Bluecoats Brass this year

[Elmo Blatch]

Straight leg?

Straight, no chaser?

Elmo Blatch

[Elmo Blatch]

False.

~Jon Cordell

PS: You still didn't march in 2002. Stop putting that in your sig. You don't deserve the nickel.

Bitter, party of one?

Elmo Blatch

[jake_the_hydra]

False.

~Jon Cordell

PS: You still didn't march in 2002. Stop putting that in your sig. You don't deserve the nickel.

Dude, that's BS. If anyone deserves a nickel, it's him.

No need to bring up the coins people wear around their necks and call into question what they went through to get them.

[rmurrey74]

Bluecoats hornline's feet/upper body posture... um... not so much.

Wow....no way. I saw them many times this summer. Finals week live, they moved as well as anyone and had probably the strongest upper body I've seen. I was extremely impressed. Look at pictures online and compare their upper body to any other corps. Not many corps had that level of detail. Upper body gets skipped over by so many. Not many people talk about it and most are only concerned with feet.

[audiodb]

I think mostly it amounted to poor numbers management and the mindset judges have when they're watching a corps when they know that six more corps (or however many) will be performing after that corps.

Andy had the balls to give them a 19.8 with three corps left- but they performed a slot earlier the next night and two slots earlier than THAT on finals night.

Who's going to give a 19.8 to a corps that's ranked in seventh place with 6 more groups to see?

And there's part of the problem - high finals-week scores create number management problems.

This was should have been a very competitive season. Seven corps were capable of winning captions, and did just that earlier in the year. By championship week, though, the obsession with pushing numbers close to full scale makes it virtually impossible for a corps in 5th, 6th or 7th to garner a caption win, no matter what happens on the field.

There needs to be more room for judges to correctly rank and rate corps at the end of the season. Whether it's the system or the interpretation of said system in practice, whatever changes are necessary should be made before the 2008 season begins. Simply put, either championship-week scores need to be lower, or the maximum score needs to be higher.

[corps_forever07]

False.

~Jon Cordell

PS: You still didn't march in 2002. Stop putting that in your sig. You don't deserve the nickel.

Wow, and to think I really used to respect you as a tech.

Key words - "used to."

I try to keep it classy with the comments I make outwardly and in public forums such as this, but when people I know that represent organizations that I've been a part of (whether it's listed in their signature or not) make such a low class impression on themselves, it makes it hard to keep it that way. If you don't like something that's been said about your corps, act like an adult and just stay away from the thread or make a point to respond in a reasonable manner. When did you age out, Cordell? 1999? Yeah? You should probably know by now how to act. Here's a hint: Low blows like that aren't the way. Way to represent!

I guess I probably shouldn't have thought of someone who is associated with the incredibly classy organization I was last a part of with any higher regard than the other homers that lurk here on DCP. My mistake.

With what was said, for the sake of keeping on topic - Music scores, third place. Visual scores, seventh place. GE scores, seventh place. In response to the scores (pure evidence and facts, not just my opinions) I'll just say Bluecoats hornline... the bad mother****** players of 2007.

Bluecoats hornline's feet/upper body posture... um... not so much.

True.

The music was strong. The feet weren't so much. Look at the scores. Problem solved. Hooray!

And Steve Moore, I totally agree with your statement as a quote, but I think we're talking about two totally different alumni.

P.S. Any low blows that you feel necessary to shoot my way may be done so through PM or my personal email. I'm sure they're coming.

Done!

EDITED for clarity.

Edited August 20, 2007 by corps_forever07

[siLk]

i'd venture to say that they had some of the best feet and upper bodies in the activity this season and that their score really came down to a guard that wasn't quite at the level the rest of the corps was, effecting a number of captions, esp. visual performance. just my opinion, though.

[silvertrombone]

Wow, well, I don't know what kind of in-house cat-fight just broke out, so I'll stay out of the way of that...

our judging system is the most perfect i have ever encountered. their word is the word of god.

your capitalization is atrocious

Paul Hinman and Albert Lo happened.

