2009 Could be Carolina Crown's year

[FTNK]

A lot of people were picking Cadets to win in 2008 as well.

[27/soa]

Competitive Inertia is dumb.

1. Bluecoats, Crossmen, Glassmen and Boston have never scored a 96.8. Nor, have they ever even been remotely close to the top spot come finals night. Crown scored a 96.8 - 1.325 down from Phantom finals night. Any other year and Crown would have likely been top 3. What Crown did in 2008 (in terms of design and execution) was far superior to any product ever put out by Bluecoats, Crossmen, Glassmen and Boston. Those three were top 5 corps, not championship caliber corps. 2008 Crown was a championship caliber corps.

2. In 1988 we won the title, after finishing 6th in 1987 and 7th in 1986. The last time Madison was top 3 was 1981. Are you saying we somehow had competitive inertia in 1988 just because we won the title in 1975? If so, that proves how flawed the competitive inertia argument is.

3. In 1994 BD won the title (with a huge score) after placing 4th the year before and never really challenging for the title since 1988. How'd BD have competitive inertia in 1994?

4. The Cadets have risen from 4th and 5th place numerous times to win the title.

5. The Cavies rose from 4th in 1994 to win the title in 1995.

6. Regiment nearly won in 1989 (with a huge score) after placing 6th in 1988 and 10th in 1986. Explain how they had competitive inertia in 1989?

The bottom line - Crown is now a championship caliber corps. They have the staff, the talent, the design and the execution. All top tier. Those are the necessary ingredients. I have no doubt that 2008 was the beginning of big things for Crown.

Crown will be our next new World Champion.

Good factual analysis.

It's just way too early to predict champions for the future. I'll make my decision in late July.

[OICMR corps]

Crown will be our next new World Champion.

Competitive Inertia doesn't dispute that. It does dispute that it will be in 2009.

[gellio]

Good factual analysis.

It's just way too early to predict champions for the future. I'll make my decision in late July.

Definitely. But when you look at what has happened in Ft. Mill, if Crown keeps doing what they are doing, they will no doubt get there. If it's not broke - don't fix it (Crown).

[gellio]

Competitive Inertia doesn't dispute that. It does dispute that it will be in 2009.

It may be 2009 - it may not be 2009. We will know on finals night 2009. But, the top 5 from last year all have an equal chance to win the title in 2009. Period! There is a reason they are all part of the top 5 and a tier up from 6th place down. The Cadets faltered due to programming in 2008 IMO. Maybe Hoppy's got it through his head that his programming choices don't work. A conventional drum corps show would be most appropriate for the Cadets in 2009.

[Bruckner8]

Competitive Inertia is dumb.

I'll let that slide...np.

1. Bluecoats, Crossmen, Glassmen and Boston have never scored a 96.8. Nor, have they ever even been remotely close to the top spot come finals night. Crown scored a 96.8 - 1.325 down from Phantom finals night. Any other year and Crown would have likely been top 3. What Crown did in 2008 (in terms of design and execution) was far superior to any product ever put out by Bluecoats, Crossmen, Glassmen and Boston. Those four were top 5 corps, not championship caliber corps. 2008 Crown was a championship caliber corps.

Lots of subjection in your "analysis," which I take issue with. Also, and most importantly, it's been shown over-and-over again that comparing scores means NOTHING. Rank is all that matters in DCI. Note that Bluecoats also finished 4th once (2006), but the others have not. That adds more credence to the "Glass Ceiling" metaphor of CI than your mention of scores and spreads. Spreads mean NOTHING, except in the eyes of the judges, who have to "get it right" when RANKING the corps "properly." The judges create spreads in order to group the corps into littel buckets, like "These 3 corps have a shot for the title: BD, PR, CAV" "These 2 corps are #### good but really have no shot: CAD, CC" "These two corps are pretty good, might even have some top 3 captions: Bloo, SCV."

etc, etc...see where I'm going? You seem to be implying that the judges actually thought Crown had a shot in 2008! And therefore, they have an even more legit shot in 2009!

1.325...how many corps can fit in that spread? If 0.025 is the smallest increment, then every single point has room for 40 corps. There are 53 "slots" in 1.325. There aren't even 53 corps anymore.

2. In 1988 we won the title, after finishing 6th in 1987 and 7th in 1986. The last time Madison was top 3 was 1981. Are you saying we somehow had competitive inertia in 1988 just because we won the title in 1975? If so, that proves how flawed the competitive inertia argument is.

2. In 1988 we won the title, after finishing 6th in 1987 and 7th in 1986. The last time Madison was top 3 was 1981. Are you saying we somehow had competitive inertia in 1988 just because we won the title in 1975? If so, that proves how flawed the competitive inertia argument is.

3. In 1994 BD won the title (with a huge score) after placing 4th the year before and never really challenging for the title since 1988. How'd BD have competitive inertia in 1994?

4. The Cadets have risen from 4th and 5th place numerous times to win the title.

5. The Cavies rose from 4th in 1994 to win the title in 1995.

6. Regiment nearly won in 1989 (with a huge score) after placing 6th in 1988 and 10th in 1986. Explain how they had competitive inertia in 1989?

If you read my original CI post carefully, you woudln't be making these statements, and I don't have time to keep educating you.

The bottom line - Crown is now a championship caliber corps. They have the staff, the talent, the design and the execution. All top tier. Those are the necessary ingredients. I have no doubt that 2008 was the beginning of big things for Crown.

