cowtown Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 6 hours ago, Stu said: My contention is that if the G7 had majority control of the DCI vote, control of the DCI adjudication rules, control of the DCI revenue, control of show line-ups, like they proposed in the document, there is no way they would have allowed another corps to be in a position to have a three year in a row stint in the top eight. the 8th spot was for Madison Crown and Bluecoats were solidified as top tier as a result when neither deserved to be in the G7 at the time it was launched Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) 9 minutes ago, garfield said: No, you're definitely correct about their intent to wrest control, but the impetus that got them to that point is the seeming perennial placements and very little movement of most corps. Again, I don't agree with their method, but the message to "GET BETTER AND CHALLENGE!!" is one we should all support, IMO. Many of us scream and moan in these parts about the seeming glacial movements in placements and the lack of competition in the ranks but, to solve that, I really can't justify asking the "Top Corps" to dumb down their productions to create the competition. Thank you for clarifying!!! I absolutely agree with the bolded parts... on the money. But I just wonder if the "get better and challenge" message from the G7 was "We'll get better, we'll make more money, and maybe we'll give you the chance to do so, too, but on our terms only." Edited September 13, 2017 by Fran Haring 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 9 minutes ago, Fran Haring said: But I just wonder if the "get better and challenge" message from the G7 was "We'll get better, we'll make more money, and maybe we'll give you the chance to do so, too, but on our terms only." Yeah, one problem with the G7 proposal was its apparent assumption that what was true at that moment had always been true (and should always remain so). Five years earlier, Boston had a stronger claim to be part of any top 7 than either Bluecoats or Crown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 13, 2017 Author Share Posted September 13, 2017 11 minutes ago, garfield said: No, you're definitely correct about their intent to wrest control, but the impetus that got them to that point is the seeming perennial placements and very little movement of most corps. Again, I don't agree with their method, but the message to "GET BETTER AND CHALLENGE!!" is one we should all support, IMO. Many of us scream and moan in these parts about the seeming glacial movements in placements and the lack of competition in the ranks but, to solve that, I really can't justify asking the "Top Corps" to dumb down their productions to create the competition. Gar: Never would I advocate 'punishing' the successful in order to prop up the unsuccessful. That would be just as wrong, bad, and horrid as the G7 plan. And if the message from the seven within that plan was, "We are tired of not being challenged, the best way for all of us to get better, for the activity as a whole to get better, is to actually challenge, so Get better and Challenge!" that would have been perfect!!!. However, that was not what was in the plan!!! Unless they were lying through their teeth from the depths of their souls it was their plan to actually take full control, to relegate all others to classifications beneath them, to take the revenue generated by all corps and mainly use it for the seven, to take the voting power away from all but the seven, to construct shows line-ups and adjudication to only benefit the seven, and oh by the way, if ya can place in the top eight for three years straight with us shafting you like that, then we will welcome you to the club. And if you believe that their whole plan from the get-go was to produce an outrageous proposal to fail 'in order to light a fire under the other corps to get better to challenge' that is just as crazy as those who believe the Coke Company planned out what happened to them!! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 13, 2017 Author Share Posted September 13, 2017 23 minutes ago, cowtown said: the 8th spot was for Madison Crown and Bluecoats were solidified as top tier as a result when neither deserved to be in the G7 at the time it was launched From what I have heard, not saying it is true, but what I heard was that Madison was originally offered to be in the G(8) club but they turned it down. And that is what shifted the plan into having a sentence about the 'top eight for three years in a row' will get ya into the club. Again, that is just what I have heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 13, 2017 Author Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, MikeN said: How so? Mike Really cannot respond in detail due to DCP policy and my own ethics. But for those who have been close enough to observe and witness personal interactions among the movers, shakers, administrators, board members, etc... tension can still be felt hanging in the air. Edited September 13, 2017 by Stu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeRapp Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 On 9/12/2017 at 7:49 PM, N.E. Brigand said: Yes, it was a despicable little scheme. And it would make it much more difficult for anyone to crack the top eight, seven, six, what have you. But not impossible. It would have been practically impossible. Who would choose to march in a non G7 corps? Only those who did not have any other options. The G7 was designed to be a self fulfilling prophecy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 17 hours ago, Stu said: But least ye forget that If implemented, the G7 would currently have the majority control of DCI revenue, the majority of control of all other DCI resources, the majority control of DCI voting, the majority control of DCI adjudication rules, and the majority control of DCI show dates and line-ups, the . The minds of those ‘agreeing’ to such a document are the same type of minds that would place a sentence concerning the three year deal as a false tease, an illusion carrot; placed in the proposal in hopes that enough corps would help implement the plan. Do you really believe that altruism, especially in the aspect of revenue sharing, would somehow kick in where the seven would create competitive rules favorable enough to any corps but themselves that would allow another corps to actually enter their club, and share their revenue, with a three year stint in eighth or higher? no and i'll tell you why: they cant agree to disagree most of the time amongst themselves 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 17 hours ago, Stu said: The voting corps have had the governance power since 1972, they are not going to give that power up now. Thus the conflict of interest shall remain. And while I despise the G7 plan, least we forget that there have been many times 'most all' voting corps have dumped hard on non-voting corps for their own agendas; especially in the area of distributing DCI revenue (example: increasing competitive payout for WC by 'eliminating' payout for OC) except a lot of the rules concerning OC and fees were created by the OC corps themselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 15 hours ago, brians said: you are correct, Blue Stars would have been the first to be in having made top 8 three years in a row, 2008, 09, 10, we all know how that worked out. Also, is the pay out for attending tour of champion shows today the same as for the non G7 corps who attend?... not sure it is. The 7 are still in force with their scheming ways, just much more quiet about it. We will know for sure there is a crack when a G7 corps is allowed to drop below 9th place....and one of the power broker corps is allowed to drop below 7th. as it is now, the G7 will always get the benefit of the doubt in a big way,... will let corps get to within 1-2 tenths but that's it. there's a crack now. one of the 7 is the most irrelevant he's ever been in the DCi Board room Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts