Gantang

Ranked 18th? Will Music City catch Madison?

That is good, BUT, it seems to have taken all the interest in the current season. Scouts dropped a spot in the rankings and no one seems to want to talk about that. BTW...it was seeing Madison in 1975 that drew me to the activity! I don't want Madison to become an afterthought.

When rifle tosses began to draw more applause and standing Os than solos it was evident that the activity had shifted to visual and away from music. Two and four bar phrases and lots of movement has replaced great ensemble work.

Relegated to Page 3 and 0 posts since Sunday? The only thing people seem to want to discuss or opine on is the co-ed aspect. Does this bode well for Madison?

Only one, Meagan. Bonnie and Rebecca were Guest Artists while Megan was a Member.

You stole my response!

So is Capitolaires.

Did the girl from last season get a spot this season?

True. But if the female talent that is left after all the other corps CGs are filled is crap, they'll merely have a bottom echelon CG.

Madison on 3rd in Cedarburg? It's like a home show for them. Will the winner be doing the encore or will Madison?

Is there a statistical correlation between Open and World Class scoring? Would BD B scoring a 59.80 on Open sheets put them ahead of a World Class 65.00 (median score of corps scoring in the 60's.) on World sheets?

I stand corrected. BD was 3rd in '75 and Madison was 2nd in '76. Thanks!

The Blue Stars were once sponsored by a bank, Pioneer by a cardboard manufacturer, and a few other corps have had corporate sponsorship, but to say the activity is a niche market is to be generous in its popularity. No prudent CMO would allocate marketing dollars on an activity that would bring no ROI. Corps will always be primarily self funded.

Devils took 2nd in 1975 and would revolutionize drum corps with their 1976 production. They were flush with money because of Jerry's financial acumen, and Jerry WAS the Blue Devils. Those calling for a change to the Madison leadership are citing many reasons for why they think changes should be made.

I'd be less than happy if I was a Dues Paying member who auditioned, earned a spot, and traveled to all the camps only to have guard members recruited and paid to be members a week before the season started. That could be a huge morale destroyer and cancer between the sections. Especially when they start looking at score sheets.

The Thing, perhaps?

Guardsmen?

churchboy asked for a positive thread. I was being positive. And negative is subjective. Inaccurate, misleading, wrong, malicious, or dishonest posts are bad, but if someone sees something from a different perspective and asks questions or makes statements that are outside popular sentiment doesn't make them negative. I came back here this season because of an article published in a Madison newspaper that focused on a female member being added. There was almost no mention of the 80th anniversary, only that a girl would be featured. I wanted to get a feel for how Madison Scouts felt about the direction of the show before they opened the season and almost immediately lost to the Colts. Because I don't have diarrhea of the fingers doesn't mean that I'm not taking in all sides of the debate. I asked about the performance level of the show versus the content of the show because there are many who say that the MMs have no role in the 16th place finish. It doesn't make sense to me unless they have perfected the material given to them. That's not negativity, it's logic. I find it hard to believe that a non-Finalist corps would draw the same level of talent as the Blue corps, SCV, Crown, etc. Is that negative or honest? Could the 2018 Madison Scouts MMs have won the title IF they had SCV's show and staff? Be careful because if you answer "no" you're being negative. It's OK though, we now that the 2018 Scouts were not that talented. WHich is why I asked if the staff had to write a show to match the talent level they had to work with. This isn't trolling or being negative; it's a starting point as Madison and their leadership begins addressing 2018 and looking ahead to 2019. ONLY an honest assessment of all aspects of their 16th place finish, a clunker of an 80th Anniversary show, and whether the corps should open auditions to boys and girls will bring confidence to the hearts and minds of the alumni, fans, and casual observers like me. They owe me nothing, but that doesn't mean I can't voice my curiosity.

Let's go Madison!!! 15th in 2019!!!

They performed to their utmost ability, indeed. But was the show design limited because of the talent level of the people who auditioned? Did the design team necessarily design a show that was within the kids' proficiency as the staff projected forward 9 months? In the past, shows have started hard and been watered down but it seems that shows now are actually made more difficult as the season progresses. Did Madison add more difficult content during the season or did they stay static with a show that they hoped would be perfected by the MMs in August? I guess this is a chicken/egg question.

Did Madison max out the "How" boxes? That seems to be the sentiment from some, which is that the MMs perfected the "What" which was never going to earn the highest numbers. If that's true, then there can be no negative critique of the MMs and everything falls on the design team, but if the "How" numbers lagged than the MMs either were not talented enough to pull off a good show OR the techs instructing the MMs didn't know how to clean the "what". People seem to be oversimplifying the issues surrounding the historic poor scoring and placement.

That brings up a question that I was wondering about. On the "sheets", did the Scouts max out performance numbers while being dumped in content? I must admit that I'm not up to speed with the way scores are accumulated, but if what people are saying is true, it seems the performance numbers would be high while the product itself would be low since the MMs were given a poor show to perfect. Does this make sense??? Or is it like in diving where you can perform a really simple dive flawlessly but you're not given a high mark because the dive was not challenging, whereas a harder dive performed with minor flaws can yield a higher score than a perfect low technical dive?

Where do you think Meghan will march next year?

Do the Prelim scores roll out throughout the night or is there one score reveal at the end?

Sure they can, but to be told to say nothing but positive things and to be insulted for vicing a negative position is not the same as criticizing. It instructing another how to think and act. There's a big difference. When people try to silence differing opinions it would be better if they would use facts and data to demonstrate why the critique is flawed rather than to attack the critic.