Jump to content

Stu

Members
  • Posts

    9,753
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    28

Everything posted by Stu

  1. But even if critique is occurring my question still stands: What happened to the compromising give and take input between the design staff of each corps and the judges in order to win them over; when did the judges take 'full and complete' control where design is now only their way or no way?
  2. I thought that face to face process was axed a few years back along with retreat in the name of getting out of the stadium and town earlier. But even if critique is occurring my question still stands: What happened to the compromising give and take input between the design staff of each corps and the judges in order to win them over; when did the judges take 'full and complete' control where design is now only their way or no way?
  3. - Madison’s biggest issue over the past 20 years has been program identity. That has done more to kill them then anything. Going back to their roots might be just what they need. - Blue Devils do not have the same idenity as 20 years ago; nor SCV; nor Bluecoats, Crown, etc.They did not have to go backwards to go forwards. - spending the next few years endearing themselves to the fans would be a great start in the right direction. - If the right direction is entertainment first and foremost, and competition taking a back seat if not in the trunk (see Jersey Surf) then yep that would be the right direction. - Winning isn’t everything. - An incomplete statement typically made by those who have never won a World Championship. Once a ring is on that finger or gold is around that neck, whether DCI or other another Major League, any other finishing position thereafter is a little hollow. Those who have tasted the top position in a Major League complete the statement this way, "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
  4. Moat everything you typed here describes Jersey Surf; which is fine for them because that is their desired mission. But do you really want the Scouts to model themselves after Surf and become the Wisconsin Wave?
  5. I know that critique is no longer done after shows but here is a serious question: What happened to the compromising give and take input between the design staff of each corps and the judges in order to win them over; when did the judges take 'full and complete' control where design is now only their way or no way?
  6. By golly you have just stumbled on a show concept that would catapult Regiment into first place. Put them in purple costumes with the music of Barney stylizes the Beatles! I love you You love me. We're best friends Like friends should be Come together Right now Over me.
  7. "The next thing I say is true; the last thing I said was false." (hat tip to DEVO) So, in that same paradoxical realm, yep, both of your posts were correct.
  8. If memory serves, yes he stayed the entire season. His rewrite after rewrite after rewrite was due to other changes, contextual, musical, pretty much on a daily basis, mainly by the more 'experiencrd' staff which forced his hand. I would agree if someone said that maybe he had a rough go trying to keep up with the speed of the changes; but to say Regiment was plagued by a bad drill writer is flat unfair, and I believe untrue. He was let go for 2010, and Shaw/Rennick left soon after. But again I believe Nick was scapegoated by being the least experienced on the design staff. And after 10 years, while he still is involved with BOA, that scapegoat release appears to have, sad to say, ruined his DCI career.
  9. Nick Scotella. Drill writer in 2008. Young, maybe even a rookie drill writer in 2008. Check out Visual and GE scores for 2008. They rocked!!!! He also was the drill writer in 2009. He was scapegoated after 2009, in my opinion. Yes he did multiple rewites all season. Not because of his inadequacies; but because concept of The Red Violin was being changed after each show. He did what he was told (by the more experienced staff) who were scrabling to contextualize that violin. The exact same staff put together by Pat.
  10. I placed both of your posts back to back. Ummmmm..... You certainly are trying to have it both ways! You say Pat was responsible for the staff in 2008 even though he was gone. You say he was the reason for the win because it was his staff not Dan's. Then your latter post completely contradicts your former. It is a fact that Pat's staff was still completely intact in 2009 just like in 2008; moreover, it started to break apart in 2010 and they left during the years you say were really good, 2010- 2013, yet no credit is given to Dan by you. So which post is correct, the former or the latter?
  11. Pat was a gerat director for Regiment from 2002 = 2007. No denying that. Yet here are a four questions: A) Where was Pat, and what was his 'Regiment' job description in '93 when Regiment took third, or '94 third, or '96 first, and '08 yet another first? B) Where was Dan, and what was his 'Regiment' job description in '93 when Regiment took third, or '94 third, or '96 first, and '08 yet another first? C) How many championships did Regiment win under Pat? D) How can Dan be responsable for the current downfall of Regiment in his retirement?
  12. You can't have it both ways. Pat's staff was still in place in 2009. So that is Pat's fault, correct? And if you say no, how can you place blame squarely on Dan with his previous top five, and winning, success prior to Pat showing up?
  13. Ummm.... Dan may or may not have been able to work well with others, but under his leadership Regiment did place in the top a lot including 2 world championsips. Moreover, the abusive personality issues of a certain person and subsiquent staff changes over the years did not really hurt The Cadets from 1983 =2015. So pinning it square on Dan for the wild competitive fluctuations of Regiment, especially the current downfall after is retirement, does not ring really true in my opinion.
