31rabbit

nerve-wracking and incredibly tense once you got down to only a few marchers left true, you'd need an agreed-upon vernacular of commands. and the difficulty in re telling a legit Tic from a stylistic difference may be a challenge for the Critique Committee. and maybe this kind of thing would take too long to really captivate. (2 members per corps, cap the entries at 64?) complications, sure. nevertheless! I remember the great time of DCM field days and this in a small way would revive some of that spirit.

when I marched, we used to play this 'game' to 'liven up' basics: -the whole corps forms up in a block. sometimes with instruments, sometimes without. -A staff member would call out marching commands, move the corps around, bring it back to a halt. -the rest of the staff would be atop the podium picking out all the mistakes. When the corps came to a halt, they'd call out everybody who made a mistake and that member would be eliminated. -as the numbers dwindled, commands became more complicated, the tempo increased, and the spotting of errors got pickier. Do many corps play this game or a variation? We took it pretty seriously, even the front ensemblers were dedicated to hoping one of their own would win it (sadly no, but very very close a time or two). the bragging would have been insufferably joyous. Now I was at Dekalb last year and got nostalgic about DCM Track&Field day, which gets me to thinking. I'm sure that even the mention of 'Corps v. Corps Tug of War' would probably bring many a current corps director to the brink of an anxiety attack. in that spirit, though, how great would a 'best marcher in DCI' competiton be? DCI has tried skill competions in the past (fastest drummer, etc), but they've never really taken off. Am I wrong in thinking that this Skill Drill might be a thrilling event? can you imagine the crowd going crazy if it came down to a couple members from the Big Corps and some Open Class members? heck, I bet one of the marching shoe companies could be convinced to put up a nice scholarship prize. finding the time would be a challenge. pre-show / intermission would no doubt exclude somebody, but that's detailwork TBD. nevertheless, it ought to come to be.

there would be much risk reward complication to such an event, it could probably have its own thread under the 'pipe-dream' umbrella. but I didn't mean to hijack a Serious Discussion with a 'what if...', regardless of how it makes my chops salivate. the salient point that may have gotten lost in my fun revery is that we talk as if there is only one thing worth winning per year. the real tech heads talk about caption awards, but even they will tend to limit the discussion to captions won at Finals. How can the Regular Season of Drum Corps be made to matter more in terms of individual shows? are there other Accolades that can be competed for which will merit recall and significance but won't take away from the Big Prize? a tricky rope to walk, but likely an easier and more palatable solution to competitive redundancy than trying to reroute the glacier of 'rich get richer.'

the below-the-bar portion of this post is part rambling and part whimsy. but the relevant summation: we are discussing Competition in a system in which only one Event has one Winner. What if the solution to 'competitive redundancy' (not that i necessarily state that as a problem) is to find a way to make more accolades worthy of note? below is my rather feverdream option, but that's just a spitball. rather consider the concept of , 'what if there were more than one Thing worth winning in a year?' --- first bit: "way back in 99" (the great thing about the 90's is that they're either Old School or Relatively Modern, depending who you talk to), I went to a Colts end-of-season-appreciation event. Remember that Blood, Sweat, & Tears show? killer. anyways: they played a 'director's cut' version of their show, it was something like 14 minutes long with extended solos and even more Park/Bark. crowd went nuts, ton of fun. second bit: from what I know casually about golf, there's one event every year in which the traditional environment of calm is replaced with a raucous atmosphere. I told you that so I could propose this: one show per year, maybe it alternates regionals (though it would have to start as an experimental small show, of course), a 'No Rules' show. or at least 'fewer rules.' extend the time limits, allow guest performers, set up some boundaries that keep it reasonable but generally allow Different Fun Things. different type of judging, maybe your fan interaction here. now I know that this would create some griping from arrangers/fans who believe that the intricacy and consistent narrative of the performance and the vision, etc, is the virtue. and hey, those corps would be free to play their regular show and move on. and certainly corps in the thick of competition would probably not want to devote a ton of time away from their 'real' show for the sake of this. or heck, they don't even have to go to the thing. the participation details would require some more thinking. but the point: the first benefit is that it could be a lot of fun. the second benefit is relevant to this thread: it would be something else to win. As it stands currently, the 'major regionals' serve as stepping-stones and measures of competition. but corps don't Brag about winning the San Antonio Regional for any longer than it takes to get to the Atlanta regional. as a fan, how many regular season show results do you remember and call meaningful? other than when the 'Coats beat the Devils in Michigan that one time a while ago, i can't think of a non-finals show in which the result was of lasting significance. basically turn the Spirit of Disney Award into its own show. if it takes off, you've got this completely new type of Championship Belt. if it doesn't, well then there was still a show. the 'fun' element of this is a whim. the salient point is that one way to increase the competitive element would be to increase the number of competitions with results that Matter. in the way that college football teams brag about beating so and so, or hype up their rivalry trophies. as it stands, creating intra-season competition can be difficult once the field seperates into packs and the competition becomes a slow inching of captions. if you disagree with me in re significance of individual show results, feel free. But we are having a discussion about competition in which only one day matters, so perhaps one solution isn't a macro evolution but an expanding of accolades? would corps then take Pride in winning the 'Velvet Knight Invitational' from year to year? would that create a prize that doesn't Equal the Big One, but is still worth mention? don't call it a solution, becuase I didn't call out a problem. but gee whiz this hypothetical event is a good time when I think about it. there could even be a championship belt.