1990 Was the beginning. They've been doing everything right since then. 2008 is a culmination of 20 years of very hard work and perserverance. Now it's time to REALLY see what they're made of. If they can disprove CI, I'll be the first one to post here that CI has been officailly debunked...or at least had its first anomoly!

Until then, your cross-examination is nowhere near as compelling, sorry.

[contrajedi8]

Competitive Inertia is dumb.

1. Bluecoats, Crossmen, Glassmen and Boston have never scored a 96.8. Nor, have they ever even been remotely close to the top spot come finals night. Crown scored a 96.8 - 1.325 down from Phantom finals night. Any other year and Crown would have likely been top 3. What Crown did in 2008 (in terms of design and execution) was far superior to any product ever put out by Bluecoats, Crossmen, Glassmen and Boston. Those four were top 5 corps, not championship caliber corps. 2008 Crown was a championship caliber corps.

2. In 1988 we won the title, after finishing 6th in 1987 and 7th in 1986. The last time Madison was top 3 was 1981. Are you saying we somehow had competitive inertia in 1988 just because we won the title in 1975? If so, that proves how flawed the competitive inertia argument is.

3. In 1994 BD won the title (with a huge score) after placing 4th the year before and never really challenging for the title since 1988. How'd BD have competitive inertia in 1994?

4. The Cadets have risen from 4th and 5th place numerous times to win the title.

5. The Cavies rose from 4th in 1994 to win the title in 1995.

6. Regiment nearly won in 1989 (with a huge score) after placing 6th in 1988 and 10th in 1986. Explain how they had competitive inertia in 1989?

The bottom line - Crown is now a championship caliber corps. They have the staff, the talent, the design and the execution. All top tier. Those are the necessary ingredients. I have no doubt that 2008 was the beginning of big things for Crown.

Crown will be our next new World Champion.

Did you even read the CI article? Based on all of these statements you've made, I'm going to say you haven't. Go back, read it, and try to understand it. Your post is full of fail.

[gellio]

I'll let that slide...np.

Lots of subjection in your "analysis," which I take issue with. Also, and most importantly, it's been shown over-and-over again that comparing scores means NOTHING. Rank is all that matters in DCI. Note that Bluecoats also finished 4th once (2006), but the others have not. That adds more credence to the "Glass Ceiling" metaphor of CI than your mention of scores and spreads. Spreads mean NOTHING, except in the eyes of the judges, who have to "get it right" when RANKING the corps "properly." The judges create spreads in order to group the corps into littel buckets, like "These 3 corps have a shot for the title: BD, PR, CAV" "These 2 corps are #### good but really have no shot: CAD, CC" "These two corps are pretty good, might even have some top 3 captions: Bloo, SCV."

etc, etc...see where I'm going? You seem to be implying that the judges actually thought Crown had a shot in 2008! And therefore, they have an even more legit shot in 2009!

1.325...how many corps can fit in that spread? If 0.025 is the smallest increment, then every single point has room for 40 corps. There are 53 "slots" in 1.325. There aren't even 53 corps anymore.

If you read my original CI post carefully, you woudln't be making these statements, and I don't have time to keep educating you.

1990 Was the beginning. They've been doing everything right since then. 2008 is a culmination of 20 years of very hard work and perserverance. Now it's time to REALLY see what they're made of. If they can disprove CI, I'll be the first one to post here that CI has been officailly debunked...or at least had its first anomoly!

Until then, your cross-examination is nowhere near as compelling, sorry.

You don't have to educate me on anything. I think my argument is spot on. There is NO SUCH THING AS COMPETITIVE INERTIA.

The Bluecoats may have made 4th in 2006, but that same show would have finished 7th in 2007 and probably 6th or 7th in 2008. There is no comparision in what was achieved between the 2008 Carolina Crown and the 2006 Bluecoats. PERIOD! It's championship caliber programming and performing vs. top 5 programming and performing. The bottom line is Carolina Crown is now a championship caliber corps. None of the other in and out of the top 5 corps you mentioned EVER were championship caliber corps. Nor would any of those shows place as high as 3rd any other year.

Can we have a discussion without throwing insults please?

[gellio]

Did you even read the CI article? Based on all of these statements you've made, I'm going to say you haven't. Go back, read it, and try to understand it. Your post is full of fail.

I have and it's dumb! The 1988 Madison Scouts had no competitive inertia. We were no better off than the 1988 Star of Indiana.

The reason corps like Cadets, Cavies and BD are consistently on the top is because of talent (staff and members) and programming. THAT'S IT!!!!! Crown is now on their level from that standpoint. Period! The reason Madison won in 1988 was programming and talent. The reason Star rose is programming and talent. The reason Garfield rose is programming and talent. The reason the Bluecoats rose is programming and talent. Should I go on and on?

Your theory is heavily flawed. The 2009 Carolina Crown will start the season in a MUCH better position than the 1988 Madison Scouts, 1990 Cadets, 1994 BD, etc....

[gellio]

The judges create spreads in order to group the corps into littel buckets, like "These 3 corps have a shot for the title: BD, PR, CAV" "These 2 corps are #### good but really have no shot: CAD, CC" "These two corps are pretty good, might even have some top 3 captions: Bloo, SCV."

This statement is absurd. You must have no faith in the judging community. Had Crown performed the best Saturday night, they would have won. Same with anyone else in the top 12. Give me one instance where it was blantantly obviously that a corps that should have placed higher was boxed in in a lower placement. You can't.