Liam Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Let me add one point here, too. I am not accusing anyone of devious tricks here. I don't know any of these gentlemen, so I would never claim to have knowledge of their motives. I give everyone the benefit of the doubt that they're trying to do they feel is best for the activity/organization. Others may not feel that way, but for me at least, I'm trying to present what I believe to be the flaws and dangers in this proposal based on my experiences of seeing these types of things in the past, which many times failed despite the best of intentions. I am also offering an alternative solution that I think will work better given that all these people who do share the best of intentions for the activity necessarily have different persepetives on what that means. I also welcome critical analysis of what I say in a similar fashion and will try to respond in kind. That's all -- and I know no one accused me otherwise -- just trying to keep this discussion on a "business" and not "personal" level Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrumCorpsFan27 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 The point is the constant reference to "the rich want the new toys" is just not valid. I believe it is. The rich is not just financially rich, but with access to resources. Companies want to sponsor the highest placing corps and will be more likely to find solutions to get the toys to those corps. The proposed system would encourage that to happen more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Yes, understand that I prefer having all members vote. I am posting under the premise of "needing" to reduce the board to 9, what I think would be better. I don't disagree. I think the proposal spells out much of what I have been saying for years are the inadequecies of the current process. That's great!!!! But I strongly disagree with the proposed solution. I do see the rationale for wanting to reduce the size of the board to 9, although there are other alternatives that would keep the board the same and improve the process. But reducing the size alone will not solve the problems magically. They also have to address the fundamental issues regarding the charter and perview of the board, imo (which it looks like they are aware of). But in order to do that, I believe that the Top 9 idea is bad -- your idea of voting members in is better -- but a staggered/rotational system is best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrumCorpsFan27 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I don't see snide and sarcastic comments in this thread, but sadly this is one. You disagree....fine. But it doesn't warrant a comment like that just because you happen to hold a different view. OK, sorry for the snyde remark, but I got very irritated when he asked for reasons for a point, then says you can't use your reasons for the point, it's rather ludicrous...somewhat snide even. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I believe it is. The rich is not just financially rich, but with access to resources. Companies want to sponsor the highest placing corps and will be more likely to find solutions to get the toys to those corps. The proposed system would encourage that to happen more. Yes, I believe that even with the best of intentions, this proposed setup has the danger of going down this path more than alternative suggestions. Doesn't mean it will necessarily happen. Doesn't mean that I think that is their intention (or "evil plan" or whatever ). But I do predict that this will be the result -- more for the top guys, less for those who can't keep up. And it's not just about the "toys" -- this isn't just an argument for or against amps or electronics or whatever, imo. I ultimately don't care about any of that stuff. It is a more fundamental division of all the spoils (financial, competitive, strategic, etc) that concerns me. The "toys" are merely a symptom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichCranford82 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Controversial proposals are most often put out there by those in the upper echelon. Amps and electronics with Hop, Bb with Gibbs...and so on. That said, the ones who usually vote for these changes are (you guessed it) the bigger programs, with Phantom being an exception occasionally...so now, with a smaller board of those very same "big boys"...you accelerate the pace of change. It's probably exactly what Hop wants to try to change things faster.So...if, by "efficiency", you mean that the pacing of changing DCI into "superbands" will increase...then, yeah, perhaps it will be more efficient. There it is in a nutshell, not for nothing but kind of thought this was inevitable as far back as the mid 80's, just never knew when. How does it make sense to say that a Corps can place in DCI's championship "finals" and not have a say in the direction of the activity? I love the part about streamlining the administrative process, by not having those extra people around for those 4 meetings a year think how much will be saved in box lunches alone!! Get ready, the guy who is a self-proclaimed non-fan of Drum Corps will be proud to present "Summer Bands of America" coming to a region somewhat near you, as soon as he can get a few more of those pesky "rules" out of the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecoats88 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 And I did answer. There was one.But... look at the list of inactive corps. There is NO difference in placing in the top 9 and folding the next year then there is in placing in the top 9, falling out of the top 9 (or finals) the next year and then folding a few years later. None. Point being, those corps never made it back in. Period. Actually there were two. You should move suncoast up to the top list. 1989 9th - 1990 innactive. they reformed in the mid 90's as a div II corps for a couple years but they folded after placing 9th in 1989. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecoats88 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Well looking back over the past 8 years, here is what the 9 member board would look like following each season. 2007 Blue Devils The Cadets Cavaliers Phantom Regiment Santa Clara Vanguard Carolina Crown Bluecoats Blue Knights Boston Crusaders 2006 Cavaliers Phantom Regiment Blue Devils Bluecoats The Cadets Santa Clara Vanguard Blue Knights Carolina Crown Madison Scouts 2005 The Cadets Cavaliers Phantom Regiment Blue Devils Bluecoats Madison Scouts Carolina Crown Santa Clara Vanguard Boston Crusaders 2004 Cavaliers Blue Devils Santa Clara Vanguard The Cadets Phantom Regiment Bluecoats Carolina Crown Madison Scouts Boston Crusaders 2003 Blue Devils Cavaliers The Cadets Phantom Regiment Santa Clara Vanguard Boston Crusaders Bluecoats Madison Scouts Crossmen 2002 Cavaliers Blue Devils The Cadets Santa Clara Vanguard Phantom Regiment Boston Crusaders Bluecoats Glassmen Crossmen 2001 Cavaliers Blue Devils The Cadets Santa Clara Vanguard Glassmen Phantom Regiment Crossmen Bluecoats Boston Crusaders 2000 Cavaliers The Cadets Blue Devils Santa Clara Vanguard Boston Crusaders Blue Knights Phantom Regiment Glassmen Crossmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Boy, I could really help Hoppy with his PowerPoint skills.No more than 6 bullets on a page....30 pt font minimal Bad bullets...bad bullets Headings blatting into the text Again...the MESSAGE IS DEFINED IN THE MEDIUM in which it is presented. I was shocked at the presentation, but I wanted to be nice. That's the worse PPT I've seen in a decade! I'm not sure how his message is going to come across through such a bad presentation. I guess it will, and I'm not liking where this could lead for DCI, but it's their show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrumCorpsFan27 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I was shocked at the presentation, but I wanted to be nice. That's the worse PPT I've seen in a decade! I'm not sure how his message is going to come across through such a bad presentation. I guess it will, and I'm not liking where this could lead for DCI, but it's their show. But Hoppy will be preaching to the choir for the most part. Did you see where he says that the "top 8" have been meeting several times, and that this is their brainstorm? 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.