Jump to content

Tenoris4Jazz

Members
  • Posts

    686
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by Tenoris4Jazz

  1. 13 hours ago, BlueStainGlass said:

    I wish I can insert a what gif for this. No execution score? That's literally on the score sheets how it's written and how it's executed. 

    It's on the sheet, but given some of the "marching" and visual performances I've seen over the past 10 years, it's obviously taking a huge back seat to the design.  BD got perfect scores in visual in 2014 and I counted 5 missed forms in less than 2 minutes.  Visual now is "That's a great design! Don't worry about all those bad lines and intervals and poor marching technique... what you're TRYING to do is really awesome!"

    Seriously... it's more participation trophy than actual critical assessment of what was really done.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  2. 8 hours ago, karuna said:

      
    So..pre-1984 all the numbers were objective, measurable FACTS and afterwards just nonsense?

    ALL the numbers judging drum corps, band etc... are just opinions.  None of them can be "measured".  Scores then were just as arbitrary as they are now.  

    ########.  A gack is a gack... that's not an opinion.  Go listen to BD '89 and tell me that's an opinion.  Dropping a rifle is a measurable fact.  Screwing up an interval, not having a straight line, missing a rest, blowing an entry, phasing... all objective mistakes that can be judged objectively.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  3. 8 hours ago, DudleytheWest said:

    I get what you are saying and agree with you, but I don't think the audience should have any influence on scores. That is a huge bias problem. To me, 1993 is the single greatest show there ever was from a design standpoint, and I believe it also the best show of '93 from an execution standpoint. I HATED it in 1993. I was so glad the Cadets won. Both were deserving and obviously the best corps IMO but the Cadets was certainly the crowd favorite. Star was something entirely special and it was a show that many (including me for a long time) just didn't get or appreciate. I also hate jazz. So I'm going to like Regiment, Cadets, and Vanguard more than Blue Dvils.

    It just can't be judged and really shouldn't. I think 2021 showed that it really isn't necessary.

    Bingo!  

    Plus, Star's show in '93 was too much, too soon.  It gave us a glimpse of the future, but it wasn't anything people wanted to see or hear in 1993.

    The audience shouldn't have any influence?????  Then what the #### are they there for????  The audience response is why Phantom won the #### title in '08.  Of COURSE there is going to be bias... we're human beings, it's part of who we are.

    • Like 2
  4. 2 hours ago, karuna said:

    The point of the competition is the drive to excel, the attempt to exceed even your most optimistic expectations.  Watching young people do things they have no business to be even attempting can be life changing for the members and rewarding for the teachers and entertaining for the rest of us.   (And this is ignoring all the other life lessons drum corps imparts to it's participants which have been listed here many times).  Anyone who takes the numbers seriously needs to get some perspective about what the activity TRULY is about.  The sheets and the criteria are educational in and of themselves but writing down numbers for band is truly a futile exercise.  BUT....competition and the numbers permit a bunch of OTHER benefits to materialize so everyone pretends they are real.  Just don't forget we're all pretending.  

    Oh good grief, I'm going to have to go there...

    From 1983 backwards, you were judged on your execution of your show 1st, the appeal to an audience 2nd, and the design 3rd.  The point of the competition was... to perform well, score high, and have fun while accomplishing something, which might be a ring, a medal, and a flag.  It was, above all else, A COMPETITION.  Was that the best thing?  Maybe not, but it worked for over 5 decades that way.

    Today, I don't see the point of scoring.  Execution is all but abandoned, so what are they assigning scores to?  Give 'em one score for the staff's design of a show, one score for doing it, and one score for whether the audience likes it or not.  You only need three judges and they can use whole numbers... problem solved.

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  5. 8 hours ago, TheOneWhoKnows said:

    Could have been, and honestly mostly was, great. The 3 levels of depth involved in the storyline was great. I just don’t think it was communicated well enough.

    Things actually overheard during Cadets' '16 show:  "Why is the groom by himself on top of the wedding cake?"  "Is he just going to stay up there the whole show?"  "So, he plays a couple of times and stands there the rest of the show?"  "Why is that guy just standing there doing bodybuilding poses?"  "Is he not going to play, or twirl something?  He's just going to pose the whole show?"  "What happened to the color guard scaffolding up front?"  "Did they rewrite the music AGAIN?!?"

    "If you have to explain it, you messed up the design."  The actual story gotten hidden behind the constantly changing visual design and the two guys who got (literally) put on pedestals and left there.

    • Like 2
  6. 5 hours ago, ContraFart said:

    When I saw the topic, it reminded me how back in the 90s, my high school band used smoke bombs in buckets at the end of the show. During district contest, the buckets got knocked down and the smoke bombs set patches of the field on fire. To this day smoke effects are not allowed in FL FBA evaluations because of my high school. 

