To those speaking about the non-competitive side of the corps being good…cool. My corps before Scouts, we were fed well, we had fun/memorable summers and made lifelong friends. But we also always finished in the upper teens or worse. When you got older, you left because most older marching-age people watched BD, SCV, Cavies, and that time, The Scouts, and wanted that opportunity to march under the lights on a Saturday night in front of a packed stadium and be looked at as rock stars of the activity.
As this current trend with Scouts goes, it will remain difficult to get back to competitive relevance because Scouts have now become the type of corps I left. And that saddens me. The members having a great summer is important, sure, but if you want to keep them for the long haul, into their 19s to age outs, you HAVE to be competitive. You can turn a blind eye to it, but it is the truth. It is now, and has always been, a competitive activity. If you’re ok with where the corps is competitive wise as long as the kids eat and are happy, then you will watch this corps continue to dissolve to irrelevancy, and maybe gone all together.
Change has to happen. This has gone on long enough. Something, or someone, has to right the ship. Other corps, corps that were NEVER in the realm of The Scouts in the 90s, and now some even well into the 2000s, have figured out. What did Mandarins do? What did Crown do? What did BAC, Bluecoats, etc do different than Scouts? How have they risen to be some of the best in the business when they all used to be an afterthought?
I wasn’t a fan of the co-Ed move, but I can stomach it if it means The Scouts are a marquee name again. It HAS to be fixed.
Ok, hopping off my soapbox.