euponitone Posted August 24, 2007 Share Posted August 24, 2007 The only way to create more parity is to get more funding for these other corps. Bigger budgets for design, produce a B corps, expand the winter programs, expand the facilities, etc. etc.I don't think DCI is in a position to be regulating or putting limitations on its flagship corps. They need those corps to sell the organization to the public. Short of a cultural shift, any thing DCI does on purpose to shave the veteran numbers off the top to satisfy the need for veteran members in the middle is almost assured of having a negative affect on the bottom line. We just had the most competitive season in memory. Why mess when it's working well? Let's let Crown and some of these other corps continue developing under the current structure to see what else they can build. Bingo. Lets stop trying to restict what the corps at the top can do - we dont want to see them getting any worse. Think of ways to help those corps right behind them break through. Bloo, Crown, SCV, and Phantom, all have the potential (and in somecases have been there before), but how do they stay there. To me, that is a better way to think about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickCogley Posted August 24, 2007 Share Posted August 24, 2007 I think this kind of parity with a forced spread of near-age-outs could never work in an activity that is funded a significant amount by member dues. Plus, the assumption is that each marcher's talent and personality is in no way linked to the corps they are in. A person who fits right in a BD might have great trouble at SCV, for instance. No, this would not work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingJoeVII Posted August 24, 2007 Share Posted August 24, 2007 Bingo. Lets stop trying to restict what the corps at the top can do - we dont want to see them getting any worse. Think of ways to help those corps right behind them break through. Bloo, Crown, SCV, and Phantom, all have the potential (and in somecases have been there before), but how do they stay there. To me, that is a better way to think about it. what do you mean "ways to help those corps right behind them break through"? wouldn't that just push a "top tier" corps down? Or in other words, everyone can't be a winner... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euponitone Posted August 24, 2007 Share Posted August 24, 2007 what do you mean "ways to help those corps right behind them break through"? wouldn't that just push a "top tier" corps down? Or in other words, everyone can't be a winner... Down competetively yes. This year we saw probably the best 7th place of all time. They went down competetively, a lot, but were certainly better than last year. Taking away members from the best corps = directly handcuffing the top corps. Making the corps behind them better through natural growth = more competition for the top corps = better products all around. If the traditional top dogs cant hang, sucks to be them...if they can, they will be better for the experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaddabout Posted August 24, 2007 Share Posted August 24, 2007 wouldn't that just push a "top tier" corps down? Or in other words, everyone can't be a winner... "Winner" is relative. Bluecoats finished No. 7, but they had to be very juiced for their 94.050. They finished No. 4 the year before with a 93.175. It's just better quality. IIRC, the number of corps scoring in the 90s has risen this decade. Any year you get 8 or more in that category, the product is working, and I think that's happened every year since 2000 with the exception of 2006. It has been a substantial improvement every year. I believe the 1980s averaged 6 in that category and 1990s average 7. IIRC, 1983 had only four (!) score in the 90+ range. The product is getting better, but I think it requires a great deal more historical perspective to appreciate it. It's that way because everyone's trying to keep up with the Blue Devils, Cavs, Cadets, and Vanguard, not because DCI has tampered with the regulations. If some corps burn out because they try to get there too quickly, well, that's a lesson everyone after them can learn from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roosevelt Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 Competitive parity should not be achieved through additional restriction. That's what makes the question so difficult... You are absolutely right. No it should not be done through restriction. But under the current system there is plenty of restriction on the lower corps as is. When they go on in a show is one of the most obvious. Here are a few things about that alone that cause a lack of parity. - The top tier corps tend to go on later while the lower corps go on early. This means 3 things: 1. The corps that go on early get less rehearsal time than the corps that go on late. So, the drum corps that are ahead get more time to pull farther ahead than the corps that could use more rehearsal time. This turns out to a few hours EVERY day they have a show where the mebers could be getting more rehearsal, more sleep or more time to relax. By the end of the season it amounts to about a week more of time the top tier corps get than the lower corps. 