    We lost a show in FL to another band from GA who used fireworks at the end of their show, which were illegal in GA, but legal in FL.  Their style copied the Bridgemen, including the raunchy outfits for the color guard.  For years the people who marched that show still referred to losing to "the fireworks and hookers show."  :thumbdown:

    • Like 1
  7. 4 hours ago, TheOneWhoKnows said:

    In theory, a longer spring training should equate to complete and cleaner. Doesn't mean it will. You can have a 6 weeks spring training and still come out and bomb it. Makes no difference. Or you could have serious design flaws that you just spent 6 weeks cleaning and because no one adjudicated it the entire time, you had no idea your baby was ugly. 

    See Cadets 2016

    • Haha 1
  8. Haven't seen the show, but I have a question:  why make her do all that running et. al. right before a solo?  In the "caveman" days of drum corps, soloists stepped out of formation and spent a few seconds prepping for a solo.  If the choice is between nailing the solo and staying in formation, I'll take the clean solo every time.  There shouldn't be a deduction for having a soloist take a few seconds to get ready for their feature.

    • Like 6
  9. 4 hours ago, C.Holland said:

    Its a sold experience to students, not necessarily a competition.  The competition is sold to ticket buyers. 

    I know what you meant here, and I will give you the Cincinnati Reds as a comparative.  Reds fans have been sold anything but a competitive or fun team for a decade.  The players simply get paid to keep playing baseball.  You march where you can if what you want is the experience.  Why do fans keep paying to see Reds games?  They love baseball, win or lose.  Some MM's want competition, some just want to learn from marching.  There's room for both.

  10. 3 hours ago, jjeffeory said:

    I don't think we'll see a streak as long as BD's. There's no catching up at this point. Maybe Cadets and Cavaliers can, but it's a long streak.

    DCI won't exist long enough for anyone to get close to BD's streaks.  However... Bucs have won 14 of the last 16 DCA titles and finished 2nd the other two years.  In fact, the last time Reading finished lower than 4th was... 1997.  That's 20th century folks!!!

    Of course, the last time BD finished lower than 5th was... 1974.  :tic:

    • Like 1
  11. 1 hour ago, MarimbaManiac said:

    I mean, are you saying it shouldn't be? A well loved and seemingly rock solid organization stumbles hard and goes inactive, at the same time shining a light on mismanagement and misbehavior by its highest levels of administration. Do you not think the organization should be under a microscope at this point? Especially when it has a history of sweeping controversies under the rug and moving forward without making necessary changes?

    Honestly this is a great opportunity for the org. They have a chance to reevaluate their operations and culture and rebuild on a strong foundation. I think what people are concerned about, is they won't take advantage of the opportunity, and instead plow forward with the same policies that put them in this position to begin with. 

    Either way, people are paying close attention as they SHOULD be, and hopefully the org is taking that seriously. 

    Look at the reactions of Spirit and SCV.  Spirit went from being one of the worst offenders to being the leader in prevention and education.  SCV... just turned a deaf ear and a blind eye and said "Speak to the hand"... about abuse, questionable hiring practices, financial management, hanging MM's out to dry... the list is long.  They practically ASKED for all this spotlight and scrutiny with their horrible behavior.

    • Like 4
  12. 4 hours ago, DFA1970 said:

    It's impossible to prevent someone from acting out. WGI world class age goes way beyond 21. It's unfortunate but blaming a certain person for someone else's behavior is stretching. I employ many people over the years and yes I make sure they try to follow work rules and in a few times I've had to fire those who don't.

    ########!!!  If the "leadership" of this outfit took being a "leader" seriously and with all necessary care, the person in the cart and everyone else involved would have been at the bus station headed home before retreat started.  That's a cop out.

    • Like 4
  13. On 6/6/2023 at 1:48 PM, Lance said:

    I can guarantee that no group of kids I supervise for any activity would ever think it would be okay to do that kind of idiotic garbage.  The mentality that it could even be remotely okay comes from the top down.  The "adults" in charge of that group are incompetent at best as are the higher ups who hired them in the first place.  Gross. 

    I helped coach my son's 6th grade basketball teams this past year.  The two primary coaches let a LOT of things slide during practices.  Discipline was non-existant.  The assistant coach's own 5 yo son would just wander through the court during practice.  The kids just weren't taking things seriously at all... until I decided I had to start asserting myself as a coach.  Once I called them out and explained, in absolutely no uncertain terms, what I expected of them during practice, things calmed down... a lot.  A couple of players even told my son "Dude, your dad is scary!"

    There's no excuse for those kids' behavior and the blame lies 99% on the leadership.  Kids (and anyone under 25 has a non-fully developed brain) will get away with, and try, whatever leaders allow them to.  If you have to make an example and throw a 1st chair out of the group, then you do it.  You only get one chance to establish a culture, and VMAPA/SCV has totally blown it.  I don't see any way this ends other than the end of drum corps in Santa Clara.  The current leadership won't do the right thing and quit and they have made it painfully obvious they have no clue how to run the organization.  As a parent, there's no way in hell I would let anyone I know send their child to SCV as it stands.

