X DM

Poring over spreadsheets and statistics, etc from various judges at various shows to see what the judges think can be a cool enterprise for folks. I have no problem with it. Why should I ? It's not my call,and it's not my time, etc.

scores and recaps are wanted by me as well. But again, " better " for me is not defined so much by " scoring " and " placements " as it is by my personal enjoyment quotient. People are certainly entitled to defer to the judges determination on what is " better ". I have no problem with that. Simply allow me the right to define " better " perhaps a little differently. I recognize the difficulty judges have. They are judging completely dissimilar shows on the part of the contestents. And on Finals Night they sit 100 yards up in a booth and the judge has to listen thru the din of crowd noise for the final musical movement of the Corps to determine which Corps performed it " better ". I appreciate the difficulty of this. I simply define whether a corps is" better " this year than last year a little differently than some posters have defined " better ", with some of the other threads here the last 2 days, that's all.

For the record though, I did not state that " people were too preoccupied with scoring and placements ". Perhaps a reread of my post should help clarify that for you. I posed my thread in the form of a question. I allowed for posters the right to define " better " in the fashion that they define it. I never said they " were too preoccupied " with scoring and placements. If " scoring " and " placement possibilities " is their definition of " better than last year ", or a member can get to practices easier this year, or whatever, and that defines the corps as " better " for them, that's ok too. I merely wanted to respond that " better " has more definitions than the multiple threads below that seemed to have a singular definition for " better " as in " scoring " and in " placement possibilities " this year.

As I look at the many threads the last 2 days, there seems to me to be lots of emphasis on whether this corps or that corps is " better " than last year. The definition of " better "seems to be defined as in " scoring ", and " placement possibilities ". While I recognize the importance of " scoring " and "placements " (it is afterall a competitive activity ), my evaluation and appreciation of a Corps tends not to be defined by " scoring ", nor " placements " so much. I tend to define " better " with an enjoyment quotient as the major yardstick. Am I the only one here defining " better " in this fashion ? For instance, it is my belief that years from now, it is not the placements outside of first place that most people will recall so much as the level of enjoyment that a particular Corps provided. When we look at the Corps that we see voted into the Classic Countdown we have annually in the movie theatres, the vast majority of the Corps selected by the fans nationwide were not first place finishers that particular year. Last year, I enjoyed the Crossmen, SCV, Phantom, Southwind, etc more so than Corps that finished higher than these Corps in " scores " and " placements ". For me, these Corps were hugely successful, irrespective of "scoring " or " placements ". So I just wanted to add my 2 cents worth here that at least for this poster " better " has a different definition than a few other posters on this forum.

My advice ? Don't take it personal. Have fun. Work hard.. Believe in yourself, your instructors, and your fellow Corps members. In the case of anonymous posters ,you don't know them, nor what their motivations are. So listen to them, but listen more to the adults you know and trust on a personal level. And listen to your God. Do that, and you'll develop the confidence to put the opinions of anonymous posters, whether young or older, into it's rightful place.

Thanks, Craiga. I don't like to see any Corps fold. That's why I think it's a good idea to acknowledge those corps that are still with us after all these years. No matter what division, or placement. I could have used the 70's or the 60's as a beginning point. Those Corps are remarkable in their perserverance to this activity too. But these 5 Jr. Corps that pre date 1950, and that are still with us....... they are something special, in my view.

Congrats to all the Corps this year as they embark on their 2006 competitive season. And a special congratulations and best wishes go out to 5 Corps who have truly stood the test of time with their remarkable resiliency, and their never say die perserverence to the competitive drum Corps activity, There will be 5 Corps competing this year ( 4 in Div.1, and 1 in Div.3 ) that competed prior to 1950 and are still with us here in 2006. This is an astonishing achievement when one thinks of the thousands upon thousands of Drum Corps since the end of World War 2 that are no longer with us for one reason or another. We especially salute these 5 Corps, and we can only hope that 65 plus years from today, ( 2070 + ) we'll have these same 5 corps still going strong, and maybe dozens more with 65 plus years of competitive activity in 2071 that we have here in 2006. These 5 Corps and their beginnings that predate 1950 are....The Racine Scouts ( 1927 ).....The Cadets ( 1934 )......Madison Scouts ( 1937 ).....Boston Crusaders ( 1940 )......The Cavaliers ( 1947 ). No matter where these 5 Corps finish in 2006, they are treasures to us all who love this activity, and we should be grateful that when it came to the test of time and obstacles along the way, they somehow found a way to endure it all. This poster, never afiliated with any of these 5 corps in any capacity, wants to take a moment as we approach the 2006 competitive season to congratuale them for their remarkable resiliency.

Fair enough. Predictions are the same as a wish list, as it's folly to make predictions when few of us have any idea what strength a Corps is putting out this year in relation to others, nor how the judges will view these Corps. Given that, I'll predict your prediction of the Cadets tieing for 6th won't come true, and I'll predict the Cadets won't finish lower than 5th this year.

