Jump to content

MikeRapp

Members
  • Posts

    4,575
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by MikeRapp

  1. I hate to break it to you but we are all at some level being played by DCI. They have a wholly vested interest in keeping Corps close together and making incremental “improvements” from show to show. I love drum corps, but the more I watch and participate the less I feel like scores are what we are led to think they are.
  2. It took me a couple of really serious DCI seasons to come to some terms about DCI scoring. It's a unique scoring system with very unique goals and parameters. You can wrongly look at every show's score in a vaccuum (which we all do) and and draw conclusions. But the reality of the system is that the goal is to get the very last rankings correct. You cannot compare scores from one season to the next, or even at some level one show to the next—except that DCI judges are working under terms that require them to make sure the corps land in the "right" order at the end of the season. Given that the max score is 100, this means that starting and ending scores are almost solely the product of judges trying, as a group, to make sure things end where the should. Unfortunately there are unintended consequences of this. One is that it is functionally impossible for a corps to climb much during the season. Every night you start where you were before. Shows do not ever stand on their own merit. Given that scores start in the 60s and 70s—as opposed to zero—and the season only lasts two or so months, the very general rankings of corps are already largely set on Day 1. You can call that collusion or lack of fairness, but it's the system DCI has adopted.
  3. No one is talking about the fact that Cavaliers is now a full three points back from Bluecoats?
  4. So many people think raising funds is as easy as making it “a priority.”
  5. Into the Light may have the most creative ending in DCI history,
  6. Crossmen have a show that is largely not very challenging from a drill and design standpoint. I love Crossmen, and continue to hope they have that magical season where they land in medal contention, but they continue to struggle with that age old balance of youth vs difficulty. They arent unique in that regard, all of the corps in that perennial 9-14 group deal with many of the same basic challenges. Boston and Cavaliers have found a way to emerge from that group via different strategies. Both are now becoming destination corps for older, more experienced marchers. Eventually Crossmen are going to have to buckle up and put a big show on the field and hope the staff can coach them up by midseason.
  7. Top three are likely established in Bluecoats, SCV and BD. The next three will be really tight between Boston, Cavaliers and Crown, probably in that order.
  8. When do we think the new ending will be put into the show? Last year it was the Arkansas show before Nashville.
  9. It is very cool and very noticeable. I actually think I heard three new musical additions.
  10. Not what I said. I asked why aren’t more kids choosing to march Scouts?
  11. I don’t really see this BD show as abstract. It’s a story, much like Dreams. Tougher to tell a story that you are writing, much like Crown last year.
  12. I would guess that “tradition” is far more relevant to Scouts, even at just 56%. If tradition were ranked at, say, Blue Knights or even Bluecoats, I’d bet that would be at best half that, and probably even less. The question isn’t really why current members chose to march Scouts, but rather why other marchers went somewhere else. Because clearly that is happening a lot now. It’s sad. I remember watching Scouts in the 80s and thinking what a total rush it must be to march with them. But today, I’d kill to march with Bluecoats—which to me has sort of become the modern version of Scouts at least in terms of how they use and stage instrumentation.
  13. Let's face it, Bluecoats' Session 44 could stand still and play for 11 minutes and be amazing. Adding in the giant chairs, used as different types of stages, is pretty cool. Quite similar to what BD has done over the last decade in many respects.
  14. I kind of see them as similar to SCV's props last year. They didn't need them to tell the story, but they used them well. I think this is where props in general are going. The best use of props either tells an essential part of the story (like Boston's fire last year) or provide unique ways to stage the corps for ensembles and solos. Probably not unique to really any stage production set. The musical Chicago didn't need their props to tell their story, but they used them in really amazing ways and the show was over the top because of it.
  15. Just wondering, in your view, what would be "a legitimate reason" for Madison "to even enter into the coed conversation"?
  16. I just don't think Crown's design is very effective. The props, for one, at best add nothing to the show. At worst they actually distract you from the show. Bluecoats' props add immeasurably to the show, both in terms of message and execution. Blue Devils' props exist pretty much exclusively to sell the story concept and design.