    Edit:  I asked my son last night about his recollection of this practice, and he can't remember the "scary" comments.  He did, however, vividly recall several teammates saying they "loved" me being their coach.  They appreciated that I cared about them and their experience, and that I felt passionately about them being able to get everything out of basketball they wanted, even if it meant getting yelled at a few times when they were screwing around.

    Leadership is a LOT like being a parent: you can't afford to be their friend if it interferes or hinders your ability to lead them, discipline them, and guide them to where they need to go.

    • Like 1
  14. 4 hours ago, scheherazadesghost said:

    Presence

    1. No swearing in your uniform at all. This is out of respect for the people who wore the uniform before you and did the same thing. They are watching you all the time.
    2. snipped
    3. Don’t swear in your corps jacket around [sic] other SCV people.

    Responsibilities as a corps member

    1. RUN! SCV is known for being a very intense and hard working corps. Run to your sets because they mean something to you. Run because you want to make it better the next time around. Run because that’s ‘The Way’.
    2. Know when talking is appropriate on the field. If there is any question of that in your mind than [sic] keep your mouth shut.
    3. If you have a serious problem with an instructor, take it to your drum major. If harsh language is your problem, join the real world and GET OVER IT! You are not always going to be patted on the back and told how great you are in your lives to come. If there is one thing the corps will teach you, it is how to perform under pressure. Rise above; listen to the message, not the words.

     

    I can't be the only one that sees an incredible amount of hypocrisy here.  The MM's can't swear in uniform or in the corps jacket, but the instructors, many of whom I would guess ARE SCV ALUMNI are allowed to instruct using "harsh language"???

    • Sad 1
  15. 15 hours ago, Sutasaurus said:

    You and I don’t agree on many things and we probably won’t going forward. No problema. I didn’t miss your point …thank you.  I don’t think people need to be spoon fed concepts.  Let your imagination take over and let the season play out. When did folks get so lazy that they have to be “instructed” on what a show is all about? No disrespect to BAC’s vid but I don’t see it as a trend setter for the 2023 season.

    My money is on how a show engages the audience and not what “armchair critics” like ourselves have to say about a program.

    Flame on….

    The following statement has been used many times in the last 10+ years, but it bears repeating:  "If all the people who only see the show once all respond with 'What the hell was that???' then you might have a problem."

    It's not the MM's or the parents or the judges who need to "get" the show concept.  They all will because they'll see it a dozen or more times.  It's the people paying $15 or $30 to see the show in July in East BumbleF who don't know when or if to clap.

    And for the record, I'll bet 99% of those people don't know what the #### "Exogenesis" is either.

    • Like 2
  16. 44 minutes ago, Sutasaurus said:

    The show theme, the repertoire, the uniforms were officially announced on Saturday so it’s not really chatter any longer.

    Sorry if you missed the Phanathon. It was quite good

    Officially announced, but where are they posted?  Interested minds want to know!  :rolleyes:

  17. 36 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

    Oh I understood your point. Just wanted to respond to the first sentence. Didn’t do college MB after my first year as just too #### busy with my class load. How many times did I hear crap about not putting band first. 🙄

    We just found out this week that UGA's two-time national champion quarterback has been in college since 2017 and hasn't finished a degree.  All this time spent putting the emphasis on football and he couldn't manage enough classes to actually get a degree in 6 years!  He got drafted and will have an NFL contract, but not every kid is that lucky.

    I had a good friend my freshman year in college that walked on with the basketball team and was good enough to earn a scholarship, but they wanted him to drop most of his classes and schedule around basketball practice.  He wouldn't, because he knew the NBA was not in his future, but a college degree and a career would be.

    • Like 1
  18. 18 hours ago, gbass598 said:

    You aren't wrong. There is also the case of baseball where they seem to be known to create new rules for problems that don't exist.

    Pitch clock = great idea

    starting extra innings with a base runner = seems a bit unfair and just trying to get the game over so the umps and players can hurry up and get to the bar afterwards.

    banning the shift = dumbest rule ever - want to beat the shift? maybe lay down a bunt or try to hit to the opposite field once in a while.

    Way off base here.  The base runner is to keep games from going on and on.  They are trying to make games shorter and more exciting to keep fan interest, not "so the umps and players can hurry up and get to the bar afterwards."  Dumb statement.

    As for the shift ban... baseball was never meant to be played with a defensive shift.  Personally, they waited too long to ban it.  As for your "advice"... someone spends 16 years playing baseball and makes it to the show, and you suddenly want them to quit doing what got them there and do something they've never done?  Ridiculous.

×
×
  • Create New...