hannahbanana

The questions they ask during panel interviews & media training have never been an even playing field. I understand why they ask the political/hot issue questions -- they need to know how to answer those types of questions if a reporter/client/whoever asks them. However, they should be quizzed on those types of questions AFTER appropriate media training NOT during the panel interviews. When you're in a public position like that with the potential of being interviewed/asked questions, you need to know how to give "politician non-answers" to those type of questions -- and that should be taught during their supposed media training. Then testing them to see if they learned how to give good "non-answers" is fine -- as long as you test everyone equally.

CMT did not renew the show. Kelli et al were reported to be shopping for another network/platform, but there don't seem to be any takers so far and they don't appear to be filming this season's training camp (at least like nothing in the past) -- so no show this season and maybe forever more.

They tape 6-8 months in advance, so depending on when she started filming, it could be awhile before her episodes are shown. ETA: The articles from May say she will appear on Salem first & then move over to Days -- don't know if that's still correct, but with their big buffer between filming & airing, she probably won't show up until closer to the end of the year, if not 2023. ETA2: Found another article from May 5 that says she was supposed to be on Salem July 11-15. It didn't give any dates for Days.

The question I was referring to was during interviews, not uniform fittings, so I think it was definitely geared towards what it represents. However, even in uniform fittings (and maybe even more so), you could say the uniform makes the cheerleader -- especially since you're never going to be a DCC if Kelli doesn't like how you look in it. 😆 Either way, it cuts both ways -- putting on the uniform makes you a DCC & all that comes with it, but one cheerleader (or Cowboys even) scandal (or just "looking bad" in the uniform) can do a lot of damage, which is why they're so protective of it (no alcohol in uniform, etc.).

I don't think they were talking about the physical aspects/how people look in the uniform (or make the uniform look) -- but more the tradition, reputation, "what it stands for" & represents aspects.

There's a difference between teaching/giving advice on trends/what looks good/doesn't in a certain time period (and we all know opinions will differ) and policing bodies/judging based on attire/forcing someone to follow certain dress codes/mores. You can teach a class on what is considered acceptable attire for different events/times of day according to the current trends and what is currently considered a "good look" and "not a good look" without forcing anyone to accept or adhere to those guidelines. Whether they believe, agree with, or follow that advice is totally up to them (and shouldn't be judged because of those choices). Unfortunately, with a job like DCC, you could be considered to always be on "company time" since it's a very public position with all of the social media, etc. When you're known as a DCC (or any public role -- entertainer, politician, even educators nowadays, etc.) and people can see what you do, it reflects on the brand and people associate whatever the DCC (or whatever position they hold) did with that brand. It's not fair and shouldn't be that way, but that is what it is right now. It reminds me of the panel interviews when someone was asked (don't remember who) if they made the DCC uniform or the DCC uniform made them (something like that) and she got cut down because she said she made the uniform. She may not have expressed it correctly, but she was right. Yes, there is a long history with the DCC uniform and a person putting it on embodies all of that (is "made" by the uniform), but it works both ways -- what the person does reflects back on the uniform and can change that uniform and what it stands for for good or bad. So, yea, I'm all for dress how you want, do what you want, etc., but also remember you are still representing a brand (even in your "off" time) -- though I don't think this is the case here. To be clear, I don't think there is anything "wrong" with Marissa wearing the fishnets or it's anything that'll reflect back on the DCC (good or bad), but I don't think they go with the outfit (I think they "compete" with it -- you don't know what to focus on, you're attention is drawn all over the place) and a little fashion advice could help -- like when your two year old dresses herself in the morning in 5 different competing styles/colors -- nothing wrong with the choices themselves, they just don't go together. You teach the two year old what colors and styles go together. Wow, that was a long soapbox. I'll get off now. 😆

I don't remember the season, but I remember one where they were doing that and a girl came out in an all white outfit to go on a plane trip. My thought was "nope, they're going to shoot that down -- travelling in all white is just asking for trouble." I was shocked (and still think they're wrong 😆) when they praised the outfit and were going on about what a great choice it was for travel.

Except Rookie of the Year is supposed to be more about being a great teammate/locker room favourite than dance level -- so, in theory, she could have still been a struggler (no or few editing hijinks) as a tcc, shown little dance improvement rookie year, and still been Rookie of the Year.

My response was to StellaCL's original question & Agent Gully's response, not to your response -- and I believe we were typing/responding at the same time, so I didn't even see yours until after mine posted.

The groups would look very lopsided if they grouped them by ability (as in best=group 1). It makes more sense to evenly distribute according to ability, looks (got to have that "bouquet"), etc. It would be possible to number the groups based on what they think of the individual group leaders, but after that it wouldn't look good to put all the best in group one, 2nd best in group 2, etc. You need an even distribution.

Yea, but it's all one area -- and they are the Dallas Cowboys. Probably doesn't think there will be enough support for 2 teams in such a small area (and is probably right). I don't blame him for this one -- there's no need for another team so close.

I agree, but I'm not the intended demographic either. With a few of those tops all I could think was -- their boobs looked so squished/crammed in, that can't be comfortable (and potentially popping out). I don't think squished boobs are attractive, but maybe men do?

Tina is definitely more of a "hanger-on" type -- especially with her apparent push of VK to be a DCC. That being said, I really don't know anything about her other than the show & what's said here, but she doesn't come across as having anything else in life other than having been a DCC (which might be because I really only know her from the show) & getting her daughter to be a DCC. I could be wrong though -- it could be her friendship with Kelli that keeps her connected to DCC, but the pushing of her daughter screams hanger-on. With VK, it remains to be seen. Right now, she seems to be all DCC -- what the future holds ?????