my experience is that the Glory Years of Drum Corps tend to be the era that the person doing the gilding first encountered the activity :) and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that

if there are two DCI events, equal in distance and accessibility, and one is a traditional scored competition and the other an unscored exhibition, wherein do you factor the competitive aspect into choosing which one you will go to? -my first priority is going to be the show with my Home team (alumni) -followed by the show with the most corps who i have traditionally enjoyed (legacy fan) -followed by the show in which I know members/staff or have friends who will be there (social) -followed by the show with more Big Name Groups (Casual Fanhood) -followed by the show with more themes I am curious about (Curious Fanhood) only if all of those things are equal would I then consider the scoring v non-scoring as a factor in deciding which show to go to. won't begrudge anybody for thinking differently, but how many people would have the scoring element ranked higher than all of the other priorities I've listed? DCI as a 'competitive circuit' is different than a sport, largely because a fan's ability to enjoy the product before them should not be diminished by numbers that they hear later. of course a single show is different than a 'Season Championship.' But I believe that this exercise reflects where the 'competitive' element stands in re interacting with the activity. I find the scoring to be a different way of exploring what I've watched, and I do enjoy that aspect, but it is more of a talking point than a tentpole. IF most people feel similar to how I do, then any kind of perceived championship circle of elitism will always just be a talking point and an arguing point. if significant number of people feel the other way in re significant of the scores, then it is something that needs to be addressed. But I go to a lot of shows and talk to a lot of folks, I'm confident that I'm not alone. whatever small number of corps have won in whatever larger number of years, that is a talking point. which is great for a forum. but i'd hesitate before inflating a talking point into alleging a symptom of imminent anything.

'4 corps in 35 years' is a hyperbole that I don't think serves anybody's purpose. as far as suggesting that the limited scope of winners is a result of effort and craft, what if I am? why WOULDN'T it be that way? given that the 'randomization' factor in this activity is health and injury, and that some corps even have a superior way of handling that, why Would not the same Top Corps attract the Top Talent and the Top Staff and employ the same Winning Methods? Look at the Cavalier 00-06s. when they didn't win in '03 and '05, one could argue that the first time was due to a steamroller of a BD team and that the second was because of an error in evaluating how a concept would be received (i'm not saying those as facts to debate here and now, just suggesting them to posit a point). But they employed a consistent standard and got consistent results. if they had done things a little different, could they have won 6 out of 7? 7 out of 7? is that more or less plausible than a more disparate series of results? the cavaliers 'figured it out' and won 5 out of 7. and then the blue devils 'figured it out a little better' and won 5 out of 8. as an activity in which many factors can be controlled, why wouldn't there be consistent runs of Being the Best at it? i fear we are arguing in circles about what I've always thought was one of the least interesting parts of a year. the more corps that 'figure it out,' the more corps that perform like each other. ( is there a separate 'back in the day'-type thread where we complain about how electronics separated the performance potential between Rich Corps and Poor Corps? used to be rich corps had Better and More of the same things that the poor corps had, now they have access to Different Things. more than the traditional 'in my day' argument about the spirit of the activity, i felt that that was a rule that had an actual on-field effect on the parity of competition. but that's neither here nor there).

