Elite Corps - Is there a limit?

[Bob J]

Yes in theory, the Clippers are "capable" of winning the NBA title next year. I wouldn't put them in the class of NBA elite though. How many people here think Pacific Crest is capable of winning the title next year? In theory, if somehow they design the best show, recruit the best staff and best members and have the best performances in August, they could win. More likely is they would make finals, but history and competitive inertia say no. It is much more likely that the Clippers would win the NBA.

We can't really compare drum corps to many sports this way. Elite sports teams win or come close to winning many times over their history, or during a certain time period. But if the Devil Rays, the Black Hawks or the SuperSonics make it into their respective playoffs, and win the necessary games, they are the champions (that year). Doesn't make them elite.

I wouldn't drop the Blue Devils off the "elite" list because in 2005 they finished 4th.

[perc2100]

I have to disagree. Titles aren't everything. If by August the consensus is "any of the following is capable of winning..." I feel those are the elite (for that season). Long term elites are those that could have won in a given year over a longer time frame (still to be determined).

Someone asked for my data, I have an XL spreadsheet. PM me.

What is your definition of "could have won?" IMO, most years Top 3 you could fairly say "could have won," and if you look at the stats I posted earlier, not surprisingly the corps who "could have won" in most years are: Cavaliers, Cadets, Blue Devils. Looking at the 2008 DCI Finals recap, only the Top 3 corps won a caption last year, and rarely does a non-Top 3 corps win a caption Finals night. I think it's safe to stipulate that a corps that can not even win one caption is not a corps that 'could have won,' so IMO in general if you're not Top 3 you were not a corps that "could have won."

And surprise, it's been a LONG time (15 years) since we had a corps in the Top 3 who has not won a DCI Championship before.

**edit: some years, you can't even really say more than one or two corps could've won. Definitely in 2002, 2005, 1986, and 1994 there was NO WAY another corps was going to win.

Edited June 10, 2009 by perc2100

[smj02]

Sports analogies aren't completely fair because scoring in sports isn't based on "style points" like drum corps is. In drum corps, even "execution" scoring is biased to some extent by design influence. Good musical writing can "sound better" and be easier to clean than mediocre writing...and the same goes for drill writing.

Plus, we're so conditioned to a certain set of expectations for excellence. When I first heard the Don Ellis band, I was put off. I was used to hearing bands like Kenton and Woody Herman that were cleaner and tighter. The Ellis band was a more exurberant performance that took some getting used to. It's not that it necessarily consisted of less talented musicians, they were just going for a different type of sound than I was used to from a big band. But I wouldn't call them any less "elite" than the Kenton band. To me, the Kenton band was more like BD in the 90s and the Ellis band was more like the Madison of that era. Different philosphies, not equally rewarded by the judges, but both "elite" in my eyes. To my dad, Madison WAS drum corps...they were THE elite, no matter the score.

[Bob J]

My somewhat arbitrary rule for "could have won" is finishing within 3 points of the winner. I am going strictly by scores at finals. A better data set would be if I could get everyone on DCP to tell me who REALLY had a shot at the title each year, for every year in DCI history. My 3 point rule is flawed, because what if the Cavies 97.2 score in 2006 was a little down, and BDs 96.55 was a little up. What if the 'real' spread was more like 5 points, and BD didn't really have a shot at winning. See my problem? But the finals scores are the data set I'm working with.

On the plus side, look at 1987, Garfield wins with a 97.9, SCV second at 97.8. Cavies a 'distant' third at 94.7. I wasn't there but I would say from the scores, the only 2 corps that 'could have won' that year are Garfield and SCV.

[Tom Brace]

You insist on cherry-picking timeframes. I insist on using all of the history. I don't care what the criteria is/was. I already said that SCV is in danger of moving off, but it will take time. You're bent on removing them now, using modern competition. That's cool. I'm also on record as calling BD/CAV/CAD the Modern Top 3. (In my original Competitive Inertia post). I hear ya...I'm just not as ready to throw away those early wins, especially when 85 and 88 probably should've gone to SCV anyway! (Flame alert!)

