Score observation...

[Pinwiz]

Writing a title show in anything but a top 5 corps wouldn't matter. You will not get the talent at tryouts like the top 5 so who is going to perform this top notch show?

It would matter. For every kid in a Top 5 corps there are at least five others who could fill that spot just as well or better. It take a commitment to get to that level, and part of it is writing shows to enter into that echelon. Even if it's a complete failure, the kids' skills would be miles ahead of where they would have been if they performed an easier show. The show design would attract more people to auditions.

People lament about a lack of change in the Top 3 or Top 5 (or now Top 7). At least Bluecoats and Crown are trying. I see nothing in the philosophies of Boston or BK or Glassmen or Spirit or any other traditional finalist that they CARE about reaching that level. I haven't seen them try. They may fall into that range by luck or perfect design, but it's not on purpose.

Both Bluecoats and Crown made radical changes in their styles, made serious decisions on where they wanted to be, and it paid off. If other corps did that, we'd see even more variety at the top.

It takes a commitment from the corps management to get to that level, and there's nothing that says they have to do it. But until they do, I refuse to complain that there's no new champions.

[drumno5]

That is something I really miss in the activity (one of many things, actually). The judges must be using previous scores as a guide these days much more than was done back then.

I know folks often come out here to express their opinions - but wow, thats a pretty bold statement. Got anything to support that claim?

No personal disrespect intended (of course),

Fred O.

[vferrera]

And if a corps wants to compete for a title, they need to write a title-worthy show. Period.

Or buy one.

There's a reason the richest corps are the most competitive.

Give Madison an extra 100K per year to spend on staff and they'll probably win a title in 3-5 years.

[soccerguy315]

Excellent Point!! The way to prevent "Ring Chasers" from jumping corps is the same as college football. If you change from one Div I college to another, you loose a year eligibility and you sit out that year. If DCI required the same, you would see a lot less corps jumping.

So if someone marches in a corps and has a bad experience, you are trying to force them to stay there?

[drumno5]

...but if the performance were judged instead of design, then an off-night for the Blue Devils might mean a Crown or Crusaders or Blue Knights' victory...kind of like used to happen "back in the day."

Kind of like in 1982, when the Blue Devils were undefeated, or in the early/mid 70's, when SCV kicked butt practically every night, or the late 80's, when Garfield/CBC ruled the field, night after night. Yeah, those were the good old days...

Tick system, build-up system, linear analysis, 4 judges, 9 judges, whatever. For better or worse, I don't really think things have changed much with regard to the dynamics of competition and judging.

Even in college football, where teams have a better chance of establishing dynasties, we have had 12 different national champions since 1992.

There is no "National Championship" of College Football. It's a creation of the Las Vegas oddsmakers.

all in good fun,

Fred O.

[Scerpella]

So if someone marches in a corps and has a bad experience, you are trying to force them to stay there?

Well for some, a"bad experience" is described as not winning the ring. I think theres merit to this idea. It would slow the steady leeching of talent from corps trying to make it to the next level to the established corps.

Edited July 26, 2008 by Scerpella

[The Tsar]

Kind of like in 1982, when the Blue Devils were undefeated, or in the early/mid 70's, when SCV kicked butt practically every night, or the late 80's, when Garfield/CBC ruled the field, night after night. Yeah, those were the good old days...

Your examples don't jive up with reality. Yes, the 1982 Blue Devils were undefeated, and you are going to get corps from time to time that have that perfect blend of people and show concept that are simply unstoppable...

However....

Looking back over corpsreps, I don't see SCV kicking butt practically every night in the mid 70s.

In fact, in 1975 they only placed first at 4 out of 13 shows. In 1974, they placed first 9 out of 15 shows. In 1973 it was 12 out of 14, so that's a lot better obviously, but it isn't like they were running around undefeated every season.

As for Garfield in the late 1980s....they won the title in 1987, but I don't think even the most die-hard Cadet homer is going to say they ruled the field night after night.

1986: 14 first place finishes out of 30. (Hardly dominating)

1987: 27 first place finishes out of 35. (DCI Champion)

1988: 26 first place finishes out of 37. (One might argue that since a bulk of their first place finishes came in the early season, they may have been getting credit for the previous year).

1989: I don't have stats...I know they started the season undefeated...but I also know they were competing out east and didn't see the "big boys" until later in the season. And I know that the first time they did, they went from undefeated to 4th place (DCI Mid-America) and ended up in 5th place at Finals.

Tick system, build-up system, linear analysis, 4 judges, 9 judges, whatever. For better or worse, I don't really think things have changed much with regard to the dynamics of competition and judging.

I disagree, but that's what these posts are for...healthy discussion.

There is no "National Championship" of College Football. It's a creation of the Las Vegas oddsmakers.

There may not be an official champion, but since the NCAA is in bed with the money brokers behind the BCS, it is in fact a de facto championship, whether they want to admit it or not. I would love if there had been a playoff system. If there had been one back during my alma mater's incredible run of 10-win seasons from 1987-2000, I think we would have won 2-3 more titles (1987, 1988, 1989, and 1992 would have been interesting to say the least. Go Noles).

[Pinwiz]

Or buy one.

There's a reason the richest corps are the most competitive.

Give Madison an extra 100K per year to spend on staff and they'll probably win a title in 3-5 years.

Replace Madison with SCV and I'd agree with you.

[salad315]

Well for some, a"bad experience" is described as not winning the ring. I think theres merit to this idea. It would slow the steady leeching of talent from corps trying to make it to the next level to the established corps.

And for most, a 'bad experience' is; not getting fed well. Getting yelled at / insulted by staffs / not fitting in with other members / not being challenged enough / being pushed too hard (yes there is such a thing). I've said this before, but as long as people are PAYING 2000$ to march for a summer (and sometimes 2-3 times that), there is NO WAY anybody is going to tell them when and where they can march. If DCI wants to start shelling out transportation and scholarship money for kids to go march no finalist corps, then go for it, but its ludicrous to try and force a 'consumer' (yes thats one way off classifying someone spending that much) to buy a certain product that they may not want. The cavaliers didnt win their first title in 92 because the salary cap forced star to trade its mello line away, and the cadets to make a draft day trade sending their staff over. They won because they found their own formula that worked. I hope a corps like crown continues to do what its doing, and I hope they get a title in the next 2 or 3 years. Either way, I can guarantee it wont be because their members were forced to stay with them. Besides, who wants to march with someone who doesnt WANT to be marching in your corps.....

[joel s]

Does anyone else think the whole idea of judging is silly?

I went to a show 2 nights ago. My wife brought along a friend that had never been to a drum corps show. I decided to have a little fun with her, so I took a piece of paper and wrote down what I thought each corps would score. I did this during their performance, (not waiting for them to finish). When the scores were called out, my wife's friend was so impressed that all my predicted scores were within .4-1.0 of the actual scores. Little did she know that I am not the great and all-knowing wizard, but instead I just read DCP and check the previous night's scores at dci.org.

Wish it wasn't so predictable.