Ha-ha! I was kind of amazed in Dallas when Phantom won brass and placed, I think, 3rd in drums.

DING! DING! DING!

One thing is for sure--this was the best hornline of the year. This group won brass more times than any other corps in large contests where most corps were involved. To say that the Bluecoats weren't the best hornline this year is like saying that the Cavaliers don't have the best visual program in drum corps because they didn't win this year.

It is interesting to note that the 2003 Bluecoats and the 2007 Bluecoats ended up in the same 7th position at Finals. Now, I ask you, are these shows even CLOSE to the same in demand/execution?

Elmo Blatch

Good point, Elmo. I don't know your stance on slotting, whether it exists or not, but this type of argument is a really great one to make for slotting.

I was talking offline with some folks this week about slotting and how I think it's kind of crazy to keep seeing corps get better and better and scores stay about the same as 5/6/7 scores of a few years ago, and such. If corps are getting better, then give them scores appropriately. If that means in two years we have all finalists above 95, well that just means that things got a little bit more interesting, now doesn't it?

I didn't see semis/finals, but I suspect that Blooo was simply the victim of my "experience" theory, and Phantom and BD have more of that still. But look out next year!

[Steve709]

With what was said, for the sake of keeping on topic - Music scores, third place. Visual scores, seventh place. GE scores, seventh place. In response to the scores (pure evidence and facts, not just my opinions) I'll just say Bluecoats hornline... the bad mother****** players of 2007.

Bluecoats hornline's feet/upper body posture... um... not so much.

True.

The music was strong. The feet weren't so much. Look at the scores. Problem solved. Hooray!

I believe that just a simple look back on the scores is nowhere near enough evidence to determine the corps ability to stand up straight and march in time. The visual performance category is much more than how well the corps marches/stands up straight. There are several other factors that need to be taken into account to find the end resulting number at the end of a performance. I strongly believe that Bluecoats feet and posture were at the highest level of the activity, some other visual performance aspects may have not been as consistent as the hornline and not to mention, every corps has different drill that demand different techniques from their membership, once the DVD's are out many will be able to see and appreciate the visual performance that was achieved from the brass performers.

Basically, you can't assume how well a brass section marches by one score, the best way is watch and judge for yourself, as there is no category in the DCI system that simply judges Brass Marching Performance. It's a common error that I myself have made, but watching the DVD's should clear up any misconception as to the ability of the 2007 Bluecoats Brass sections' marching abilities.

Also, you'd have a hard time convincing me that a brass section that can win with a 19.8, marches poorly, or even average for that matter, but I digress, the DVD will clear up any misconceptions.

[thx3838]

I believe that just a simple look back on the scores is nowhere near enough evidence to determine the corps ability to stand up straight and march in time. The visual performance category is much more than how well the corps marches/stands up straight. There are several other factors that need to be taken into account to find the end resulting number at the end of a performance. I strongly believe that Bluecoats feet and posture were at the highest level of the activity, some other visual performance aspects may have not been as consistent as the hornline and not to mention, every corps has different drill that demand different techniques from their membership, once the DVD's are out many will be able to see and appreciate the visual performance that was achieved from the brass performers.

Basically, you can't assume how well a brass section marches by one score, the best way is watch and judge for yourself, as there is no category in the DCI system that simply judges Brass Marching Performance. It's a common error that I myself have made, but watching the DVD's should clear up any misconception as to the ability of the 2007 Bluecoats Brass sections' marching abilities.

Also, you'd have a hard time convincing me that a brass section that can win with a 19.8, marches poorly, or even average for that matter, but I digress, the DVD will clear up any misconceptions.

who cares now what happened finals night, its over, bluecoats have an amazing brass section, they could win that caption this year and next year as well, the percussion is awesome as well, thats another section that could win..the only thing keeping this corps from a championship, is fixing the colorguard issues and ome visuall issues. if the bluecoats can somehow find an amazing guard staff, and turn the visual thing around, they will win a championship soon. im calling it now.