BamRam

This thread is hilarious. Let's virtue signal to the "kids" by throwing around some buzz words. That'll fill the holes, lol. Sorry folks. Staff, participants, fans, boosters, social sites, and yes forum admins, years ago killed true diversity in drum corps. The most important diversity, diversity of opinions and ideas, has been shouted down and banned by those who've self anoint themselves as keepers of drum corps morality. But hey, "it's for the kids, so you can ignore the awful outcomes and lack of participation created by our policies and behaviors."

Whenever I see a picture of Millstadt or the Crusaders, it reminds me of only one thing. BEER GARDEN! Ahhh. Just one of many places young men shouldn't go... but always do.

You're right, I should clarify my definitions. It's simple really. Elite - corps that are DCI member corps. Those that have voting rights. (I would consider there to be a few super-elite corps at the very top of the activity in terms of success and longevity. But this isn't important to the discussion). non-Elite - corps that are not DCI member corps. Those without voting rights. These are the lower tier of World Class, Open Class, and others who may not participate in DCI sanctioned activities. I tend to interchange the terms "non-Elite" and "small" As to the 15-20 years comment, I knew that would get misinterpreted. I'm not saying the solution will take 15-20 years. The impact will be almost immediate. When finally deshackled from DCI, the non-Elite corps will be free to explore innovative financial, touring, marketing and membership solutions that will enable many to make the jump in excellence. Right now the barriers erected by DCI are so high that very few can hurdle the wall. A bottom up, not top down answer to the problems impacting "drum corps". Make no mistake. There will be a major fight with the remaining DCI corps for control of market share. But, IMO, competition is exactly what is needed. My prediction is that it will take 15-20 years for the newly formed group to become the dominant financial, marketing and creative force.

Umm. My last statement reinforced my original contention. By definition the voting members of DCI are all elite corps. Have you ever seen any small corps casting DCI votes that permanently change the face of drum corps? I haven't. Once the smaller, non-elite corps stop trying to be DCI member corps, they will stop reinforcing the people making poor decisions. In essence, what I'm proposing is the exact opposite of G7/G8. They need to reorganize and refuse to participate in DCI events. Then they will be free to make decisions which benefit the vast majority of corps rather than a few elite corps. <edit> If the non-elite corps have the courage to do this, in 15-20 years they will control the marketing, distribution, and dollars. </edit>

After 40 years, I see no reason to follow or trust the elite corps directors who have taken drum corps to this point. I'd rather see if the non-elite corps have any innovative solutions (could they do worse?). But as long as the non-elites keep chasing the DCI promise land, I doubt true solutions will emerge <shrug>.

Really? All of the World Class "Junior" corps DID NOT start DCI! DCI was started by a small number of upper echelon corps. Those upper echelon corps set up new rules and changed those rules as they deemed necessary. These corps used their growing power and influence to create a system that benefited THEM, not all drum corps (including marketing and distribution rights). And while it will be painful to the ears of many old timers, most of those revered drum corps directors from the 70's and 80's where directly responsible for putting in place a system which decimated "drum corps". Those elite corps directors refused to look at the big picture that was "drum corps". Through the last 30 year the elite corps directors have continued to make decisions which benefit them and their corps. Yes, today all the World Class Junior corps are members of DCI. But only the foolish believe they historically have had equal say in the direction of the activity. More importantly only the gullible believe that the actions of these elite corps have historically benefited "drum corps". "Without the Wizard's balloon Dorothy wouldn't have gotten back to Kansas, and without DCI's backing the activity won't get back to profitability." You've missed the analogy. Dorothy didn't need the wizard, she always had the ability to solve her own problems via the ruby red slippers. So does "drum corps". Note: I tend not to post too much at DCP because, like many, I can become too passionate about a once great activity that is at the final fork in the road. I mean no disrespect to anyone, especially those that disagree. Just stating my opinion.

Are we in Oz? "Bow down to the all powerful, all knowing DCI." When Toto starts to tug on the curtain, the guards come out in force to protect the wizard(s) of DCI. The original poster asked what are the biggest challenges facing drum corps today? It's not money, it's not lack of fans or corps, it's not lack of membership, it's not that drum corps is a niche within a niche. All of these challenges are merely symptoms of the most fundamental challenge. DCI does not equal drum corps AND drum corps does not equal DCI. Once fans, members, corps administrators stop bowing to the all powerful, all knowing DCI, then and only then will the other challenges be solved. Just one persons opinion.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over & over and expecting different results... Einstein The definition of gullibility is following the same people over & over and expecting different results... Einstein Corollary Regarding TOC, I don't consider myself insane nor gullible.

