Blackstar Posted February 4, 2010 Author Share Posted February 4, 2010 Its easy to list the corps that started and are still around. Harder to list the corps that announced and never fielded since 2000. Ekilpse out of KY and an aborted attempt out of the Carolinas called Star something to name two that come to mind. I talked to the director if Eklipse at length years ago. We talked about the barriers of getting into the activity. We also talked about many of the things I bring up today and this was 2-3 years ago. He was also lambasted on DCP and ended up leaving the activity. Funny that one thing we talked about that would help the activity was what SDCA is doing now, going indoors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 Its easy to list the corps that started and are still around. Harder to list the corps that announced and never fielded since 2000. Ekilpse out of KY and an aborted attempt out of the Carolinas called Star something to name two that come to mind. I talked to the director if Eklipse at length years ago. We talked about the barriers of getting into the activity. We also talked about many of the things I bring up today and this was 2-3 years ago. He was also lambasted on DCP and ended up leaving the activity. Funny that one thing we talked about that would help the activity was what SDCA is doing now, going indoors. well DCI is indoors now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpaul Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 because being seen as uncompetitive isn't a great recruiting tool. neither is being inactive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 electronicsamps 150 full tour etc. Startup corps would not require amps and electronics, nor do they need to field 150 members...probably wouldn't as a startup. Plus they would be in the open class, not doing the full tour of a WC corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerguy315 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Nothing on your list is a requirement. They are options that are available. If people choose to live beyond their means in a misguided effort to keep up, then they suffer the consequences. I don't know why a corps' management would put the financial stability of their organization at risk to buy equipment they can't afford to be "more competitive" for a couple years before they go inactive. Maybe that's just me. they are all a requirement if you want to survive. How long are you going to last in WC with 110 members? These issues make it virtually impossible to start up a new corps (OC gets treated like crap). So, we have what we have now... hopefully as many of them as possible hang around for a long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerguy315 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Startup corps would not require amps and electronics, nor do they need to field 150 members...probably wouldn't as a startup. Plus they would be in the open class, not doing the full tour of a WC corps. who is going to want to be in a start up corps with 50 members and not a full tour? open class is DYING. It's dying so much that they had to combine divII and divIII into 1 grouping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpaul Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 they are all a requirement if you want to survive. How long are you going to last in WC with 110 members? These issues make it virtually impossible to start up a new corps (OC gets treated like crap). So, we have what we have now... hopefully as many of them as possible hang around for a long time. It depends on how you define "survival". When was the last time we saw a start-up corps in WC with 150 members? Lots of corps survive without all the items on your list. You might not see them on Saturday night at finals, but that doesn't mean they're not surviving. It takes smart people making wise choices to grow a WC drum corps. Some have done it better than others and some have failed. The problem is that people get ahead of themselves and spend money they don't have in an attempt to "be competitive" rather than build a stable foundation and grow at a sustainable pace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Posts that were not pertinent to the thread topic and attempted to purposefully derail the discussion have been deleted. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Nothing on your list is a requirement. They are options that are available. Not exactly. These "options" become prerequisites for competitive success at some level. If people choose to live beyond their means in a misguided effort to keep up, then they suffer the consequences. And why make "keeping up" so expensive in the first place? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I always thought that particular argument was just so much BS. Anyone who really expected any corps to use members' equipment past the initial starting phase was deluded. So Dave Gibbs was deluded, then? Here's an excerpt from the rule change proposal he wrote: It will help start-up corps. They can have their students bring instruments and not only practice with them, use them in a performance. 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.