  14. There you are!!! Welcome Back! And to answer your question; no, I have already had my vowel movement for today. But thanks for asking! "Whistle while you work....". All seriousness, I do hope you had a great time with the kiddos. At some point as we age we won't be able to do that anymore, and we need to relish it while we still can. And I do mean that!
  15. That's only because Tinkerbell shirt you bought at Disney, and are now wearing I might add, is still new and your snark is muted. Wait a few weeks and we will be once again be singing, "When the Snark Bites..."
  16. This is DCP. This was tame. Wait until Jeff Ream jumps at ya!!!! 😋
  17. The other member corps did stop it. True. The proposal was shuttered. Also true. But with no apology, no remorse from the 7; and just a hope by the non-7 it would just go away by ignoring the underlying problem. But with the exception of the administration clean out at the Cadets, the deep seeded arrogance which created the problem is still there underneath simmering with those corps. They did not relent out of a change of heart, but by force. At least 4 if not 5 would still go that direction if it were possible. So, if the experience Regiment could feel by possibly being a second or third choice, they might become humbled enough to realize how arrogant they had been. That is why I do not find it sad.
  18. Not sad at all. Maybe the administration will learn how other corps felt when they desired to relegate and demote all but themselves and the others in the G7. If they really learn that, my respect shall return for at least one of the seven.
  19. While there are subjective human umpire calls in baseball which can be at times erroneous, there are hundreds more lost opportunities in pop flys, stranding a runner on third, swing and miss, et al which contribute to a runner not crossing home plate to score a run. So the little subjectivity which is there really does not impact who wins and who loses.
  20. I said the scoring, the scoring, the scoring in baseball is purely objective. If baseball was scored like the marching arts there would be a rubric sheet with 5 boxes, 5 ranges of possible scoring, descriptors in each box, and the score itself would be determined by a judge evaluating the artistic design of how well the base running sashay effect came across in conveying the intensity of the moment when they crossed home plate. (That particular home run with nobody else on base deserves a score of 7 instead of 1 based on the interpritation of the celebratory run around the bases as applied to the rubric!) While there are subjective human umpire calls in baseball which can be at times erroneous, there are hundreds more lost opportunities in pop flys, stranding a runner on third, swing and miss, et al which contribute to a runner not crossing home plate to score a run. So the little subjectivity which is there really does not impact who wins and who loses. Name one descriptor on a music arts GE sheet concerning design 'scoring' that is objective like crossing home plate yields a score, that lends itself to a unified directly measurable factual scoring conclusion instead of someone determing a number, and does not need a unified 'interpretation of opinion' in order to have consistent adjudicated scoring. If you can show that objective scoring critera on a GE sheet as fact, I shall relent.
  21. In objective evaluation, rulers, watches, and other direct measurable tools.must be used. Yes. Otherwise it is mere observed opinion.
  22. And sliding in at home with a tag. But the subjectivity is minimized in the MLB by the instant replay rule. And please note that DCI does bill itself as the Major League. Also while calling balls and strikes is subjective, the actual scoring takes place the moment a runner touches home. The scoring itself is objective.
  23. Please do not confuse subjective with arbitrary. Yes the early reads are subjective, but they are not arbitrary. And the early reads will liely be consistent with the late interprations. Not because of cause and effect. But because of unified training of interpritaton. Now if intonation is evaluated by an oscilloscope that would be objective evaluation. The moment it is evaluated solely by a human ear, live on the fly, it becomes subjective due to the imperfections of the person who is observing. Same held true back in the tick system days. At what point does something become an error? At what point does an apple, while being consumed, become an apple core? Human evaluation in that manner is always subjective. So how is that minimized? Both the Harry Conick Jr. Band Brass and the Chicago Symphony Brass can play the music of Duke Ellington very well. You can train judges that the dark open trumpet sound of the Chicago Symphony Brass is the desired interpretation for adjudicating purposes; but that does not make it objective; nor does it make the HCJ Brass sound bad. It only creates a unified subjective evaluation for adjudication.
  24. There are many definitions of the word Can. Depending on the context it is a verb or a noun. Same contextual use applies to other words like Objective. And you are crowbaring in a definition relating to physical objects which is out of context. Yes we are looking at objects, but that does not mean the same as objective evaluation which is evaluation of shear cold hard facts which are directly measurable. Yes there are criteria within the GE rubrics; and yes we are looking at objects. But the terms and descriptors in the GE rubrics are not factual constructs in which the objects can be directly measured like the drag racing, hockey, and baseball examples. The objects here are observed, and interpritation judgement is placed on the artistic design; that makes the outcome purely and utterly subjective. You can train people on the same interpretation, you can trial run them to make sure they apply the same interpretation to the objects in which they are observing; but that only yields consistent subjective opinion, not factual objective outcome.
×
×
  • Create New...