I don't see Cassie as a "hanger-on" either. Her mother is the head choreographer so the DCC (& Cowboys) has always been a huge part of her life and probably pretty much will always be -- whether she had ever been a DCC or not. And now, having a role with the junior DCC, her connection is further cemented -- but I don't see that as "hanging on" to her days as a DCC, just like I don't see Kitty, Kelli, Judy, Shelly, Jenn, Kashara, etc. "hanging on" -- they have moved into different roles. DCC will always be a huge part of her life because of her mother, but I don't see her as "eating, living, breathing" it. It's a part of her life (and, yes, a big part), but not her whole life.

We know of at least one incident where editing manipulated who the choreographer praised. I don't remember the season or the other dancer, but I remember the kerfuffle when VK was standing to one side of the choreographer (let's say to their left -- I don't remember) and the choreographer was looking in the other direction (so to their right if VK was on their left) & said something complimentary about a dancer -- but the editors cut to VK like the choreographer was talking about her instead of whoever they were actually praising -- so maybe not "scripted" per say, but they definitely edit/set up situations to get the results they want.

Because they apparently got away with it -- otherwise we'd be saying Erica did a Shami. 😁

Didn't Cassie also do competition cheer growing up? -- so she had some experience being a teammate/on a team not controlled by mom/mom's best friend. Cassie had her problems, but she got a lot more of the regular DCC experience than VK -- the friendships, etc.

No biggie -- I just thought it was weird that the article said 19 while the podcast said 17 (I obviously didn't listen to the podcast 😊). Still, it's a different world today than it was in the 70's -- so being 17 or 18 on the squad in the 70's (especially when the average age was 18-19) is not comparable to being on the squad at 18 today. There will be a few who will have the maturity/experience to handle it fine, but many will not.

It's not really age that is the factor, but maturity/experience & the ability to handle everything that comes with the job -- which usually (but not always) comes with age. With VK having a late birthday (Oct.), she was well on her way to 19 when she first auditioned, but was still right out of high school (no experience). Her biggest hindrances, of course, are her mother and her ties to the organization. This separated her from the others from the beginning & allowed her "not to grow up" (as in there doesn't seem to be a lot of difference between when we first saw her & now). As others have said (and wished she would have done), if she had gone away to college & been on their dance team or did something else that got her away from her mother & the DCC bubble, and then came back & tried out, her experience might have been a whole lot different.

Hhhhmmm, this Texas Monthly (they do the America's Girls podcast) article, says she was 19 when she auditioned (still young by today's standards). Anyway, with the show (which now may be gone), all of the social media, etc., I think there's a big difference between being a DCC in the 70's and now. They received a lot of attention, scrutiny, etc. in the 70's, but it's so much more now. In the article, Shannon Baker talks about her and Tami breaking the rules by going and buying beer in their uniforms after the game -- something they could get away with in the 70's. But today? You can't sneeze without someone potentially capturing it, putting it on social media, and it going viral. It's just a whole different ballgame and a couple of years life experience past 18-19 can make a world of difference. https://www.texasmonthly.com/arts-entertainment/tami-barber-cowboys-cheerleader/

We really don't know what Maddie is going to LA for yet. She replied to one comment that she will post about it in a couple of days, but hasn't yet. She's a dancer, so we assume it's to pursue a pro dance career/jobs, but I thought some of the comments made it seem like it's a temporary move/maybe for a specific job (but I could be totally reading them wrong).

I think they've kind of turned finals into the first few days of training camp -- so probably why some are calling it finals & some training camp. Technically, they've made it to training camp because they've combined them, but whether they make it past the first couple of days (what they'd do in the pre-covid finals) to what was training camp pre-covid is ???????.

Not only do I not have a Bogg bag, I had to google it to find out what it is. I would say, in my defense, I live nowhere near a beach -- but even if I did, I doubt I would have known what it was much less owned one. When I saw them, I did think, "hmm, that might be nice for gardening tools" -- until I saw the price -- my old garbage can will continue to do the job. Just call me nothing, old, unstylish, & cheap. 😁

I think you are getting confused as to what "rule" Gina is being called the exception to (and why). Generally, when you have a serious injury, especially something like your ACL, your recovery takes so long that you will end up sitting out a year. That is the "rule": serious injury = sitting out a year. Two things made Gina an exception to this rule: (1) the timing of her injury & (2) her dedication/hard work to coming back. If she had been injured before the team was formed, they could have replaced her and she would have missed the normal year. But it didn't happen until early in the season after the team was already set and they didn't have the option to replace her. Because of that, she could stay on the team & do everything but dance (non-dance appearances, etc.) while having the necessary surgery & working on her recovery. Having the surgery while on the team/during the season (I don't remember the actual date she had the surgery -- but she didn't need to wait for the off-season since she her injury was bad enough she couldn't dance) & working hard on her recovery, she was ready to re-audition the next season, thereby being the "exception to the rule" that a serious injury usually leads to missing a year. Lisa was hurt (or further aggravated her injury) during training camp & Amber before training camp started. The team wasn't set yet, so they're easily replaced and miss at least a year.

From what she wrote, it doesn't sound like she is planning on retiring, but taking the year off to recover and then coming back (of course, if she'll make it back remains to be seen -- as we've all seen, a lot depends on Kelli's mood 😉).