  17. Most of my all time favorite shows had a strong story line. Phantom of the Opera, Machine, Angels and Demons, What Dreams are Made On, Inferno. Some had a strong message but not a story. Bluecoats over the last five years all fit that concept. Bluecoats is saying, if all you get is a great musical and visual feast, then that's great. But if you want something more, that's great too. Session 44 has both. So did Inferno. That said, my all time least favorite and most frustrating shows attempted to tell a story and sucked at it. I'll leave that where it is. It depends on your goal in design. If your goal is to tell a story, or create a strong message, and the audience gets neither, you've failed. This isn't just a technical exposition. It's entertainment. There's no crime in just going out and blowing the heck out of your horns, and marching your *ss off, but the era of just being faster and louder is probably over.
  18. If you are trying to communicate a story and a message, and people don't get that message, then you've failed in show design. If you don't care, then you walk the corps out and play 11 minutes of kick-@ss music and drill, and call it a show.
  19. I'm not interested into getting into heated arguments with people who clearly have much more invested in Scouts than I do—and who attempt to win arguments by calling people names, set up endless straw men, and jumping to wild conclusions about my personal character. I have absolutely no "squeaky wheel" agenda. None. Not any. I have nothing to gain or lose from Scouts existing as is, as some other thing, or folding. I'm not some secret PR agent of the folks in charge of Scouts. I'm not even a DCI alum of any kind. So you can choose to ignore me from here on out, put me on mute, whatever you wish. Not once have I stated or suggested that going co-ed would solve their problems—though it is quite obvious that being one gender, be it male or female, dramatically limits your potential enrollment and show concept options. You may view this as a limitation or an opportunity or both. Many who have a lot more hands-on experience in DCI do not believe being all-male is a fatal hindrance to success. That's great, I hope that's true. I'm not convinced. But I'm nothing but a guy who likes drum corps. Regardless, the constant straw man argument of, I can't PROVE that being co-ed would work, is silly. You can't prove being all-male will work either. Or all-female. If your goal is to be in medalist contention, then I might suggest you look at the corps that are in medal contention (which again includes the all-male Cavaliers and a dozen co-ed corps) and follow their lead. No doubt that includes making significant changes in MANY things BEFORE you would even consider going co-ed. If that's not your goal, and there are many DCI corps that fit this description, then you don't have to change anything but your fund raising efforts to keep doing what you're doing. Clearly you are willing to die on the all-male hill. That's your right. I for one would hope Scouts can retain their unique identity in the activity, as they are one of the corps that got me excited about drum corps decades ago.That said, what I'm not interested in, personally, is seeing the corps continue to decline into irrelevance. For me there is no honor in representing the history of Scouts by being essentially out of Finals before we even hit August—all male or co-ed.
  20. “No one can empirically prove that becoming a coed corps would help or hurt their standings and viability. There are plenty of coed corps that are not competitive.”
  21. He was, and insisted on being, the sole figurehead for everything. It was his very predictable downfall. He simply refused to listen to anyone he differed with, and especially those who were imminently more creatively qualified. Cadets are infinitely better off without him.
  22. I fully understand and appreciate the importance of brands, and the Scouts brand. At the same time, you don’t honor history by being irrelevant today. You have to change with the times. This activity is nothing like what it was even a decade ago, let,alone three. It seems there is a very sizable contingent of Scouts alums who will never, not ever, let go of being an all male corps. They would literally rather finish 16th than change. Unfortunately it seems these alums also do not donate much money to Scouts, so you have the worst of both worlds. Being a Vanderbilt fan, its the same as Vandy football. They believe they deserve to compete in the Sec, but yet refuse to put the resources in to compete with the other members. They continue to finish at or near the bottom every year, and make the excuse of being a small School that cares about academics. And they keep cashing that fat SEC check, while overpromising and underdelivering to it’s fans every single year. They want to have their cake and eat it too. There are many challenges that Scouts have failed to meet. Show design is one of them. But when you can’t recruit anyone but teenagers it’s impossible to put high danger shows on the field. When you finish outside of finals, it’s almost impossible to raise funds. And so long as a huge contingent of its “supporters” both refuse to support change and refuse to donate enough money to stay afloat, nothing can change. No one can empirically prove that becoming a coed corps would help or hurt their standings and viability. There are plenty of coed corps that are not competitive. Personally, I would hope that they could return to relevance as the Scouts. But I would rather thy return to relevance, period, than be subjected to misery.
  23. He had no taste. Period. The guy had no business designing shows. Zero. None.
×
×
  • Create New...