Someone I seldom agree with and we are lockstep on this one.

You make a very compelling argument for SCV by using all of DCI history and I tend to side with you.

A top 4 elite makes sense historically and it is hard to take SCV off anyone's list as they are the ONLY corps to make every Saturday night performance during finals week. Their kids NEVER question whether they will be there on Saturday, just how dark it will be.

I also agree, that if we were to slice a modern era together of 10, 15 or 20 years, we might leave SCV slightly behind in their elite status. I will also say this...with the advent of some of the new fundraising limitations now in California, we may see a tougher time for these two stalwarts. Odds on that BD can manage based on my understanding of their reserves. I have heard nothing regarding the financial stability of SCV and the presence of any untapped funds.

I believe as we go forward over the next 5 years...financial stability will play a greater and greater role in who is classified as elite.

[Tom Brace]

So which corps would you pick against the field for odds on champion in August?

I would believe the top corps we'd come up with would obviously be considered elite, regardless if they actually won it or not.

My vote year in and year out...BD.

Even if I don't predict BD to win, I ask myself, who out there could beat BD this year.

Unscientific, of course. But much of my analysis is.

[Bob J]

My "scientific" prediction? Cadets, followed by BD, and a tie for 3rd between Cavies and Phantom. No surprizes there. My gut feeling? BD all the way. Everything points that way. Competitive inertia, the close 2nd place last year, the sound of their show design this year...

[Tim Coffey]

With the relatively recent surges of Crown and the Bluecoats, and the sustained excellence of Cavaliers, Blue Devils, Phantom Regiment, Cadets, and SCV, DCI has arguably the strongest ever crop of corps consistently threatening to place in the top 6. Unlike the late 90s/early 2000s, when corps like Glassmen, Blue Knights, and Boston had fleeting success but were unable to sustain a top 6 placement for more than a couple years, recently Crown and Bluecoats have demonstrated staying power, and the activity appears to have a legitimate "top 7" that looks difficult to break into. Some argue that the Blue Stars have the capability of joining this elite class and surely corps like Blue Knights, Madison, Glassmen, Boston, and those corps fighting for finals last year would love to achieve sustained success. At the same time, there is concern about SCV's ability to re-gain their former position as a perennial title contender, and some even seem legitimately concerned that they may slip further down the pack. In light of all this, I wonder:

Is there a limit to how many corps can maintain a high standard of achievement year after year? For example, is there a dilution of talent once too many corps start to get good? We saw in 2007 that a corps placing as low as 7th can threaten the eventual champion during the season (and granted, this wasn't unprecedented in DCI history), but can this level of competition persist? Or with the rise of new challengers, are some of the old guard, SCV for example, destined to fall? Is there room at the table for more, or is there a limit to the number of corps that can maintain an elite status?

Yes, there is a limit.............................42

[Tom Brace]

Yes, there is a limit.............................42

Just this year.

Southwind is mounting a comeback to competitive status.

[BRASSO]

The Rays might not be an elite franchise in an historic sense, but I must give them a hearty pat on the back for accomplishing what they did last year. They did it with a small payroll, a good manager, a developing minor league team, and finally, determination in a division loaded with stars. It's "The Little Engine That Could" story.

That's elite, in and of itself.

True enough..... but if " Elite Status " is reduced to " little engines that could ", and those Corps that " deserve a pat on the back " for efforts, etc., then what the heck, lets just assign " Elite Corps Status " to EVERY Corps out there.

If this is the case, then the OP's thread question......" Elite Corps..... is there a limit ?" the answer would have to be : " NO "

That's because with this definition then they are ALL " Elite Corps " .....similar to the Tampa Bay Rays baseball team becoming defined as an " Elite " MLB professioinal baseball franchise with such a minimal criteria established to attain such " Elite Status ".

Edited June 10, 2009 by BRASSO