cixelsyd

No. The G7 proposal was full of spots marked "work to be done". The 7 agreed on what they presented, but had not worked out all the details. In other words, they did not have all the answers yet (and still do not), and they did not agree on all the details (and still do not). None of that supercedes the G7 proposal that they do agree with.

Yes, there was nothing in the proposal about a time frame for delaying the end of service to open class. The proposal is the prevailing evidence of where they stand on that issue. Until they provide similarly definitive evidence to the contrary, the G7 Report is their most definitive, detailed and recent statement on their future vision for open class. It has been nearly three years since then, a very long time in which any or all of the 7 could have developed a modified proposal, issued a press release, given an interview, leaked an email, or simply posted right here on DCP. They could still do so today, in fact.

But you just said they do. In fact, you said they pay more. But that is what DCI has been focusing on for the past few years, and as a result you say their leadership should be fired. Maybe you would not be making such demands if they had focused on getting kids to join more corps, and grown the activity instead.

To continue with the pie analogy - yes, the next pie need not be the same size as the last one. I would greatly prefer DCI focus on making the pie bigger, rather than bicker on how to slice it. For a brief moment in late 2009, the leaders of DCI were in near unanimous agreement to do that, and they developed a five-year business plan focused on growing the pie. The ensuing G7/the7 saga has disrupted that focus. That is somewhat true. But we cannot seem to make the G7/the7 stop wasting their energy in this manner. Like you said, the answers to those questions will vary quite a bit. For instance, I think the marketable aspects of the activity boil down to two simple things: a. the brass-percussion-drill-guard thing (the art) b. the competitive event format (the sport)

Less than one, by my estimation. It would be quite a stretch to contend more.

Couched in the terms I underlined - no. I understand the whole "showcase the top corps" thing. Now, I do not know your background, as this was your very first post here (welcome!). So maybe you have not noticed the many ways in which top corps are already showcased. Finals vs. prelims. Performance order. Marketing of video and audio media. Preferential ad placement. Headlines in show coverage. Extended tours. And lately, a growing number of separate, exclusive shows. We do that already. We have been doing that all along. It is part of the DCI mission statement, so we will continue to showcase the top corps. We should not throw all the other corps under the bus in the process, though. But that is not necessarily true. If we, as you say, "focus more energy" (and money) on showcasing the top corps by doing what they have proposed (having DCI route more revenue to them, less to the other corps), then we guarantee that even if there is more revenue in the future, it will not be available to other corps. Well, it is a little early to start painting people with such a broad brush. I think that any situation where a subset of the participating organizations suddenly start hatching their own plots to make massive and largely undefined changes that they admittedly are not fully decided on themselves, but want exclusive voting power so they can impose them on everyone the instant they do decide - you will see many react with instinctive caution. They would all look like traditionalists at that point.

And this is what the debate really boils down to - how to slice the pie. The fewer slices, the bigger each slice can be. No, but it should be challenged. For instance, in this case, on what basis do you justify taking away the pie slice allotted to open class? It is already so paper thin that it is probably better thought of as the crumbs left in the pie plate. Do they provide no real service of their own to DCI, and thus deserve "no real service" in return? Because in my judgment, if open class serves any purpose at all to DCI, say, as a source of replacements for attrition at the world class level, or even just as part of the greater activity that gives credence to the DCI "world championship" label, then it provides a real service to DCI. Sure. But that is all relative. The pie is currently carved into 22 legitimate slices for the member corps. Those slices are nowhere near equal in size. Thanks to the DCI revenue sharing formula, current and historic "top corps" get slices much larger than other WC corps. Honestly, it makes little difference to each member corps what we do with the open class crumbs - but it makes a huge difference to those open class corps. That is all they get, and it has been proposed to take it all away. Meanwhile, the corps already getting bigger slices demand more still. That would inevitably have to come from the other WC corps. They often tour just as far and work just as hard as the top corps. They need to eat too. Why they are currently fed less is already a matter of debate, in my opinion. But to feed them less still would clearly be an issue with "the quality of help they receive", as you put it. Or are you suggesting that we cut the pie into fewer than 22 slices?

