WestCoaster Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 This recap is in error. I marched in the '75 Scouts and can attest that the only time we were beat was at prelims, which did not count as a contest back then. That is something that we were NOT happy with and made sure we corrected at finals, with a vengence. I also don't recall that we lost to anyone in brass that year either, so I think this recap is flawed.We were undefeated in '75. It even says so on the ring. CT How can it not "count" as a contest? You marched and played, they marched and played, judges were present, you lost, they won. Sorry...that ain't undefeated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 tough call between 82 and 94. i'll go with 94 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaestroBen Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Was going to complain that '86 BD wasn't on the list. Then I rechecked, and remembered that they lost their very first show, and were undefeated from there. I voted '82. '94 might have come close, if it weren't for the fact that they weren't wearing the right uniforms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobrien Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) How can anyone legitimately vote for 2002 Cavaliers ? Because of the corps on the list, they're the only ones whose actual program was particularly distinguished. The only downside I can think of with BD being undefeated this year is that they did it with a show that was performed well, but not distinctively new or innovative. Edited August 13, 2009 by mobrien Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meaghatron Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 2002 The Cavaliers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) Because of the corps on the list, they're the only ones whose actual program was particularly distinguished. The only downside I can think of with BD being undefeated this year is that they did it with a show that was performed well, but not distinctively new or innovative. Edited Edited August 13, 2009 by GMichael1230 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Because of the corps on the list, they're the only ones whose actual program was particularly distinguished. The only downside I can think of with BD being undefeated this year is that they did it with a show that was performed well, but not distinctively new or innovative. Nothing 2002 Cavaliers did was new or innovative either. Just better than the weaker field below it. G Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_S Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 How can anyone legitimately vote for 2002 Cavaliers ? They had no competition at all, BD was full of re-writes and had to fight to gain the second spot and nobody had a show strong enough to challenge..... Probably because those voting are choosing which of the five corps listed they thought was the best, and not which corps faced the stiffest competition that season. You're correct that the Cavaliers faced a relatively weak field in 2002, but that's reflected in their tick-era record gap of 1.85 at finals. (You have to go back to 1976 to find a bigger gap between first and second place.) SCV in 4th was closer to the Blue Devils than the Blue Devils in 2nd were to the Cavaliers that year. Still, a weak field doesn't take away what the Cavaliers were able to achieve as a corps. Even if the Blue Devils had been another point and a half better by the end of the season, it wouldn't have been enough to keep the Cavaliers from being undefeated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobrien Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 This recap is in error. I marched in the '75 Scouts and can attest that the only time we were beat was at prelims, which did not count as a contest back then. That will be news to the Colts from last Friday night, I'm sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Probably because those voting are choosing which of the five corps listed they thought was the best, and not which corps faced the stiffest competition that season. You're correct that the Cavaliers faced a relatively weak field in 2002, but that's reflected in their tick-era record gap of 1.85 at finals. (You have to go back to 1976 to find a bigger gap between first and second place.) SCV in 4th was closer to the Blue Devils than the Blue Devils in 2nd were to the Cavaliers that year. You're absolutely right that the rest of the field was comparatively weak that year, but it doesn't take away what the Cavaliers were able to achieve as a corps. Even if the Blue Devils had been another point and a half better by the end of the season, it wouldn't have been enough to keep the Cavaliers from being undefeated. Not sure of the logic but if Im going in that direction and giving BD another point and a half and making them stronger than Cavaliers would have lost ground in some of their dominance and wouldnt have been able to score that high ....ying/yang, balance...etc..... Should BD had been stronger in say, visual, then the judges would have not have been able to award the numbers they did, same thing in brass, percussion and/or GE...there has to be accountability. G 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.