1986 DCA Finals - Matadors

[Dale Bari]

I remember a story about how it happened, but I've forgotten the details. I looked in this forum to see if it's been discussed already, and it was briefly (and only tangentially) mentioned in a 2005 thread about DCA's "biggest" screw-up. I know I risk stirring up old enmities, but then this isn't Sky vs Cabs either.

So:

In 1986 DCA Prelims, the Guelph Royalaires finished 10th with 75.35. RI Matadors were 11th with a 74.80. (And there was this upstart corps from MN who got a solid 9th place.)

OK, so Guelph's in, Mats are out. Case closed. But, hold on.... I see in Finals: ELEVEN corps! (Not only that, but Guelph ends up in 11th place.)

I remember that Matadors had the DCA champion colorguard and were trying to defend that title, and I remember that being mentioned in the telling of the tale as the REAL reason they were put into Finals.

So, my question is: What was the actual ruling that the voting members approved such that Matadors could compete in Finals? (Follow-up: Did they retain the guard trophy?)

[Gary Matczak]

CorpsReps lists 12 corps for finals with the Hurcs in the 12th spot...............

[JimF-LowBari]

Chris needs to make a correction as he also has 1985 DCA Finals as a 12 corps show. Westshore came in 12th at Prelims and we performed in exhibition at Finals. (My memory ain't that bad... yet)

Edit: Just poked around and looks like corpsreps has all DCA Finals with 12 corps no matter what year. Might be the template used in displaying the years...

Edited May 16, 2008 by JimF-3rdBari

[goalieguy]

I remember a story about how it happened, but I've forgotten the details. I looked in this forum to see if it's been discussed already, and it was briefly (and only tangentially) mentioned in a 2005 thread about DCA's "biggest" screw-up. I know I risk stirring up old enmities, but then this isn't Sky vs Cabs either.

So:

In 1986 DCA Prelims, the Guelph Royalaires finished 10th with 75.35. RI Matadors were 11th with a 74.80. (And there was this upstart corps from MN who got a solid 9th place.)

OK, so Guelph's in, Mats are out. Case closed. But, hold on.... I see in Finals: ELEVEN corps! (Not only that, but Guelph ends up in 11th place.)

I remember that Matadors had the DCA champion colorguard and were trying to defend that title, and I remember that being mentioned in the telling of the tale as the REAL reason they were put into Finals.

So, my question is: What was the actual ruling that the voting members approved such that Matadors could compete in Finals? (Follow-up: Did they retain the guard trophy?)

Dale:

I can't be specific as to who or how the decision was made to let the Matadors into Finals, but because there was a TIE for 1st at Prelims, somehow the choice was made to allow the 11th place corps into Finals being judged...We didn't care...we'd just made HISTORY - getting into the top 10 for the first time!

To your other question, yes..they retained the color guard title, although many of us felt that WE had the best shot at beating their guard..

That was just one of many unusual twists on Sunday night..like the corps who came from 3rd to win it all..and the unusual retreat, where they didn't follow the normal pass in review by placement..near the end, it was just Steel City, Bush and MBI left on the field...something about the 3 newest DCA member corps left on the field..a little wierd, but satisfying none the less. That was the first of the later-than-normal departures from eastern PA for the 'upstarts from MN'...It was our first Finale at DCA.

Pat

[bugleboy1048]

Chris needs to make a correction as he also has 1985 DCA Finals as a 12 corps show. Westshore came in 12th at Prelims and we performed in exhibition at Finals. (My memory ain't that bad... yet)

Edit: Just poked around and looks like corpsreps has all DCA Finals with 12 corps no matter what year. Might be the template used in displaying the years...

I remember in DCA years that the last two (11 and 12 place) went back to Aquinas after prelims and standing on field and doing show to get on the album.

[goalieguy]

I remember in DCA years that the last two (11 and 12 place) went back to Aquinas after prelims and standing on field and doing show to get on the album.

Exactly ! They just added the 11th and 12th place corps to fill out 3 albums...That's kinda why I mentioned that '86 was the longest we'd been in the stadium...We finshed 11th/12th a few times and after our exhibition at finals, we'd watch the show and then head for the busses as everyone else lined up for Finale...That 20+ hour bus ride ahead of us didn't allow for us to stay late..

That all changed in '86 for MBI..Haven't missed a top 12 since '89, top 10 since '91.

Pat

[Dale Bari]

I can't be specific as to who or how the decision was made to let the Matadors into Finals, but because there was a TIE for 1st at Prelims, somehow the choice was made to allow the 11th place corps into Finals being judged...We didn't care...we'd just made HISTORY - getting into the top 10 for the first time!

I wonder how much MBI's "surprise" placement in the Top 10 affected the Matadors and the decision to go to 11 that night. I'm sure the corps looking at making the last couple of spots (Mats, Hurcs, Guelph) probably weren't thinking MBI would beat them.

So, beyond Pat, does anybody else remember exactly what the issue was (ie what rule was waived) that allowed for 11 corps? Or is the official explanation the tie at the top (Steel City & Cabs)? That seems like a dumb reason. In 2002 (or was it 2003), the NBA didn't let a ninth Western Conference team (Houston Rockets) into the playoffs, just because the Spurs and the Mavericks tied for first.

There were still 10 scores above Matadors, even if two were exactly the same.

[bedford]

I wonder how much MBI's "surprise" placement in the Top 10 affected the Matadors and the decision to go to 11 that night. I'm sure the corps looking at making the last couple of spots (Mats, Hurcs, Guelph) probably weren't thinking MBI would beat them.

So, beyond Pat, does anybody else remember exactly what the issue was (ie what rule was waived) that allowed for 11 corps? Or is the official explanation the tie at the top (Steel City & Cabs)? That seems like a dumb reason. In 2002 (or was it 2003), the NBA didn't let a ninth Western Conference team (Houston Rockets) into the playoffs, just because the Spurs and the Mavericks tied for first.

There were still 10 scores above Matadors, even if two were exactly the same.

Have you been reading "The Catcher in the Rye"?

[Dale Bari]

Have you been reading "The Catcher in the Rye"?

No. Why?

[steelcityrabbit]

They should have scored prelims like this:

1.cabs/steel

3. bush

4...

5...

and so forth. In other words, there was no 2nd place corps.

My belief is that DCA wanted to let the Matadors defend their CG title, so they used the tie as an excuse.

I really don't have a problem with that. I am sure the decision helped with ticket sales. That's a good thing.

Kind of like when Sandy won the 1st ever showmanship award. Story is that the judge who picked soloist of the year award that night did not know it was supposed to be a horn player. He picked Sandy. So to make the situation right, they invented the showmanship award.

How many of you know that he never got his trophy that 1st year. They said he would get one later, but till this day, he has never got one.

As long as we are on that topic, I have always thought the showmanship trophy should be named after Sandy. I recently learned that is was named after Vince Bruni. He deserves recognition, but not on that particular trophy, it should go to Sandy.