Could the new pre-show rule lead to woodwinds?

[The Other Mike]

How many? Who outside of the Troopers toured 'extensively' before 1972? Maybe Santa Clara in 1971...and I guess the Argonne Rebels in 71. Not a lot of 'extensive' touring before that. The typical corps had one long tour of a week or two, and some long weekends to travel outside of their area, but hardly 'extensive' touring on any large scale.

Almost all of the corps out of New Orleans HAD to do it. First stop, Chicago, then on from there. Yes, we had at least 2 - 3 long weekends, usually a 9 day-two weekender tied together with a drill camp in between, somewhere up north and then a 24-34 day tour. It was the only way we could do it.

I would imagine that the corps out of Florida had to do the same thing.

I remember making the trip to Ft. Meyers for a contest on a Sat. night ( pre Interstate days ) that took 24 hours to get there and 3 days to get back for just one show ( see "Trip from H-E-L-L on RAMD )

The trip to VFW 71 in Dallas was a short trip for us.

Crescent City Cadets, Southernairs ( of the 50's/60's), Stardusters, Masquraders and Southern Rebels all had to do it just to attend shows prior to 72.

We found it strange that other corps had school buses because we didn't realize those corps didn't travel like we did.

For many,the Bleu Raeders' Silver Eagles were a nice step up from the old 50's Greyhounds of the Rebels and Dusters

By the way, marching less than 5 miles is not a parade, it's a stroll around the block.......Happy Mardi Gras

[cowtown]

I have no idea why you did or didn't go to finals. I'm also not a DCI apologist...ask Jeff Ream. I do, however, value the truth. The actual one, not one that's spun. My posting history stands for itself, as does yours.

I disagree with the idea there is one unspun truth in this matter and that you solely hold

I think it’s a matter of perspective which makes ‘the truth’ look differently to different people

Thank you for your valuable contribution

[Jeff Ream]

Another example of cowtown bending the truth?

That's rather insulting, wrong and I consider it a personal attack

More so considering your post backs up mine just with different language and a few strawmen thrown in (secret vote, where did that come from....really?)

I see that statement as slander, an attempt to discredit me as a poster so that you can dismiss my point of view and spin DCI as some sort of saint.

Corps wanted more money from DCM so they pulled out of the show. Corps are DCI, therefore DCI pulled their corps, just as we both said

This is almost becoming a trend here, so when a corps is allowed in world class do they also have to supply a DCI apologist to spin 'the truth' and attack the detractors on DCP?

I mean between you and Bob, well if it walks like a duck

hey wait, you're the guy that tried to imply I didn't go to finals because I said the sound was bad....

you can consider it an attack, but the guidelines don't, and to be honest, from all I have read on here and discussed offline, some of both sides of your argument is accurate.

however..all of the DCI corps are DCI, not just those that chose to leave. and the only corps that had a say in this were the DCI WC corps that were also DCM members. It's not like Hop and Gibbs sat Fiedler and the rest down and said "ok, this is what you HAVE to do"

granted, I miss the local circuits, but this was no grand DCI conspiracy....tho snatching up DeKalb was kinda ###### the next year

[audiodb]

Another example of cowtown bending the truth to make his point. "DCI" didn't pull anyone from anything, not even DCM. Some world class (open/div 1 class at the time) decided that the revenue sharing model of performance payouts weren't fair to the corps pulling in the crowds, and were, in effect, subsidizing the smaller corps. When DCM resisted efforts to make a more fair payout system, some of those corps left the circuit.

DCI held no secret vote to destroy DCM, and no one issued any commandments from on high. It really came down to forcing the Cavaliers to subsidize the Racine Scouts (just an example, don't flame me). There were other issues as well, but that was the main one.

Would a tiered payout system have been bad? No. Would it have saved DCM? Probably, at least for a while.

You have no idea what you're talking about. DCM had a tiered payout system. But I doubt that the facts will change your attitude....the elitists have gotten to you.

This "subsidation" myth is one of the most dangerous manipulations out there, as it apparently has spread to the point where open-class staffers (like you were until last month) believe this mumbo-jumbo. They've accepted the premise that they are "subsidized", and don't deserve appearance fees or revenue sharing. They've accepted having themselves segregated from world-class, and when their separate events don't draw, that completes the vicious circle.

So who is the draw in world-class? Is world-class fair? Or do the top 12 "subsidize" the other 11? Maybe we should segregate the top 12 from the 13-23, put them on separate tours all summer, and if the 13-23 tour doesn't make enough money, those corps don't get paid. That's the logical extension of this elitist practice - the rich get richer....and fewer.

[Kamarag]

You have no idea what you're talking about. DCM had a tiered payout system. But I doubt that the facts will change your attitude....the elitists have gotten to you.

