BigW Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 This sounds sorta like the National Hockey League not so long ago... There were six teams, but only four made the playoffs. Point well taken, Andy- but still-- the threat of three going home is going to push the ones on the bubble HARD, very, very, hard. And I see that is a good thing. Nothing worse as a staff member or performer when you get fat and complacent. And before Ream says it, in my case it might be more the complacent issue, LOL. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyroo Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Point well taken, Andy- but still-- the threat of three going home is going to push the ones on the bubble HARD, very, very, hard. And I see that is a good thing. Nothing worse as a staff member or performer when you get fat and complacent. And before Ream says it, in my case it might be more the complacent issue, LOL. :D Well then, why don't we dig up that old dead horse that's been beaten so many times before and look at reducing the number of open class corps by two or three and adding in a like number of Class A corps. If the goal is simply to "make Finals" (and for some corps it apparently is), then what we have today is silly. If we were to create a situation in which "making Finals" actually meant something, then that could create a far more competitive situation in the mid-range of corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajlisko Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Well then, why don't we dig up that old dead horse that's been beaten so many times before and look at reducing the number of open class corps by two or three and adding in a like number of Class A corps. If the goal is simply to "make Finals" (and for some corps it apparently is), then what we have today is silly. If we were to create a situation in which "making Finals" actually meant something, then that could create a far more competitive situation in the mid-range of corps. I concur ... a finals mix of six Open and six A corps would be much more dramatic and reflective of the current distribution of corps ... Andy "not the Roo" Lisko 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Well then, why don't we dig up that old dead horse that's been beaten so many times before and look at reducing the number of open class corps by two or three and adding in a like number of Class A corps. If the goal is simply to "make Finals" (and for some corps it apparently is), then what we have today is silly. If we were to create a situation in which "making Finals" actually meant something, then that could create a far more competitive situation in the mid-range of corps. Andy, this year is actually better than some previous years, in terms of number of Open Class corps. There were 11 last year and the year before. Also 11 in 2000 and 2001. 12 in 1999. 12 in 1998. 13 in 1997. And in the pre-Class A years... before 1997... we had 1993, when there were only 13 corps total... and all 13 were taken into Finals. There were other years... 15 prelims corps in 1978, with 10 finalists and exhibitions from the 11th and 12-place corps at Finals. 15 corps in 1974.... 12 finalists. 14 corps in 1994... 10 finalists, two exhibitions. So this isn't new, by any stretch of the imagination. And this year (disclaimer: this is a completely unofficial count, just my own calculations, not based on any particular official or "inside" information)... it looks like the Open Class field this year will be larger (maybe as many as 14), and the Class A field smaller, than in recent years. So I'm not sure expanding the Class A finalist field is the answer this year. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 One big downside, IMO, to narrowing the Open Class finalist field to, say, six: You'd leave some really terrific corps out of the mix. Perhaps the Renegades. Maybe the Kidsgrove Scouts. Or Atlanta CV. Or whoever. Last year, the "top 10 scoring corps from Prelims" breakdown was: eight Open Class corps, two Class A corps (Govenaires and Fusion Core). And the bottom two Open Class finalists (Kilties and Tampa Bay Thunder) outscored the rest of the Class A field. So... if, last year, the Finals field was six Open Class and six Class A corps, it would have been: Minnesota Brass Buccaneers Empire Statesmen Hurricanes Caballeros Renegades Govenaires Fusion Core Carolina Gold Windsor Regiment Sunrisers High Country Brass You would have cut four Open Class corps who, at Prelims, outscored some, or all, of the Class A corps who made Finals under the "6 and 6" format. (Alliance and Atlanta CV outscored Govies and Fusion... Kilties and Thunder outscored Gold, Windsor, Sun and HCB). No offense at all meant to any Class A corps, who bring a lot to the table... but how fair is that? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 15 corps in 1974.... 