Schickmeister Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 My favorite part of this thread is reading people try to argue with the theory. Bruckner has spoken. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruckner8 Posted August 12, 2014 Author Share Posted August 12, 2014 Safe for another year. Now Spirit and Boston stumbled a bit. Maybe Blue Knights? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Safe for another year. Now Spirit and Boston stumbled a bit. Maybe Blue Knights? Blue Knights finals performance, IMO, was dirtier than semis...but much more passionate. Phantom's was the cleanest they'd been all year by a country mile. I was bummed for BK, but can see why they dropped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortAndFast Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Safe for another year. Now Spirit and Boston stumbled a bit. Maybe Blue Knights? Can you strengthen your theory? Is it really the case that former champions like Santa Clara, Phantom Regiment and Cavaliers could win the gold next year? Or will they also need to re-establish some inertia by getting a medal before they will again win? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 (edited) Can you strengthen your theory? Is it really the case that former champions like Santa Clara, Phantom Regiment and Cavaliers could win the gold next year? Or will they also need to re-establish some inertia by getting a medal before they will again win? If he wants his theory debunked or weakened, then he could say that they need to re-establish some inertia by getting a medal before they will win again: SCV: 1980 7th -> 1981 1st Madison Scouts: 1987 6th -> 1988 1st -> 1989 7th Phantom Regiment: 1995 5th -> 1996 1st, 2007 4th -> 2008 1st -> 2009 9th Cavaliers: 1994 4th-> 1995 1st Cadets: 1986 4th -> 1987 1st; 1989 5th -> 1990 1st; 1999 4th -> 2000 1st; 2004 1st -> 2005 1st; 2010 5th -> 2011 1st Once you've won, it seems that you don't need to re-establish inertia by getting a medal before winning again. Edited August 12, 2014 by jjeffeory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim K Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Safe for another year. Now Spirit and Boston stumbled a bit. Maybe Blue Knights? Boston Crusaders and Blue Knights may not consider this past season or finals a stumble. I don't know if I ever remember a Blue Knights show being do well received by the public. The kids in the corps also looked pretty young and the placed higher than the past few years. This bodes well for next year. I know Boston Crusaders folks are not happy with a tenth place finish, and like many BAC fans, I exprected that as the season progressed, so would the scores. That being said, more people paid attention to Boston crusaders this year than in years past and this is likely to lead to a greater interest in young people wanting to march with Boston Crusaders. These stumbles will not likely lead to falling from finals next year. In Spirit's case, it sounds like there may be more work to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortAndFast Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 If he wants his theory debunked or weakened, then he could say that they need to re-establish some inertia by getting a medal before they will win again: SCV: 1980 7th -> 1981 1st Madison Scouts: 1987 6th -> 1988 1st -> 1989 7th Phantom Regiment: 1995 5th -> 1996 1st, 2007 4th -> 2008 1st -> 2009 9th Cavaliers: 1994 4th-> 1995 1st Cadets: 1986 4th -> 1987 1st; 1989 5th -> 1990 1st; 1999 4th -> 2000 1st; 2004 1st -> 2005 1st; 2010 5th -> 2011 1st Once you've won, it seems that you don't need to re-establish inertia by getting a medal before winning again. Well, most of those received a medal a couple of years before getting the title Phantom 1996 (bronze in 1994), 2008 (silver in 2006) Cavaliers 1995 (gold 1992) Cadets 1987 (gold 1985), 1990 (gold 1987), 2000 (gold 1998), 2005 (bronze 2003), 2011 (bronze 2009) So it would seem that they had plenty of inertia at the time when they won. Madison (bronze in 1981 > gold in 1988) is the last time there is really a long gap between a top 3 finish and a championship. My question for Bruckner8, or for you, is how quickly competitive inertia decays. Do you really believe that Madison Scouts has the ci to win DCI next year because they received a medal in 1988? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Well, most of those received a medal a couple of years before getting the title Phantom 1996 (bronze in 1994), 2008 (silver in 2006) Cavaliers 1995 (gold 1992) Cadets 1987 (gold 1985), 1990 (gold 1987), 2000 (gold 1998), 2005 (bronze 2003), 2011 (bronze 2009) So it would seem that they had plenty of inertia at the time when they won. Madison (bronze in 1981 > gold in 1988) is the last time there is really a long gap between a top 3 finish and a championship. My question for Bruckner8, or for you, is how quickly competitive inertia decays. Do you really believe that Madison Scouts has the ci to win DCI next year because they received a medal in 1988? Ah, that's a great question! It's not my theory, so I look forward to getting answers too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruckner8 Posted August 12, 2014 Author Share Posted August 12, 2014 Well, most of those received a medal a couple of years before getting the title Phantom 1996 (bronze in 1994), 2008 (silver in 2006) Cavaliers 1995 (gold 1992) Cadets 1987 (gold 1985), 1990 (gold 1987), 2000 (gold 1998), 2005 (bronze 2003), 2011 (bronze 2009) So it would seem that they had plenty of inertia at the time when they won. Madison (bronze in 1981 > gold in 1988) is the last time there is really a long gap between a top 3 finish and a championship. My question for Bruckner8, or for you, is how quickly competitive inertia decays. Do you really believe that Madison Scouts has the ci to win DCI next year because they received a medal in 1988? The theory doesn't mention any inertia once a medal is achieved. It only highlights the difficulty for non-champs to "build up enough inertia" to be "allowed" to win. But trust me on this: Madison has PLENTY OF CI! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruckner8 Posted August 10, 2015 Author Share Posted August 10, 2015 Safe for another year! Still waiting on Spirit, Boston or Blue Knights to disprove the theory! Heck, Competitive Inertia is so strong, we haven't even had anyone new in the Top 6 since 2007 (Crown). One more thing: The CI Theory would get a lot of credit if Bluecoats would win soon, lol. I was really hoping it would've happened this year. But with 2 yrs straight in the Top 3, maybe next year is their "allowed" year! It took Crown 4 years from their first Top 2/3 placement (2009) to finally win (2013), but that was preceded by in 2012 by another Top 2/3. C'mon, Bloo! :)Things change, though, even if slowly. It wasn't too long ago we were talking about CADEVILIERS holding Top 3. Now Cavies are nowhere to be seen, and Cadets are making midseason uni changes that make no sense. 4 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.