Maybe you should have titled this your " wish list ". Pretty sure we are not going to see the defending champion drop to a tie for 6th. The Cadets have finished lower than 5th only once in the last 24 years. This won't be their 2nd time. You can take that to the bank.

The incredibly positive influences that Mr. Rogers has had on generations of young children needs no defense except to an isolated few who apparently need some sort of buffer against their own ignorance. It takes a very confident Man to expose his known weaknesses before millions of people. Mr. Rogers made us laugh at his incompetence with a musical instrument. He knew the reaction it would receive with his audience. And it was funny. He made a point when he then went to the piano. And demonstrated his profiency with that. And how people can be proficient in some things, and not in others due to experience and training. He made an educational point to his young audience. Most of them no doubt " got it ". Only the older, more dull of mind, could have missed his exercise here...... R.I.P, Mr. Rogers..... a truly great, intelligent, cultured, caring Man.

Cadets 2005 was certainly a radical departure for them over recent additions that seemed to have more widespread popular audience appeal. It was dramatically new and different". (This does not mean I enjoyed their music ) But it would fit the definition of " dramatically new " for them with their music in 2005. Now that they won over the judges with this, we will see more of this style from them in 2006, and my guess other Corps, ie Boston Crusaders, SCV, etc, to perhaps emulate this avarde garde style in attempts to rise up in placements from recent placements.

Easy choice for me. Jerry Noonan, North Star Sop. Soloist playing " Ole ". think it was 1980 or so. As a matter of fact, I'm hoping the North Star make the Classic Countdown. This North Star soloist was one of the best Soprano Soloists in DCI history . He stood out there alone for " OLE".. The exposure was all there, and the risk taking enormous in the ending of the song, as the corps completely stopped playing and he reached down and cranked out a great ending to the song. He was awesome. He was at his best in big competitions it seemed too. He nailed his solos, all of them, at DCI Championships for his Corps. He's my choice for best single soprano soloist for their corps, and I've seen or heard all the great single soprano soloists for the top 12 Corps in each year since DCI began.

They were a highly competitive senior competing Drum and Bugle Corps in the 50's and 60's. from upstate New York. My guess. the name was probably derived from apple orchards and the manner in which the apples were plucked from trees by long poles in those days. That's just a guess though. The Corps actually had sharp cadet style uniforms, White and ( green ? ), but mostly white or cream colored for sure. I can just vaguely remember them, as I was pretty young when they were around. But they had sharp uniforms and were a fine Corps for awhile there.They also had several talented musicians within the Corps ranks, and the Appleknockers performed in Concert fashion in sit down musical performances in doors in the off season in their area. Others can fill in other info, and possibly provide pictures. But in their day, they were a terrific competing Senior Drum and Bugle Corps. Nobody laughed at this Corps back then, believe me.

I'd add the St. Kevin Emerald Knights, and the. Lt. Norman Prince " Princemen " to this list. These were 2 other corps with sharp looking uniforms from the " old days ".

They tell me the Cadets show of 2005 seems much clearer when one is high. And that there is no confusion at all, as the theme becomes better understood when one attains an out of body experience that the high allegedly produces. And the higher one is, the better the appreciation of the show. But to be honest with you, I wouldn't really know. I'll just have to take their word for it. Even without being high, the 2005 Cadets show seemed to be quite a mind trip for the drum corps fan.

I might take slight issue with an enthusiast of a Corps performance in the 40's not being appreciated by your typical drum corps enthusiast in the 70's and having that 70's enthusiast gripe about that 40's corps show. Those who participated in drum corps in the 40's thru the 70's and well into the 80's in my opinion do not share the same disconnect to the corps shows that came about in the 90's and beyond. Most 70's and 80' s Corps members can relate to that 40's corps show a lot better than the DCI Champion's show of 2005. It is the mid 90's year members and beyond that have the tendency to appreciate the DCI shows of today. I don't want to stereotype here too much, but it is a misnomer to think that the 40's marcher and the 70's marcher don't have much in common and can't relate to one another's show despite the more than 30 years between the 1945 Corps and the 1975 Corps. These folks, despite their vast age and experience levels, tend to be much more closely aligned on their drum corps thoughts on what they appreciate most in Drum Corps programs.

2 sop soloists..... Les Etoiles ?

Seems to me the Boston Crusaders would have to be on this list. They had a stretch in the late 50's when they were in the top 10 nationally, the 60's where they were in the top 10 ( when there were more corps ) rising as high as top 3 in the late 60's at national championships. They had strectches in the 70's and 80's where they were up and down, but were back in the top 10 in the late 90's and through to today. Few corps on this thread that have been nominated by posters can make a claim of top 10 status that cuts across 5 decades, like the Boston Crusaders can. Boston should be on this list, without question, in my opinion. The Blessed Sacrament Golden Knights deserve strong consideration for their accomplishments as well.