Way to break open old wounds Folks are confusing 82 and 83. The 15+ point drop at Whitewater occured in 82. Geneseo was a legitimate 11-15 place corps that year (eventually finishing in 15th at Montreal). At DCM Championships in DeKalb scoring a 72, beating Colts by nearly 13 points and trailing Cavies by 6.5. Two weeks later at DCI-Whitewater scoring a 61 (23rd place) losing to Colts by 1 and trailing Cavies by 17+. Two nights later at another DCI sanctioned show, scoring a 71 and trailing Cavies by 9. None of the marching members were ever told why. And to my knowledge no comments from DCI were provided. The situation at Whitewater in 83 was similar, but far more destructive to the corps. As a previous poster said, Geneseo was a legitimate top 10 corps that year (eventually finishing in 16th at Miami). At DCM Championships in DeKalb scoring a 71 at finals, beating Cavies by 0.05 and trailing Madison by 6.5 (Madison finished 5th that season). One week later at DCI-Whitewater scoring a 68 at prelims (9th place) droping to a 61.9 at finals (11th place). While the drop was large, the finals performance was flat, so the drop was not all that unexpected given that it was a DCI regional championship. The next night in Rockford the score was 59.9. The following week the score jumped back up to a 70. From July 23rd until Aug 15th the scores stayed at about 70. Occassionally popping up to 73 or 74. The same time all other corps scores were continuing to move up so that by finals week, essentially all but a handful of corps passed Geneseo. There are a lot of theories and speculation, I truly don't know why. I can tell you this. After the Whitewater and Rockford shows, Geneseo worked their tails off the last 3 weeks. Including certain sections refusing to take a "free day" so they could practice. There is zero chance that the corps didn't improve during those three weeks. So I'll leave it to those who saw the corps to decide for themselves if the fix was in. Regardless of how/why it happened. The 83 season was the beginning of the end of a terrific drum corps. Due to what transpired they lost a tremendous number of members after that season. Also, please note that I'm not trying to disparage any of the other corps' from 82 & 83. There were some terrific corps' with great programs each of those seasons. Any residual anger from former members and staff are toward DCI and the judging community not the other corps' or their membership.

Staying with the Knights theme... 1952 Kewanee Black Knights - Dale Whitman 1969 Kewanee Black Knights 1979 Geneseo Knights 1981 Geneseo Knights 1989 Quad City Knights All photos courtesy of knightscorps.org - lots of other photos in the galleries

Rita on bells in 1980. Photo Courtesy Of www.knightscorps.org

I didn't march with Knights that year. My wife, who did march that year, believes it was in Monterey, CA.

1981 Geneseo Knights Drum Line A bunch of Midwest kids drumming in the Pacific Ocean! Photo Courtesy Of www.knightscorps.org

1981 Geneseo Knights Snare Line Photo Courtesy Of www.knightscorps.org

1980 Geneseo Knights Courtesy of www.knightscorps.org

1980 ^0^

"Wow, did you see that bird hit window?" Long Live The QUEEN!!!

