stop the corps folding

[oldtimefan]

In one of the threads there was a mention about DCI helping a corps. I am not going to get into that per se. I do however think that if we want to start seeing parity and longevity that maybe the next rule to implement into DCI, should be a spending CAP. Take out fuel as corps from the west coast travel further, etc. But, all corps in a season can spend X on staff, props, equipment, etc. Then you won't have all these corps going 70 million in debt trying to keep up with the joneses. They will know each season what they can and can't spend. Budgets will be set. The top dogs can't "buy" themselves a championship. They only have the same amount as the lower dogs.

Now I know everyone is going to go ape on this and say, but the Cadetadevaliers deserve to spend more, they earn more,etc. Look at any major league sport and they all have spending caps. Why? To make the sport more viable and give it parity. We all want to call DCI, the major leagues of music, yet we only have one or two corps that ever have any chance of ever winning anything. What other major league sport sounds like that?.

How many major league sports teams have folded in the last century? How many drum corps? With every advent of a new rule, the rich got richer and and the poor folded up. More members???? Yep, Rich got more members and the poor, folded. New gadgets? Yep, rich could buy them, the poor borrowed to keep in the game, and went belly up to pay for them. Time to even up the playing field. Even pro sports has a draft. Everyone wants to be progressive with drum corps, then get progressive.

[skeptic]

I dont see a spending cap stopping corps from folding.

Each corps should be responsible enough not to spend more than they have.

Even if you instituted a cap... smaller corps still wouldnt be able to afford the "luxuries" and keep up with the top dogs, unless the cap was so low that nobody could afford extras.

Edited August 16, 2013 by skeptic

[barigirl78]

A spending cap would be good for drum corps whether it prevents corps from folding or not.

The rules the NFL has implemented to encourage parity have been hugely successful. While other professional sports have declined in popularity it continues to thrive.

[DCIroxx]

Spending is only half the equation. Income is the other half. What do you propose to address income? ... sounds like the same difficulty that Congress has in solving a budget deficit .. but I digress...

[corpsband]

I dont see a spending cap stopping corps from folding.

Each corps should be responsible enough not to spend more than they have.

Even if you instituted a cap... smaller corps still wouldnt be able to afford the "luxuries" and keep up with the top dogs, unless the cap was so low that nobody could afford extras.

Exactly. If a corps (or NFL team) can't manage their budget, they will fold.

Spending caps to address parity (in Pro Sports) make sense. (FWIW I don't think they would address parity in drum corps).

Spending caps to somehow enforce fiscal responsibility on the part of corps admin does not.

[BRASSO]

The rules the NFL has implemented to encourage parity have been hugely successful.

oh, I wish it to be true... but unfortunately, the data does not support this.

The NFL, despite a salary cap, has far less parity than does MLB that has no salary cap ( just a Luxury surcharge tax imposed by the IRS )

Edited August 16, 2013 by BRASSO

[oldtimefan]

A spending cap would be good for drum corps whether it prevents corps from folding or not.

The rules the NFL has implemented to encourage parity have been hugely successful. While other professional sports have declined in popularity it continues to thrive.

The point that others are missing is that it is a start, and any start at saving the activity is better than nothing. Most want to stand on the sidelines and yell at others to do something. Then when others do something, they like to yell at those doing something, that they are doing it wrong.

The spending cap, would slow the top dogs from BUYING a championship, it may encourage smaller corps to STOP trying to keep up with OVERSPENDING just to keep up.

Cadetadevaliers can afford to put X dollars in props on a field. If you want to compete, you better find a way to do it also. Small corps try to fund their way to do it and go belly up doing it. If you CAP all corps, then Cadetadevaliers don't waste X dollars on props on the field.........unless they don't want to spend some of that CAP on their instructors????

Edited August 17, 2013 by oldtimefan

[oldtimefan]

oh, I wish it to be true... but unfortunately, the data does not support this.

The NFL, despite a salary cap, has far less parity than does MLB that has no salary cap ( just a Luxury surcharge tax imposed by the IRS )

yet they do have a profit sharing program in place and they do draft players to keep teams in check.

[BRASSO]

The point that others are missing is that it is a start, and any start at saving the activity is better than nothing. Most want to stand on the sidelines and yell at others to do something. Then when others do something, they like to yell at those doing something, that they are doing it wrong.

The spending cap, would slow the top dogs from BUYING a championship, it may encourage smaller corps to STOP trying to keep up with OVERSPENDING just to keep up.

Cadetadevaliers can afford to put 3,000,000 in props on a field. If you want to compete, you better find a way to do it also. Small corps try to fund their way to do it and go belly up doing it. If you CAP all corps, then Cadetadevaliers don't waste 3,000,000 on props on the field.........unless they don't want to spend some of that CAP on their instructors?????

Spending caps won't do anything at all to stem the loss of Corps if, unlike every other competitive sport in the world, we do not address some level of transfer rules. Its the big elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about it. Most tell us they don't want any reasonable and sensible transfer rules put in place. None at all. Ok, I get that. If theres little to no support for this, then thats that. But absent that, we're all just kidding ourselves here if we believe that the Cadevaliers won't continue to win over 85% of the DCI Titles the next 30 years just as they have for the last 30 years. A cap won't do much of anything at all, imo, to stem the loss of Corps either. But if DCI decides to try it ( doubt they would ), I 'd be ok with trying it. Whats to lose, when we're already losing more Corps than we're adding, and have now for 3 decades.

Edited August 16, 2013 by BRASSO

[skeptic]

The point that others are missing is that it is a start, and any start at saving the activity is better than nothing. Most want to stand on the sidelines and yell at others to do something. Then when others do something, they like to yell at those doing something, that they are doing it wrong.

The spending cap, would slow the top dogs from BUYING a championship, it may encourage smaller corps to STOP trying to keep up with OVERSPENDING just to keep up.

Cadetadevaliers can afford to put 3,000,000 in props on a field. If you want to compete, you better find a way to do it also. Small corps try to fund their way to do it and go belly up doing it. If you CAP all corps, then Cadetadevaliers don't waste 3,000,000 on props on the field.........unless they don't want to spend some of that CAP on their instructors?????

Stop using absurd dollar amounts to make a point.

Corps are not folding because they are trying to keep up with other corps.