wesleyrp Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 The way the proposal is structured the G7 will be in a position for more visibility which means more sponsor money. They will have exclusive nights for super competitions which means more money for them and less for the non-G7 corps. While not impossible, in practice it will cement them as the top and make it extremely difficult for anyone else to break in. Should someone be able to break into the elite, there's always the 2/3 vote rule to help "correct" the situation. I'm not sure if this is a money grab or a power grab. Maybe they're both the same.I'm not sure how you think it's an insult to the judges. Are you a teacher? Because if you are you'd see that I and others are not whining or calling slotting or whatever you claim I am saying. I am simply stating it is unrealistic to see so many talent laden young people that we teach go and try out for the SUPER DUPER G7 Corps and nothing else. But with the current proposals I am betting that the numbers of students tryout will increase including the ones that are not ready for it. Is that healthy? As I said I have kids in many corps including some of the G7 groups and I can tell you that they are all proud of their organizations and the teamwork they are a part of. But this system that's being proposed no matter what the intention is would be a slap in the face of young musicians that are already a part of great teams. These Groups ARE working to be the BEST their organizations can be! Also keep in mind that many of the G7 Corps membership is derived from students that marched in the "NON G7" groups and then went to the G7 corps. My point, take those students out of the mix and how legit would your arguement be that "All Corps Just Need to Get That Good." Ok, so find a way to keep all those kids in the corps and keep them loyal and see what happens. Make a difference? You bet it does!!! Check the average age of the G7 corps vs. the non-G7 corps... Again I ask from a teacher standpoint, if those corps are that old already are they going to be taking a lot of younger students in their organizations? I again say this--- It is unrealistic for students trying out for those corps if this proposal passes because most will not get the time of day!! My take, you may not agree, but I am thinking from the student perspective and not My Corps vs. Your Corps. Wes P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brians Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 but, last time I checked, no one is stopping any drum corps from rising up and being great.to imply such (slotting will never allow anyone new into the top 7) is an insult to the judges. any of the non-G7 should (if they so desire) build their corps into championship calibre organizations (certainly there are enough examples of how to do it) - then they should kick some G7 butt! really...I'm so tired of hearing the whining... if DCI becomes to mean only the G7, because that is what i predict will happen over time if what they propose comes true. Not unlike what has happened to DCM and most of the smaller midwest Div. 1-2-3 corps over the past few years without the support of the larger successful coprs. The arguments being used now are the same ones which were presented to DCM years ago and look with happened. This is what is wrong with this proposal. It is extreemely hard to compete or "pull yourself up by your boot straps" when the deck is so drastically stacked against you. With this proposal most of the talent, 2 of the largest money making nights, sponsors, the ability to draw an audiance at your own show, etc... all gone. In my mind this is a lot about some of these top corps feeling very threateded by up and coming coprs who may replace them, their income and easy recruiting. They simply are trying to solidify their current status before they potentially slide and everthing becomes more difficult....like it has been for all the other coprs who have had to work their tails off over the years to become more competitive. Everyting was fine as long as there was no real competition to threaten them, their money, recruiting, sponsors, and status. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contreuph Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Well, said and very classy!!! OC is a great organization as are many DCI groups and that's the way it should stay!WP Thank you. I believe it would be just shameful to see re-emerging corps like VK, Spartans, and Spokane Thunder go back under in such a short time. And let's not get started on what this will do to the BRAND NEW drum corps that were just approved. I would love more competition in Open Class, and with this proposal, I will see the opposite. To put it into words everyone would understand: This is a VERY bad idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brians Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 I guess I would say to the G7 corps, if money is an issue, simply go out and get more and dont rely so heavely on show revenue. That is what all the other non higher placing corps have had to do to become more competitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 but, last time I checked, no one is stopping any drum corps from rising up and being great.to imply such (slotting will never allow anyone new into the top 7) is an insult to the judges. any of the non-G7 should (if they so desire) build their corps into championship calibre organizations (certainly there are enough examples of how to do it) - then they should kick some G7 butt! really...I'm so tired of hearing the whining... one point you miss...that corps can get that good...and get voted down by the G7 anyways Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 (edited) Well, alot of the kids I have spoken too are not happy, Im talkin only thirty or so kids,. so its really doesnt say much either way....... Funny I read that some think this idea will drive membership up.....are you really that naive' to think that these shows, or this new activity is going to be anything like what drum corps is today ?? G Edited May 27, 2010 by GMichael1230 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wesleyrp Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Well, alot of the kids I have spoken too are not happy, Im talkin only thirty or so kids,. so its really doesant day much either way.......Funny I read that some think this idea will drive membership up.....are you really that naive' to think that these shows, or this new activity is going to be anything like what drum corps is today ?? G !!!!!!AMEN!!!!!! Wes P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
see me Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Thank you.I believe it would be just shameful to see re-emerging corps like VK, Spartans, and Spokane Thunder go back under in such a short time. And let's not get started on what this will do to the BRAND NEW drum corps that were just approved. I would love more competition in Open Class, and with this proposal, I will see the opposite. To put it into words everyone would understand: This is a VERY bad idea. VERY BAD indeed has any of the oc corps director chimed in on this? how they feel about it? would be nice to hear that too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerguy315 Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Kids, like we all were once just want to perform. I think you are out of touch with the activity if you believe that kids will abandon the G7 corps. and this is why boo-ing the kids is not misdirected. They are funneling their thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours of work into this proposal and the vision of these corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybersnyder Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Are you a teacher? Because if you are you'd see that I and others are not whining or calling slotting or whatever you claim I am saying. I am simply stating it is unrealistic to see so many talent laden young people that we teach go and try out for the SUPER DUPER G7 Corps and nothing else. But with the current proposals I am betting that the numbers of students tryout will increase including the ones that are not ready for it. Is that healthy? As I said I have kids in many corps including some of the G7 groups and I can tell you that they are all proud of their organizations and the teamwork they are a part of. But this system that's being proposed no matter what the intention is would be a slap in the face of young musicians that are already a part of great teams. These Groups ARE working to be the BEST their organizations can be! Also keep in mind that many of the G7 Corps membership is derived from students that marched in the "NON G7" groups and then went to the G7 corps. My point, take those students out of the mix and how legit would your arguement be that "All Corps Just Need to Get That Good." Ok, so find a way to keep all those kids in the corps and keep them loyal and see what happens. Make a difference? You bet it does!!! Check the average age of the G7 corps vs. the non-G7 corps... Again I ask from a teacher standpoint, if those corps are that old already are they going to be taking a lot of younger students in their organizations? I again say this--- It is unrealistic for students trying out for those corps if this proposal passes because most will not get the time of day!! My take, you may not agree, but I am thinking from the student perspective and not My Corps vs. Your Corps.Wes P Not sure if you accidentally quoted the wrong person or I didn't explain well, but I think we're saying the same thing. In fact, I will no longer play music that has a G7 chord. (Sorry, gotta throw a little humor in because this is depressing.) 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.