Reverse the Rules

[bawker]

So you assume that there are enough corps in DCI who are against current rules (that many of them voted to pass) to support it's own division?

ANY organization is free to do whatever they want (see Star of Indiana): if they want to break away from DCI to try their luck with their own venture, they can. The fact that most do not do this, and instead work within DCI's parameters, indicates to me that most of them are happy working "in the system."

I don't assume anything; it's merely a hypothetical, just like the original topic was.

I could care less if BD or Cadets decided to go on their own tour, or Madison joined DCA. It's simply an exercise in fantasy, much like wishing for a NCAA football playoff or getting rid of the DH in baseball.

Bait elsewhere, friend.

edit: however, if you bothered to read closely, you would see that one division stays where the activity is now in 2009 ("current rules"), synths and all . . .while the other goes on towards woodwinds and everything else, which, actually, doesn't have much "support" from corps instructors/directors.

[CorpsPhan]

So you assume that there are enough corps in DCI who are against current rules (that many of them voted to pass) to support it's own division?

ANY organization is free to do whatever they want (see Star of Indiana): if they want to break away from DCI to try their luck with their own venture, they can. The fact that most do not do this, and instead work within DCI's parameters, indicates to me that most of them are happy working "in the system."

Provided they can keep changing the system to make it do what they want.....you left that part out.

And that's all I'm going to say on the matter. I have to go find a tar pit somewhere....RAWR!

[Jeff Ream]

From the "pre-show...woodwinds" poll/thread:

In an effort to better understand the opposition, I have some questions for those of you who dislike some or all of the modern drum corps rules.

1. If you were given the option pick a year rules-wise and have those rules be carved in stone tablets and enshrined in DCI headquaters until the end of time, would you do that? Which year and why?

2. Would you be comfortable with the activity never changing/evolving again? If not, how would you suggest the activity move forwards (not necessarily from today, but from a year of your choice)?

3. Along those lines, which recent (2000+) rules changes do you support and feel have been beneficial to the activity?

1) 2003

2) some change is ok, as I'm not opposed to all change. I'm even ok with amping pits, but I saw thru the proposal for what it was and what else it wanted to add.

3) amping alone, not vocals etc.

[jpaul]

Instead of participating in this . . .because I already see the argument coming as to "you're a crusty dino and don't like progress besides what you did on the field", I'll make a counter-offer to the "other side":

What if we could establish two divisions in DCI, and then had Saturday night as a direct competition between the two?

First, no more World Class/ Open Class. Everyone can compete against each other in their "division". . . . so if BDB is better than Teal Sound and makes Finals, then that's just the way it goes.

Regular shows during the season would be split, with groups in one division on first at a show, then the other, depending on show sponsors preference. Regionals could be alternating between what division performs first.

Divisions as follows:

1. Anything goes. Woodwinds, light shows, step teams, rappers, whatever. You get to have your Finals Friday night in the Oil Can (since these shows will be designed for it), and compete against the other division directly on Saturday.

2. Brass only. Bb is fine, amps and synths can stay. This group gets to have their Finals on Friday night at wherever the Open Class Finals would be and meets the other group on Saturday at the Oil Can.

Let say it falls like this:

World Class "Open"

Cadets

Blue Devils

Cascades

Bluecoats

Vanguard

Spirit

SCV Cadets

Blue Devils B

Cavaliers

Teal Sound

(etc)

World Class

Phantom Regiment

Madison Scouts

Citations

Carolina Crown

Colts

Pioneer

Boston Crusaders

(etc)

Both groups go head to head Saturday night in direct competition and a "World Champion" is still crowned.

How would you develop a singular set of rules/criteria for judging this hybrid finals event?

[Bob J]

1984

128 members

grounded pit

no more ticks

unamplified vocals allowed

G bugles

The corps (pretty much) stayed on the field.

The really good shows of today (with the obvious exception of extensive narration) could still be performed today under these rules. Think about it. Props were allowed. Mallets were allowed. Running around on the field at crazy-fast tempos while you play 16th note runs was allowed (remember Garfield?) A little re-arranging and re-staging of today's shows would be all it takes to perform them under '80s rules. And who's to say the activity wouldn't have progressed to where it is now without the rule changes that have occurred? Is it true that Star of Indiana played the same set of 2-valve G bugles from 1985 until 1993?

[bawker]

How would you develop a singular set of rules/criteria for judging this hybrid finals event?

That's a good question. Let's throw out some options:

1. Perhaps since both already have their own judged "champion", Saturday could instead be a victory lap of sorts that is voted on by the audience.

2. A special "hybrid" sheet could be created that is more general in nature to allow for plays, acting, songs, etc from the other group . . .so the general effect caption is more, well, general.

I dunno. It would be interesting to see who would go what way. I'm sure the Cadets and Blue Devils would take full advantage of a anything goes division . . .but it seems like there are at least a few corps that would put the brakes on.

Having a possible Saturday night championship with Cadets with woodwinds and 180+ members versus Phantom Regiment with all brass and 150 . . .it'd definitely be interesting to see that played out with an audience.

[SFZFAN]

I'm good with the 150 member rule.

I'm good with the asymmetrical drill as long as they throw in some symmetrical patterns here and there

I'm good with returning to G Bugles

I'm good with reducing the prancing and dancing, adding more actual precision marching and tossing from the guard

I'm good with the grounded pit, but make it smaller (no more than 6 people)

I'm good with eliminating amps, electronics, mikes, synths, bunnys, and such

I'm really good with no themes - just kick butt music and marching

So there's lots of changes I haven't liked through the years but I still love drum corps, and probably always will.

[MikeD]

I think my intent in this thread has been severely misinterpreted. I'm not looking to debate the merits of modern drum corps rules versus rules of years past, or even to demonstrate that each individual has their own concept of what drum corps should be. I'm just curious about what people would like to see. I obviously don't expect people to say that the rules should be like 1979, 1989 or 1999 and never change again.

The most interesting part of the question, I think, is where would you take the activity (rules-wise) from any given starting point? It's easy to say to say "we should go back to year X", but I'm interested to know if people think we should stay with year X rules perpetually, or what changes could have been beneficial starting with the rules in year X.

So far the suggestions provided related to that have been very interesting!

All of the changes have been beneficial, with hopefully more to come.

[76strad]

I would go with 2004-2008 any of those years, I support the 150 member size. However I do not in any way support the use of synths, amps, and what not. Vocals are alowed if there is no artificial help given as in speak in a bull horn, or what I prefer a shout or what not from the corps members. Thers my generic take. However just because of the recession I wish the age limit was increased.....

[Jeff Ream]

All of the changes have been beneficial, with hopefully more to come.

how so?