Putting my cards on the table

[euponitone]

Sorry about my spelling of grammar. finger fault.

No prob....just ironic. Like saying, I like, hate it when people like, say like too much when they like, talk....

[Ed from Kansas]

Wait....20 year olds get special favors? Are you saying that rook-outs DONT, and beat, younger members for spots in corps?....because that would be ludicrous. If there is a clear cut difference it talent, work ethic, and skill, then age doesnt matter. If the younger auditionee is mature enough to handle the stress of tour AND, is better than the older guy, he gets the spot every time. Perhaps the only exception to this is if a 21 year old and a 15 year old get the exact same ratings in all aspects of their audtion, corps will probably go with the 21 year old.....why?, because they know this is their last, and only shot. That sort of thing tends to motivate people, although obviously not everyone ticks the same way. As for why the average age being 19.4....i find that a little hard to believe. Average age of the cadets.....maybe, but the average age of DCI WC....probably 17-18. Why is it even that high.....probably because those kids that get in are better than the ones that didnt....maybe

Go to the DCI Home Page. That's where I got my number. You and I almost agree. If I were a Corps Director and had a 15 or 16 year old and a 20 (rook-out) year old and all things being equal, the 20 year old wouldn't have a chance. Why? I've only got him for one year. It is also a thing about committment and dedication. If the younger person plays as well as the older, then that would tell me something.

The plain fact is that it does not work that way in drum corps today. The older kids will have preference over the younger, regardless of the level of talent. I am inherently suspicious of someone who would wait until a "rook-out" year to march for a corps, any corps. There has to be an ulterior motive in mid --- looks good on the resume sort of thing.

You don't have to agree with me but I've seen it in action.

[Ed from Kansas]

No prob....just ironic. Like saying, I like, hate it when people like, say like too much when they like, talk....

I like your sense of humor. It's like, like it's cool.

[Rimba47]

The plain fact is that it does not work that way in drum corps today. The older kids will have preference over the younger, regardless of the level of talent. I am inherently suspicious of someone who would wait until a "rook-out" year to march for a corps, any corps. There has to be an ulterior motive in mid --- looks good on the resume sort of thing.

You don't have to agree with me but I've seen it in action.

I'm not denying that maybe what you say is true. But I doubt that this is the case for a majority of rook-outs. People have different reasons for doing drum corps for one year (their last year) and for not doing drum corps for any number of years. But we can't judge them based on the personal choices they made or the circumstances they were under.

(Maybe a rook-out learned trumpet for 4 years straight to be good enough to play with the corps of their choice? or could only afford one year to march?)

I'm wondering if the "reason" behind someone marching is really relevant at all aslong as they put out 100% of their effort for the final product. No one reason is more "legitimate" for doing drum corps then another.

But if there was any 15 year old, or 16 year old, or rook-out who actually felt discriminated against during the audition process then it would be worth talking about. But if no such cases exist then this argument doesn't even matter.

Edited February 3, 2010 by Rimba47

[Ed from Kansas]

I'm not denying that maybe what you say is true. But I doubt that this is the case for a majority of rook-outs. People have different reasons for doing drum corps for one year (their last year) and for not doing drum corps for any number of years. But we can't judge them based on the personal choices they made or the circumstances they were under.

(Maybe a rook-out learned trumpet for 4 years straight to be good enough to play with the corps of their choice? or could only afford one year to march?)

I'm wondering if the "reason" behind someone marching is really relevant at all aslong as they put out 100% of their effort for the final product. No one reason is more "legitimate" for doing drum corps then another.

But if there was any 15 year old, or 16 year old, or rook-out who actually felt discriminated against during the audition process then it would be worth talking about. But if no such cases exist then this argument doesn't even matter.

I have witnessed it and it isn't pretty. The only point that I was trying to make in the first place is that younger people should get an equal opportunity to march and they don't.

[euponitone]

I have witnessed it and it isn't pretty. The only point that I was trying to make in the first place is that younger people should get an equal opportunity to march and they don't.

I've marched with some VERY young people....at least for a top corps. Some of them belong there....some of them dont. Who's to say whether a 15 year old kid is really ready for a full tour like that....and when they arent, it rarely has anything to do with talent or ability. Then again, there are immature 21 year olds in DCI....heck, i may have been one of them

[roosevelt]

Before you criticize other people about their grammer and spelling, perhaps you should check yours.

Oh I get it. It is one of those make sure your backyards is clean of things.....

A minor spelling or grammar mistake verses an incomprehensible post are a little different.

[roosevelt]

A 14-15 year old kid does not deserve the same opportunity to march at BD than a 19-20 year old kid. Age and maturity (both physical, mental , and emotional) are contributing factors in a drum corps decision on who is going to be able to handle a summer on the road in addition to talent and individual ability.

Edited February 3, 2010 by roosevelt

[76strad]

The plain fact is that it does not work that way in drum corps today. The older kids will have preference over the younger, regardless of the level of talent. I am inherently suspicious of someone who would wait until a "rook-out" year to march for a corps, any corps. There has to be an ulterior motive in mid --- looks good on the resume sort of thing.

You don't have to agree with me but I've seen it in action.

Look here this is my view because its my situation. I think that there are people who could make world class if given the chance, but it costs money. If I get the money together before I age out with college and everything to march open or world ill be lucky. So people that say that if you wait till your age out year to tryout annoy the mess out of me, I have college to pay for, even with the lottery scholorship its expensive as #### Just sayin an ulterior motive is not always the case, Maybe you had it all paid for, in college im on my own for paying it, and from what ive looked at majoring in music is not cheap. Just dont say ulterior motive like someone has a master plan or a resume thing, because in my case, and probably someone elses case, paying to do corps of whatever catagory will be a pretty big achievement. In my book anyhow. I come from middle class, but my parents arent just gonna sit down and write a check like alot of parents do.

Edited February 3, 2010 by 76strad

[BRASSO]

True. The main difference being, even perennial bottom-feeder teams like the Royals or the Nationals will win a few games each season. A more accurate comparison would be for each team to have to field the same starting lineup each game of the season including the same starting pitcher since all corps are typically saddled with the same show all season long.

Even " bottom -feeder " Kansas City Royals you listed here have won a Major League World Series Title since 1979.

Pity the stating pitcher that would be required to pitch every Major League game for his team. He'd be in arm surgery by game 3 of the season, if not sooner.

A bettter comparison still might be to give The Cavaliers or Blue Devils the entire staff to Pioneer for a year, and give The Cavaliers or Blue Devils the entire Pioneer staff, and see if The Cavaliers and Blue Devils could both hold off Carolina Crown from overtaking them. And conversely, see if Pioneer, with the same kids, rise up a bit in the standings as a result of staff changes they receive from Cavaliers and Blue Devils.

How long has Cavaliers and Blue Devils kept their show design staff together now ? Certainly longer than we see winning sports teams keep their Championship winning Coaching staffs together.

Players come and go in sports. Coaches come and go in sports. Marchers come and go in DCI.

But the Top 3 Elite Corps..... their chief architects remain. Year after Year after Year.

And THAT'S the key difference for their continued success (and lack of parity ) in my view.

Edited February 3, 2010 by BRASSO