Before I just sigh and resolve myself to "agree to disagree" status, one question. How much money are we talking about? As I understand it, the only money open class receives from DCI that is up for debate here is the occasional appearance fee when an open class corps appears in a world class tour show. The entire open class tour is run on their own separate, balanced budget.

If that is the case, then the 7 should participate in recreating the local/regional circuits - since they were the ones who insisted in folding them into DCI in the first place.

Sounds good. But the 7, to my knowledge, have no intention of doing anything of the sort. They have, however, proposed withdrawing "real service" from open class up front, before there are any reconstructed local/regional circuits for them to fall back on.

Well, if the "Music in Motion, Inc." really is not being used, maybe that can be the new open class circuit.

Again, DCA is a national circuit. That means that like DCI, their focus is going to be on the all-age activity at the national level. Their voting membership will be corps that qualify at the national level, largely determined by placement at the national/world championship. Those corps will direct DCA rule and policy making toward the agenda of national level corps, not local/regional corps. My previous post was not specific enough - sorry.

Sort of. I think it was more of a habit that developed back in ancient times. Field competition was still being organized in the 1920s. The first few American Legion national championship contests were judged parades. Their first field contest was the 1924 finals, but the preliminary contest was still a parade, and "field drill" was essentially just parading around on grass instead of the street. Prelims became a field event for the first time in 1928. From what I have read, the prelim contests way back then appear to have been completed in a single day, and show length varied at times to accomodate the number of corps in the competition. As we know, things were quite different in the 1960s. Field programs were more complex, and the idea of a preliminary contest taking more than one day had occurred in both Legion (1966) and VFW (1969). Still, both of those organizations had prelim timing requirements that forced corps to cut portions of their drill (not just concert). Go figure.

In case you were not aware, DCA is also a national circuit. There are no local or regional circuits in operation anymore.

Please - we hear enough baseless fearmongering from the political class these days. It already is subsidized by outside revenues. It always has been, and it always will be. Did you just come to this realization this week? No wonder you are in a panic! The same was said a few years ago. But look - DCI is still here!

I take the last phrase with a grain of salt. But before that, are you serious in suggesting that judges will give different scores than they would have otherwise just because the show is also part of a NASCAR style cumulative point system? If so, they cannot both be correct, so would the sincere judging be with or without the NASCAR?

I understand all of that. This whole tangent originated from my response to a previous post of yours, where you said: Thought I sensed an inference from you that if any one, two or three corps (or even seven) grow to the point of being capable of creating the "next big thing", as you call it, something with open market drawing potential of its own (i.e. Blast), that DCI should be serving as the launching pad or incubator for their derivative product. I replied merely to point out that DCI is a drum corps circuit, not a search for the "next big thing", and that the 13 founders of DCI intended for the circuit to serve at least 13 corps. Nowhere along the way did I contend that the original intent of DCI was to treat Blue Saints the same as Blue Devils.

You are correct.

DCI was founded with 13 charter members, not what I would call "a few". Their dream was to enable themselves to travel to a national/"world" championship annually, a relatively new concept at the time. Their plan to achieve that goal was to increase their share of the financial pie, even if that meant running the championship and sanctioning the tour themselves to earn that money. Their most important lesson learned* was that they needed more than 13 corps to participate to connect the dots and make a viable nationwide tour. * - admittedly, it is no longer clear whether current DCI directors have all learned that lesson.

Looking at last year, the placement order was the same at every TOC show except for Cadets and PR. Cumulative scoring based on that would be no more interesting.

Good for you. There is an open BOD spot with DCI, if you are interested. Then I guess it was kind of disingenuous when you said "who really cares who owns what and how they do things".

Sorry, you are correct. I should have said this: Aside from "The 7" self-selecting the lineup and getting all the money, these are normal shows.

Well, then, make that the next trivia question. Who were the two corps in 1972 finals with 34 horns? I remember that. Had I not counted heads, I would not believe there were only 47 brass.

There were a couple of 34-horn lines in 1972. But if we are starting in 1975, I would guess the 1975 Troopers with 42 horns.

Technically, there were four AG corps competing at the 1968 U.S. Open. Royaleers and Sweethearts were in open class, while Catholic Daughters and Eaglettes finished 1-2 in class A.