12 finalists. Also the last year for 12 Finalists (think sumthin' about Final scores in the 40s might have changed things).... But possibly none of those corps had less than the 65 or so members to qualify for todays Class A. Even that 15th place corps... now who were they again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyroo Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 One big downside, IMO, to narrowing the Open Class finalist field to, say, six: You'd leave some really terrific corps out of the mix. Perhaps the Renegades. Maybe the Kidsgrove Scouts. Or Atlanta CV. Or whoever. Last year, the "top 10 scoring corps from Prelims" breakdown was: eight Open Class corps, two Class A corps (Govenaires and Fusion Core). And the bottom two Open Class finalists (Kilties and Tampa Bay Thunder) outscored the rest of the Class A field. So... if, last year, the Finals field was six Open Class and six Class A corps, it would have been: Minnesota Brass Buccaneers Empire Statesmen Hurricanes Caballeros Renegades Govenaires Fusion Core Carolina Gold Windsor Regiment Sunrisers High Country Brass You would have cut four Open Class corps who, at Prelims, outscored some, or all, of the Class A corps who made Finals under the "6 and 6" format. (Alliance and Atlanta CV outscored Govies and Fusion... Kilties and Thunder outscored Gold, Windsor, Sun and HCB). No offense at all meant to any Class A corps, who bring a lot to the table... but how fair is that? I'm not disagreeing with you at all, Fran. Six and six probably wouldn't be an appropriate breakdown either. But eight and four might work. It would give two more Class A corps an opportunity to appear before the evening crowd, and it would make "making finals' somewhat more meaningful to the Open Class corps. I think I see a fundamental difference between the way you and I are looking at it. You indicated that even the non-finals Open Class corps outscored the next two Class A Corps. I'm looking at it as two completely different contests, where the scores of one class cannot and should not be compared to the scores of the other class. After all, corps will have declared their class at the beginning of the season. This all harks back to the Cadets2 comments about their appearing in the prelims and the finals. That appearently struck some people as the height of egotism. I think it simply reflects reality. Percentage-wise, there are darn few corps that *don't* make finals. Think of how it was "back in the day".... The Class A corps had their contest and the class B corps had theirs. They both, however, had their finals and their championships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 (edited) I think I see a fundamental difference between the way you and I are looking at it. You indicated that even the non-finals Open Class corps outscored the next two Class A Corps. I'm looking at it as two completely different contests, where the scores of one class cannot and should not be compared to the scores of the other class. After all, corps will have declared their class at the beginning of the season. The only way scores could not be compared is if DCA's Class A corps were judged on a different set of "tolerence criteria" (for lack of a better phrase) from the way DCA's Open Class corps are judged... similar to the way DCI Open Class (formerly Division 2/3) corps are scored differently, in their class, from DCI World Class corps. Within their class, this allows a DCI Open Class corps like, say, Oregon Crusaders, to score a 90-plus at Open Class championships. But when that same corps, that same week, is judged on World Class sheets, against World Class corps, the score is more like a low to mid 70 or so. But with the DCA system... the corps are all judged under the same criteria, at all shows. The Class separation simply allows the corps who have declared Class A status to have a better chance competitively against similar corps, at the championships. Remember... Class A status, for all intents and purposes, only applies to the grouping of the corps at DCA Prelims... not at regular-season shows. In other words, to avoid comparison of scores... you'd have to have separate DCA Open Class and DCA Class A contests at every show in which corps of each class are present... with the corps judged on different sheets/criteria... all the way through the championships. I've heard both sides of the argument from a variety of people... but personally, I like the current DCA system better than the DCI system. And that, plus a couple of bucks, will get you on the subway. LOL Back on topic... you have a good point about Cadets2. And I have no problem at all with them drumming up interest in their corps with this latest press release, because at the same time they are drumming up interest in DCA championship weekend. Man.... one thing for sure... I have way too much time on my hands tonight. Edited May 12, 2012 by Fran Haring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Point well taken, Andy- but still-- the threat of three going home is going to push the ones on the bubble HARD, very, very, hard. And I see that is a good thing. Nothing worse as a staff member or performer when you get fat and complacent. And before Ream says it, in my case it might be more the complacent issue, LOL. :D I don't even see it as complacent ( for the corps, not you). I see it as people need to design smart. if you only have 30 brass, dont write for 50 and stage for 50. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Also the last year for 12 Finalists (think sumthin' about Final scores in the 40s might have changed things).... But possibly none of those corps had less than the 65 or so members to qualify for todays Class A. Even that 15th place corps... now who were they again... i believe 92 had 12 finalists as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.