Thank you DCP for providing a mechanism for drum corps fans to interact with the decision makers within DCI. And thank you Mr. Hopkins for your accessiblity to the fans. I have a tremendous amount of respect for you because of your willingness to publicly debate ideas about the future of drum corps and to defend your positions within the drum corps community. Mr Hopkins - I hope that you and others understand that the comments and disagreements which I have with some of your positions are intended as counter arguments in the debate over the past/present/future of drum corps and are not intended to be personal in nature. I believe that most of us know and understand the restrictions and limitations placed upon drum corps' by the veterans rule committees in the pre-DCI era. It was an era, in the eyes of the corps', that severely limited the creativity of instructional staffs and stunted the development of "national" corps. But, in return, there were many, many local corps' providing music education and discipline to a large number of youths across the country. DCI itself was created as an alternative to the VFW/AL view of drum corps. And, in the free market, drum corps prospered. But only to a point. While the VFW/AL provided drum corps managment with little or no input, DCI gave most of the input to the best corps' in the activity. That is, the DCI Board of Directors (BOD). This has created it's own problems. We can debate the reasons, but it's quite clear that the number of active corps' is significantly lower than in the pre-DCI era. Certainly, some were lost due to economics (gas prices, for example) while others were lost due to poor management. But it's also true that the decisions of the DCI BoD and rule committees over the last 30+ years has also contributed to the decline in corps' and the decline in overall participation within the activity. But, in return, the corps' that do survive have advanced the difficulty and artistry of drum corps almost beyond comprehension. Your comments clearly exhibit the schizophrenia of the problem. You stated, "The number of corps will not grow! They are too expensive to manage and fuel costs will over time, make our current model impossible to maintain." Then later you state, "But, we need to allow for all of humanity to taste the joy of this activity. It is such a wonderful life experience, I just do not know how we can leave someone on the outside looking in!" You want as many people as possible to "taste the joy of this activity" and yet you admit that "The number of corps will not grow". It's impossible to expand the joy of this activity without expanding the number of corps! Why? Because the "joy" comes from the experiences of the youths within the corps' themselves and the interaction between the performers and the audience. But hasn't this schizophrenia been created or at least amplified by DCI itself? Decisions made by the BoD over the years have only exacerbated the financial problems caused by external pressures (fuel prices and insurance for example). Personally, I could care less about the debates which in the past have engulfed drum corps (2 valves, 3 valves, pits, Bb vs G, amplification, etc). None of these issues make drum corp be "drum corps". But these decisions directly led to the loss of many corps'. Over the last three decades many corps directors had to make lose-lose decisions. Buy the necessities such as fuel and insurance but maintain fiscal responsibility by not buying new equipment. Or, buy the necessities and lose fiscal responsibility by buying equipment they couldn't afford. Either decision was wrong. If they didn't buy the new horns, pit equipment, amplifiers, etc. they couldn't remain competitive on the sheets and lost members to the "big" corps'. If they did buy the new equipment they couldn't remain financially stable. In either case, the only responsible solution for many directors was to fold the corps'. And, thereby, reduce the availability of the drum corps "joy" to many local youths. I'm not suggesting that there should have been no instrumentation growth and modernization within the activity. But I am suggesting that these decisions and more importantly, the timing of these decisions should have been made with an eye toward the greater good of ALL the corps'. So, in essence, I agree with you that "our current model (is) impossible to maintain". But I disagree that the solution is to make a "shift in what constitutes success" and "allow the leaders of the activity to spread their wings". In fact, I'd argue that this solution is exactly what has exacerbated the problems. I'm not in a position to make decisions regarding the direction of drum corps. But I do know that the decisions made by an extremely small number of people (i.e. DCI BoD, rules committees) has had a tremendous impact on who and what this activity has become in the past 30+ years. Those decisions have impacted the definition of success on the sheets, the instrumentation, the touring costs, and a whole host of others. I hope and pray that those decisions were made with the best intentions of all competing corps'. But quite frankly, when I look at the impact of past decisions and your views about the future of this activity I'm disheartened. Personally, I'd like to see a middle ground. A model in which some power is vested in the activities "leaders" who have consistently been on the cutting edge of the activity; pushing, pulling and expanding the very essence of "drum corps". But also a model which can throttle back the "leaders" by allowing for greater input from the rest of the drum corps community. This way ALL corps' can have a better chance at remaining financially viable and thereby provide more "joy". I'm not a political scientist and don't know how to create this type of system. But, IMO, this should be the solution that the drum corps community should be working towards. Again, Mr. Hopkins, I'm not trying to be disrectful to you or anyone else. I'm just trying to verbalize my frustration with the direction and evolution of this activity that everyone here on DCP loves. Best Regards

More from Southern Illinois Belleville Bellettes Milstadt Crusaders Spirit of St. Louis Statesmen (Springfield) Grenadiers (Kankakee) Piasa Indians

For those of you who're interested, here's a terrific website full of Viintage Brass Band Pictures.

Ames (IA) Drum & Bugle Corps - 1937 Photo Courtesy Of www.ameshistoricalsociety.org

Ames (IA) Drum & Bugle Corps - 1936 Photo Courtesy Of www.ameshistoricalsociety.org

Waves (Stillwater, OK) - Year Unknown

SPAR's Women (Washington D.C.) - Year Unknown

Brainerd Ladies - 1936 Photo Courtesy www.brainerddispatch.com