one year, in a good but not great corps, i marched with a tenor player who was so severe that he went into self-punishment mode after a show on account of one of his sticks broke at an inopportune moment. actually tears followed by several hours of intense practice. he was a good guy, but he made it clearly known that his priority1 was becoming a magnificent tenor drummer. he marched in that corps for a year, the next year he was in an elite corps. I couldn't have been a member like he was, and I don't think I would have wanted to. not that the Top Tier Corps are composed 100% of 'i want to be the greatest' types, but I imagine that they get more of those types than non-championship corps. Incredibly Dedicated Players are going to be drawn towards corps with a winning pedigree, hence a rich get richer cycle. a good staff can run a good practice, a good staff can run a great practice if the members devote their off-time to the craft as well. observationally, what I do know about 'parity of performance,' is that it's my opinion that the moment in quarterfinals when the shows turn from 'fun and interesting if flawed' to 'a lot of good stuff going on' has been coming earlier and earlier the last few years. in the early 00's I thought it was trending the other direction. so even if the Championship Rings don't show it, I think the talent in members/staff has been spreading itself out more today than 15 years ago.

was walking through a warm-up area last year, stopped to watch a pit, noticed that the uniforms of this corps (a consistent quarterfnals corps) were just lying casually around. they warmed up casually, and their show on the field was spirited but generally as precise as their methods. I've stood in retreat next to top tier corps and lower tier corps. I've seen rehearsals of the Big Guys and the Little Guys. it doesn't take too keen an eye to see the difference in the prep and the resulting difference in the product. so: how to take into consideration that not all marchers Want to be in an elite corps? parity of results would rely greatly on a parity of preparation. For some kids, drum corps is more fun than work. nothing wrong with that. going from a DCI to a college marching band, my first instinct was to be aghast at these 25min waterbreaks and picnic-like practices. but eventually i bought into the idea that band isn't corps, a lot of the band kids wouldn't have wanted to march corps if it meant doing things in a strict and severe way. in order to be a contending corps, a group has to be run to a certain degree of efficiency and determination. sure everybody likes winning, but not everybody wants to prioritize their summer That Way. which is a good thing, because there Should be corps for members who dig performing but aren't necessarily the militantly disciplined type. or, let's be honest, for members who aren't as necessarily talented as the members who want to be in Elite groups. summation: some corps win more often than everybody else because they run themselves like winning corps. there's nothing 'wrong' with anybody Wanting It More than others, and naturally those groups will be rewarded more and will therefore attract more performers and staff who are of like mind.

was that replied at me? i was using college sports for comparison, where the player gets to pick his destination, not professional.

relevant to that other topic, comparing DCI to college football has some merit. every corps plays by the same rules, but a certain set have an advantage in garnering resources to succeed within those rules. More funds, more prestige, they can attract a higher caliber of staff and member talent. so it goes. short of a hardcap on budgets and a draft to place auditionees, I can't foresee a dramatic change to there being Haves and Havenots. A corps can improve its lot via consistent dedication and good planning, but it's a long road. see points as previously discussed in all those other posts. despite that, I don't want any kind of rules that puts a limiting ceiling on any particular corps. that would only harm the product. and that said: how important is winning? I didn't see the numbers, but the crowd around the 'coats souvenir booth this year far and away dwarfed that around the Devils'. How many people are going to put their 2014 disc in and skip to track 2? by a Wide Margin, the years in which my favorite show didn't win far outnumber the years in which my favorite show did. yet here I still am and so are most of you.

Auburn takes their Marching Band seriously. In terms of equipment, they've got a front ensemble that that could rival a lot of Top12 corps. I'm looking at a photo of them front last year and can see at least 9 fullsize keyboards. yowza.

http://espn.go.com/ncaa/revenue from this, it seems that most football operate on at least a slight profit. the deficit in Athletic Departments comes from funding any sport that isn't Football or Basketball. also, Football has other benefits to the school: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/03/report-finds-alumni-giving-among-other-areas-correlated-football-success yes, the coverage of "amateur" sports is frequently overbearing and much sound/fury signifying youknowhat. And certainly the celebration of a prodigy violinist should merit more public celebration than he is likely to get. football is a moneymaking engine that also happens to give many the opportunity to perform marching music in front of an enormous audience. I won't begrudge athletes the attention that they get, rather lament the Lack of attention given to those who deserve accolades but don't get them.