I do know what I'm talking about, but that's ok. We all have our opinions. Look, I'm far from an elitist, and I've been in and around DCI for a long time. The difference is I think a lot of folks here are fighting all the wrong battles when it comes to DCI.

[audiodb]

I do know what I'm talking about, but that's ok. We all have our opinions.

Well, perhaps you could clarify regarding the DCM pay scale.

[Jeff Ream]

I do know what I'm talking about, but that's ok. We all have our opinions. Look, I'm far from an elitist, and I've been in and around DCI for a long time. The difference is I think a lot of folks here are fighting all the wrong battles when it comes to DCI.

ok...which battles should they fight?

[Kamarag]

ok...which battles should they fight?

Fiscal policy, recruiting, focus on entertainment, digital media, marketing, etc. Pick one.

[MikeD]

I said they "began more extensive touring" before DCI.

And let's clear up the misconception in your post. Before Troopers, corps virtually never "toured". Even a Nationals trip would involve traveling straight there and back, leaving home for only a few days at a time....and Nationals was the only contest worth leaving the home region for. That began to change in the mid-to-late 1960s, as other major contests developed and top corps learned from the example Troopers set.

IMO when you use the term 'extensive' it implies widespread and long duration. Outside of the couple of corps noted, it just wasn't as common place as you are making it seem, pre-DCI.

By 1971, you had SCV, Anaheim, Troopers all taking three-week tours through the Midwest leading to World Open in July....and then a second tour of two weeks in the Plains states leading to VFW in Dallas. Argonne, Blue Stars, Madison Scouts took both of those tours as well, but their hometowns were on the tour route, so theirs were both two-week tours rather than a three-week and a two-week. Blue Rock just did a two-week tour to U.S. Open and VFW, while your corps, 27th and BAC just went to VFW without any other contests en route.

Again, a couple of weeks of tour for most of them, not the model of today...and it still was not as 'extensive' as you are implying...it was a handful of corps, even adding the ones TOM mentioned. It was the exception, not the rule for the huge majority of corps that existed. And, 1971 is just before DCI...one year hardly makes for such a wide-sweeping trend you seem to imply, IMO.

Our VFW tour was 2-weeks, fyi. It just did not include competitions. We did a Dolphin/49'er pre-season 1/2-time in Miami on the way to Dallas and an exhibition at Six Flags over Atlanta on the way back after Nats.

Your rhetoric is getting old. Again, to correct all your mischaracterizations:

1. DCI has some culpability regarding the decline in number of corps. However, neither rhetorical extreme (i.e. "DCI killed them all" vs. "DCI had nothing to do with it") is true.

Your opinion, not mine. You seem to like to assign blame to DCI for non-DCI corps having trouble getting kids to march and their lack of business skills. I'm glad DCI does a lot on the latter part today, but it's not their 'fault' corps failed in the old days.

2. The corps we've lost were not all "local corps". Some were local, some were regional, and some were national, each with different touring/travel patterns.

Of 440 corps, as the number has been noted many ties, MOST were certainly local corps (IMO this includes what you call 'regininal', as their primary base was their home, unless that is not what you mean by regional).

3. The majority of North American junior corps competing 1972-2009 were involved in DCI-sanctioned events.

Never said they had zero involvement...doing a couple of shows hardly makes them DCI corps.

4. An even wider majority of corps were affected by DCI as their rulebook was adopted by other circuits, and as DCI competed with and/or joined forces with other contest sponsors.

And your point is? I never claimed otherwise. I know circuits like the GSC adopted, sometimes badly, DCI rules and judging approaches.

[bawker]

Some world class (open/div 1 class at the time) decided that the revenue sharing model of performance payouts weren't fair to the corps pulling in the crowds, and were, in effect, subsidizing the smaller corps. When DCM resisted efforts to make a more fair payout system, some of those corps left the circuit.

It boggles my mind that Division I directors would do this. Seriously.

I know this is all in the past, but, I'm sorry, WC directors . . . explain how giving money equally across the board to all the corps hurts an organization that is supposedly by the corps and for the corps?

The Cavaliers or Phantom Regiment really don't deserve any more money from the circuit itself than anyone else. Getting additional sponsorship deals, running clinics . . .all that, that's fine. The "big boys" have the name power to do this to make extra dollars.

Are those corps the ones that are the big draws? Sure they are. But in order to grow the rest of the activity, maybe it might be nice to throw a bone during the season to a Racine Scouts, Cap Reg or someone else trying to build a program.

Why in the hell would people want to take away the one chance the smaller corps have to make an equal amount?

Is it the little guy riding on the back of the power corps? Sure is.

However, maybe those "power corps", and DCI itself should look at where their membership comes from and quit trying to cannabilize every other avenue they can find for members and money instead of growing their own.

You can't swallow your own tail forever; DCI sure as hell ain't the Ouroboros.