities would increase demand for Varsity Brands’ products and services."

Remember that the question that the judge is trying to answer in the part of the decision based on the facts laid out here is this: is cheerleading a sport? To put it briefly: this was a case in which a university got rid of its women's vollyeball team. Members of the team and the coach sued the university claiming discrimination against women's sports. The university said that, on the contrary, it simultaneously launched a new women's cheerleading team, and that cheerleading is a sport. The judge's decision was that cheerleading is not a sport (and thus that the university had violated Title IX), and part of the reason it's not a sport is the way that so much of its governance is in the hands of this private company named Varsity instead of the usual kind of organization that oversees sports.

I think it's really important that the underlined sentence immediately follows the judge saying that "the NCA's scoring system was intertwined with the promotion of Varsity Brands."

The key sentence that you cite is thus meant to prove that phrase; it's the judge saying: here's how Varsity promotion is intertwined with the scores.

But I can see why you interpreted it the other way, and if I were the judge, I would have written it this way instead:

"During the 'spirit' portion of the competition, cheerleading teams are awarded points for using props, such as pom poms, sold by Varsity Brands; the more Varsity props a team uses, the more points that team receives."

I believe the judge thought readers would assume the word "Varsity" that I have added was implied by the first half of his sentence.

- - - - - - - - - -

*OK, I just found Webb's testimony, which I will read and then link and discuss in a separate reply. We'll see if I'm right or wrong about what he said.

Edited September 2, 2020 by N.E. Brigand

[N.E. Brigand]

1 hour ago, N.E. Brigand said:

I have bolded the passage that is central to our discussion, but unfortunately, the judge is not clear. Does anyone have a link to Webb's actual testimony about this?*

[...]

*OK, I just found Webb's testimony, which I will read and then link and discuss in a separate reply. We'll see if I'm right or wrong about what he said.

Well, I've read all 70 pages of Webb's testimony in this transcript, but unfortunately it's not complete, and as far as I can see, nowhere in that portion of the testimony is there anything about how cheer teams' scores relate to their use of props. If someone can find the testimony where Webb talks about this, please share the link. He must have done so, because the judge references it in his decision.

Edit: I've found a document with the rest of Webb's testimony, and will read it now to see if it answers this question.

Edited September 2, 2020 by N.E. Brigand

[garfield]

2 hours ago, E3D said:

I'm going to go back and read the DCI announcement for Varsity sound-sport and reevaluate my position. I currently and previously held or hold the opinion that its a good thing. Still don't see the problem. 

You and the devil, always advocating...

 

[N.E. Brigand]

29 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Well, I've read all 70 pages of Webb's testimony in this transcript, but unfortunately it's not complete, and as far as I can see, nowhere in that portion of the testimony is there anything about how cheer teams' scores relate to their use of props. If someone can find the testimony where Webb talks about this, please share the link. He must have done so, because the judge references it in his decision.

Edit: I've found a document with the rest of Webb's testimony, and will read it now to see if it answers this question.

There were only about ten more pages in Webb's testimony in this transcript, and what we're seeking isn't there.

And yet, as we all agree, the judge indicates that Webb made a statement about scoring and props (whether Varsity's or not, we're not agreed). What can that mean?

I noticed that in the first part of Webb's testimony, there was reference to entering his earlier deposition into the record. So I have to imagine that's where Webb made these comments. And now we have to find that document.

[N.E. Brigand]

By the way, for anyone else who wants to dig into these files, here's how you can find them. Start with this link:

https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/ED-CT-0001-0001.pdf

And change the last two digits from "01" to "02", "03", "04", etc. to see further files. Webb's trial testimony was in parts 28 and 29. I know the documents go at least as high as part 33.

There's probably some other way to navigate, but this works well enough.

(I now see that this thing dragged on for two four years or more after the decision.)

(And there is absolutely no rhyme or reason to the numbering of these documents.)

 

Edited September 3, 2020 by N.E. Brigand

[N.E. Brigand]

43 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

There were only about ten more pages in Webb's testimony in this transcript, and what we're seeking isn't there.

And yet, as we all agree, the judge indicates that Webb made a statement about scoring and props (whether Varsity's or not, we're not agreed). What can that mean?

I noticed that in the first part of Webb's testimony, there was reference to entering his earlier deposition into the record. So I have to imagine that's where Webb made these comments. And now we have to find that document.

Still haven't found Webb's deposition, but from this portion of the trial transcript, here is something the attorney for the defense, i.e. Quinnipiac University said in his summation:

"You may recall about how the team used some pompoms in the one 45-second portion of one performance during the year in which they were actually required by Jeff Webb's company to use those pompoms, which by the way he also sold to the participants."

Remember, the university is arguing that competitive cheerleading is a sport, but here they appear to be admitting that at times there have been reasons to believe otherwise.