12th: 1993 Colts 11th: 2005 Glassmen 10th: 1989 Freelancers 8th: 1977 Optimists 8th: 1996 Crossmen 7th: 1992 SCV 6th: 1999 Madison 5th: 2000 Boston 4th: 1979/80 Spirit (i always backtoback 'em, they're one big cool gig to me) 3rd: 1988 Devils 2nd: 2006 Phantom 1st: 2001 Cavaliers / 2000 Cadets all time Favorite Top Twelve of the Top 12. funny thing, the 4th place slot is the one I agonize over the most.

i'm familiar with forecasting and the dangerous world of slotting, oughtn't we at least hear what the Show is before we start all that? There was talk that they announced it at their last camp. anybody have the inside scoop? i'm going to continue to live with the pretense that any corps could show up with the right idea and the right talent, blow the standings to hell and Win out of Nowhere. if there's any corps that is Really Good at being enjoyable without competive success, It has to be the Colts. at least the 90's Colts. 93? 95? 97? Hot shows. Colts '93 may be my favorite 12th place show.

i dig that. now that, depending who you talk to, Concept & Design are Nearly As / As / More Important than Technical Execution, I imagine that Design Teams will sooner/later be a common topic of discussion among even casual fans. we'll be talking about them like we talk about Directors of movies, "So-&-So's Phantom Regiment Production of ______." don't know what it's like among Brass folks, but I've been parlay to conversation among Serious Drum Guys who won't know what corps won in a given year but can readily name the writers of the Percussion Books for all relevant corps. Not only is this kind of stuff interesting, but it helps establish and trace a lineage of inspiration within the activity.

as far as I ever root for particular corps, I'd like to see the Bluecoats keep up their momentum. it's been quite a while since a corps has had a sustained run as 'the fans' corps.' As much as I rolled my eyes at the cavalier groupies in all their squealing brighteyes-ness, they did bring a certain energy that the discerning body of enlightened imposing fans sometimes refrain from. in the years post-Machine, I don't think I've seen one corps hold the hearts/minds of the screaming fans for a sustained period. Phantom had them with Spartacus, then lost 'em with Violin. Crown seems to win the fans in odd year, then lose them in even years. Blue Devils have always been a 'they're really good, but i like....' The cavie-groupies are still around, but they aren't the giggling swarm they used to be. The pressing horde around the Bluecoats souvie booth on saturday of finals, though, was like nothing I'd seen in terms of sudden affection. and, for the first time in my tenure, folks were regularly inquiring at the Unit about old BC shows . so I'm really looking forward to their 2015 show, hopefully they keep up the 'pleasing-but-not-pandering' style and maintain all the momentum they got from last year. things are more fun when there's a 'that corps' that has much and sustained and vocal fan-love. [above-stated opinions are not meant to praise or bury any corps, simply a reflection on the temperature-taking of the crowds as I observe and interact with them in the wild. I love all corps equally, save for the hometeam whom I love most of all in adherence to contractual agreements.]

I've manned the helm of DCI A/V Unit at the majority of regionals for quite a while now, and if I were to sum up observations it would be that the Current Membership is MORE willing to engage with 80's shows and earlier than they were when I started the gig in the early 00's. My interactions lead me to believe, anyways, that there are more 'DCI Savy' marching members than there have been in a while. Of course there will always be the large body that believe that the Greatest Show Ever is last year's winner (or last year's Cavalier show, depending on the year), but a lot of themcan be Walked Backwards through history if you know how to guide them. more marchers today view what they are doing as a Competition, I think, and that fosters a drive to know more about the shifting of priorities, strengths and weakness, and evolution of the game. but that's theorizing. So to put it tangibly: even with youtube at their pocket, I sell more old discs to the marching-age crowd in recent years than i did a decade ago.

Once the New Disc Scent wears off, I think it's going to be BD and Cavaliers that have staying power as To Watch shows. All the other shows this year remind me of similar programs from recent years that I enjoy more. -that said, 'Coats can serve as a teaching moment of how to employ high-power drill while working around a crowded field. Having a field full of stuff really tests how creative a drillwriter can get, always respect+ for the pens that up their game instead of submitting to the limitations and shrinking their field.