Gary Matczak Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 The league was beginning to fail before the salary cap was installed in 1994, right when Fox paid unprecedented rights fees for the NFC package? News to me. Yes, the wheels were coming off many of the small market teams,...............for several years prior to the salary cap,......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbc03 Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Savings I can think of (and have no idea how much that would be) is ye olde buying things and services in volume. Instead of individual corps buying smaller food and equipment trucks, bigger vehicles could be used which would be cheaper in gas and maintenance per amount of crap hauled. (That is if corps aren't already used the biggest trucks allowed by law.) The vehicles would be purchased/rented and controlled by DCI and the corps would pay a usage or rental fee. DCI would also set up the buses and corps would reimburse DCI for their costs.Also thinking might be easier for DCI to get sponsorship money instead of individual corps. Thinking "Hauling young people for thousands of miles for weeks at a time. DCI trusts Greyhound to do it and do it safely" on print ads. But in order to fit two corps worth of stuff on one equipment truck you are going to need an equipment truck that is almost twice as big, which in most cases probably would be much bigger than allowed by law. You also run into the problem that happens if one corps in the pair goes on early at a show and the other corps goes on late. The late corps misses out on rehearsal time because of the early corps. You could theoretically pair up corps that are close in competition so that their performance times would be pretty close together, but yikes that could cause some drama. Maybe corps should collaborate more when ordering food? Communicate with the corps that are going to be near you for your next food drop off and see if you can work out a way to combine your food orders to lower the costs. The DCI buses idea is interesting as well, but the corps don't need to travel together for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 I don't disagree ... and I don't think that would be such a bad thing PROVIDED THAT this sponsorship money is used to shore up the activity we already have and not immediately used for more -- more instrumentation, more props, more uniforms, more equipment, more instructors, etc, etc, etc. I don't want to just raise the spending of the top corps thru sponsorship, leaving the have-nots even farther behind. Excellent point. Wonder how many of this year's rule change proposals will seek to reduce the cost of competing, and how many will just add more, more, more.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsb2007 Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 I'm spewing nothing, just stating opinions and positing about solutions as the original poster solicited. You are not providing solutions. You are providing complaints and negativity. Just being honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumcat Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Excellent point. Wonder how many of this year's rule change proposals will seek to reduce the cost of competing, and how many will just add more, more, more.... Well, the 150 rule was sort of the converse; it raised the coffers of all "full" corps by $30k/year with marginal additional costs. You know... the pit box got bigger a few years ago... I almost wonder if that would eventually make things cheaper if you reversed it. Maybe the "solution" isn't in making tour cheaper. It seems as though touring isn't ever going to get any cheaper by changing something that doesn't effect the quality of the production (save amplification). If that's the case, maybe it's time to start looking at the other side of things -- increasing revenue to corps. Local members playing year-round gigs, maybe a partnership with the NFL league-wide, maybe a full World class sponsorship for uniforms, like the MLS and NHL deals (adidas & reebok). Wearing sponsor patches. Adding a "sponsored by" announcement for every corps as well as their "hometown". Imagine for a minute that Dynasty struck a deal to provide every world corps with all its instruments every year. Imagine Nike made a marching shoe. Imagine ESPN put our show on without having to pay for the airtime. Imagine if every show was in a college stadium, because the NCAA gave DCI their blessing. Imagine if the NFL would let DCI use its facilities at cost. Imagine if the regular season mattered, and regionals were figured into the final score. Imagine if season scores were cumulative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Would you mind pointing out just which posts are considered borderline ? Well, we can start with all of the posts by this guy named "Poche".... :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Okay.So . . . DCI and its corps have no responsibility in ensuring this activity continues to grow/thrive/prosper in this way? While the number of competing corps continues to drop? Scary. Read what I said... Individual corps are responsible for making sure they can survive and provide an excellent experience for their members. I don't remotely see it as their job to promote expansion, unless they choose to do so for the overall health of their organization, a la BD, SCV, Colts.I think DCI has lots of information available on starting corps...but again, I don't see it as their job to actually start them. Help them once started? Sure. The more help the better. Not 'scary' at all. DCI is not in the business of STARTING corps itself, but it can and as far as I know does, provide some level of assistance and support to new units that DO start up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumcat Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Read what I said...Not 'scary' at all. DCI is not in the business of STARTING corps itself, but it can and as far as I know does, provide some level of assistance and support to new units that DO start up. Indeed, it would be a conflict of interest to start corps, but not to help them. Fine distinction, but until there's granting of franchises and such, this is a real distinction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 (edited) DCI is not in the business of STARTING corps itself, but it can and as far as I know does, provide some level of assistance and support to new units that DO start up. Here's where I disagree. It's true that DCI is not currently in the business of starting corps up. But maybe they should be involved in the process to a greater extent. I understand that they do provide some level of assistance. I believe that they should do more of this and targeted to regions that have the most opportunity and/or geographical sense to aid the activity as a whole. I also think DCI should do more than they currently do to attract show sponsors in advantagous locations, etc. I understand that DCI can do whatever they want in this regard -- this is just MY OPINION of what they should do. And I understand that DCI is made up of the corps themselves and all that. What I am suggesting is that I believe that individual corps need to understand better that even though they are each tasked with running their own organizations, an expanding base of corps is, imo, advantageous in the long run to all of them. And that if they did take this to heart, then using their collective organization (namely, DCI) to further these goals of expansion of corps, regionalization of circuits/shows, etc, would be a proper and beneficial path to take. All of this is my opinion, of course. The corps, individually and together (thru DCI) can do what they want. Just my helpful suggestion to take or dismiss. :) Edited October 18, 2007 by Liam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Savings I can think of (and have no idea how much that would be) is ye olde buying things and services in volume. Instead of individual corps buying smaller food and equipment trucks, bigger vehicles could be used which would be cheaper in gas and maintenance per amount of crap hauled. (That is if corps aren't already used the biggest trucks allowed by law.) Which is where I think the idea falls apart...have you seen the food and equipment trucks of the touring corps? They already are quite large. Plus you have to consider the need of the corps to travel on all sorts of roads, not just interstates, to get to their housing sites and shows. That would elmiinate, say, the double trailers you see on the interstates today. The vehicles would be purchased/rented and controlled by DCI and the corps would pay a usage or rental fee. DCI would also set up the buses and corps would reimburse DCI for their costs. Might be something good in this one if DCI could, say, negotiate a master rental contract with one of the large vehicle rental companies at a lower cost due to volume. 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.