(It's also interesting that at the beginning of this section of the transcript, the university's lawyers inform the judge and the the plaintiff's lawyers that Webb, subsequent to his trial testimony in which he stated clearly that he didn't believe cheerleading was a sport, went on to make public comments that appear to contradict that position. Apparently there was a lot of backlash to what Webb testified in court from cheerleaders and their parents. The judge says he doesn't need to see those news reports because he wasn't going to just take Webb at his word anyway; he was going to make up his own mind. You will recall that what he decided was that competitive cheerleaders are athletes but competitive cheerleading is not a sport.)

What does "required by Jeff Webb's company to use those pompoms" mean? Does "those pompoms" mean the pompoms sold by Varsity? Or does it mean the pompoms they were waving?

Edited September 3, 2020 by N.E. Brigand

[N.E. Brigand]

1 hour ago, N.E. Brigand said:

By the way, for anyone else who wants to dig into these files, here's how you can find them. Start with this link:

https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/ED-CT-0001-0001.pdf

And change the last two digits from "01" to "02", "03", "04", etc. to see further files. Webb's trial testimony was in parts 28 and 29. I know the documents go at least as high as part 33.

There's probably some other way to navigate, but this works well enough.

(I now see that this thing dragged on for two four years or more after the decision.)

(And there is absolutely no rhyme or reason to the numbering of these documents.)

Well, the last numbered item appears to be 43, and I still haven't found Webb's deposition.

So now I'm wondering if I just missed Webb talking about this in his trial testimony. I see the judge, in the portion of the decision that garfield initially brought to our attention, specifies that it was in Webb's "testimony at trial" that he made the statement we've been attempting to parse second-hand. That's parts 28-29 of the files, for anyone with sharper eyes than mine.

Here are two legal blog posts about the case that might help with this search:

Title IX Blog: Quinnipiac Volleyball Players Win Title IX Decision

Connecticut Sports Law: Competitive Cheering a Varsity Sport?

I see that they include links to news stories that might have details not uploaded in those files I checked.

(Some helpful analysis of the case here at the Sports Law Canary blog.)

Here's a media article about Webb's testimony that doesn't mention what the judge and defense counsel took from it.

Here's another article on the subject that notes that Wisconsin's Supreme Court had previously ruled that cheerleading is a sport. That article also says:

"Unfortunately, an appropriate governing body has yet to be created for competitive cheer at the high school level. Although athletes regularly compete at local, regional, and national competitions, the organization that currently hosts most of the competitions is Varsity Brands, Incorporated.

One of the problems is that Varsity Brands, Incorporated currently hosts more than 66 national championship competitions each year (Penn and Teller, 2010). They are also the organization that profits from the sport of cheer through the sale of uniforms, practice clothes, competition entrance fees, and competition gate fees (300 million annually). In order to bring the sport of competitive cheer within line with other traditional sports, there would need to be one annual state competition (per state) and one national competition.

Whether this can be done by reorganizing the current Varsity competition schedule or through existing state high school athletic organizations is yet to be determined. Reducing 66 national competitions to one national competition and reducing state competitions to one per state might have a financial impact on this company."

Edited September 3, 2020 by N.E. Brigand

[N.E. Brigand]

Jeff Webb did say this about cheerleaders during that trial: "They don't cheer and they don't lead."

And he also said that competitive cheerleading is no more a sport than chess is.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Here's an example of what the defendant's lawyers brought to the attention of the judge in the case: following testimony in which Webb said that cheerleading was not a sport, he published this on Varsity's website (it's no longer there, but it was saved on the Internet Archive):

"My own belief, as well as that of Varsity, is that when using the general definition of sport – 'an athletic activity with competition' -- all forms of cheerleading are either sports or have sports components."

Run away! Run away!

I'm finding this website ("Spirit Company") to be useful in locating items like that.

- - - - - - - - -

I want to be as fair as possible to Webb, so I will say that this testimony from the trial sounds like what many decent people say about drum corps:

"Well, cheerleading is something I have had a passion for since I was very young man. And you know, I've been able been fortunate enough over the past 30, 35 years to take sort of a concept that I created and to be able to transform this athletic activity into something that millions of kids can participate in and I honestly believe that as cheerleading exists today which is what we originally envisioned when we started UCA, we began that transforming process, we envisioned that the traditional role of cheerleading with leadership, with spirit race, combined with what we do on the field, entertainment and an element of competition, we believe that the result speaks for itself. Most people tell you that cheerleading has grown three to four times over the past 25 years and it involves millions and millions of kids, and we know from the feedback we get the impact it's had on so many lives and it's because of the total experience, not just one. So that's why it's important."

Then again, it also sounds like what some indecent people have said about drum corps.

Edited September 3, 2020 by N.E. Brigand

[N.E. Brigand]

Apologies if someone else already mentioned this, but a lawsuit was filed just a month ago against Varsity alleging that the company is running a monopoly, although I don't have a subscription and can't see much past the headline.