2. We all know that judges tend to rank in order of appearance. This is not to say that they will not mix things up a bit from the performance order in relation to placing, but they tend to low ball corps that go on early just for the simple reason that they need to leave room for the corps that go on after them. So, corps that get less rehearsal time, often times less sleep, and are trying to move up the competitive ranks are also having to deal with judges being safe with their numbers in order to cover their hyde. 3. Drum corps look better at night under the lights. I know this sounds dumb but they do. There is more excitement and energy (which translates to more GE) when the show takes place under the lights. Under the lights uniforms look better, the color of the flags are more vibrant, and everything seems to sparkle a but more. When the sun is out it transaltes to less energy and it seems more like a rehearsal. It also causes issues at times with the sun being in the performers eyes making it difficult for them to see (like at DCI finals this year for example). If the sun happens to be behind them, than it may be in the eyes of the audience and judges....that is sure to effect things - On a side note related to this. I know some people on the Troopers staff that told me that they did 32 shows before quarters this past year (which I believe was the most in DCI). He said they went on first 21 times out of those 32. He also said that they went on after the sun went down only once the whole season. It should be noted that that one show that they went on at night (where they went on last at that show) their score jumped nearly five points from the previous show (where they went on early in the event). At the very next show they went on first again and it dropped nearly five points. When they approached the judges at cirtique that night more than one of the jusges said "that is the problem with going on first."....so, performance order makes a big difference and the corps that go on early are generally the ones that get shafted. A couple of other things to look at: 1. Top tier corps tend to stay at the show site more than lower tier corps. This transates to no travel time for them. You add that with the fact that the corps staying at the show site usually goes on last or very close to it that translates into far more time for rehearsal, or rest for the members. 2. Top tier corps get more cirtiques than everyone else. That should not be the case but it most definately is. Blue Stars this past year had more shows this year than BD, SCV, PR, Cavies, & Cadets but they had less than half of the number of cirtiques than any of those corps. Less cirtiques, means less access to the judges to get feedback or give your input to them. Now, is there a simple solution to some of these problems liste above. Yes. - They can make the number of cirtiques a specific nuumber for everyone during the season, or a percentage of the shows you have done. - I am sure they could make a rule about corps that have to drive long distances from their housing site to get to the show get to go on later in the event (some band circuits do this). Or you could stipulate that the corps that is staying at the housing site must go on first unless it is their "home" show. Niether of these ideas will ever pass becuase it would cause a sea of red tape the DCI is probably unwilling and dare say unable to handle. - Last but not least DCI could insitute a total random order from show to show. What they have know is called a random order but it is far from it. I am talking about one night you see colts go on last and BD go on first and then the next night BD goes on last while the Cadets go first.....or whatever scenario you desire. This would force the judges to make calls, and it would give the corps more of an even playing field in terms of rehearsal, sleep, free time and whatever else. If this rule were to be proposed (which I have been told it will be this next year) it will fail miserably. Hopkins, Gibbs, Fiedler and the rest of the elite corps that generally go on late at night will see to it that is does not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbc03 Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 Why would anyone want to create parity by making the top corps worse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbc03 Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 As for the random order and the complaining that the top corps get more time. With very few exceptions corps get MAYBE a difference of 30-45 minutes in rehearsal time to anyone that they are actually competitive with on any given show day. The real question for me is this. Is it fair for Crown to get 3 extra hours of rehearsal than Bluecoats before a show in which they will be in close competition? I don't think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roosevelt Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 As for the random order and the complaining that the top corps get more time.With very few exceptions corps get MAYBE a difference of 30-45 minutes in rehearsal time to anyone that they are actually competitive with on any given show day. The real question for me is this. Is it fair for Crown to get 3 extra hours of rehearsal than Bluecoats before a show in which they will be in close competition? I don't think so. No way. It turns out to be a signifigant amount of time for some corps. I I haved been with corps in the top and near the bottom of the competitive spectrum and I can assure you that the lower tier corps have far shorter days than everyone else, especially at big shows and regionals. Besides, 45 minutes here and there really adds up. If I went up to the staff for the cadets and the blue devils and told them that they were going to get 30-45 minutes less time on every show day next season they would blow a gasket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roosevelt Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 Why would anyone want to create parity by making the top corps worse? you dont...at least I dont Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.