Jeff Ream Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 here's one possible benefit.... the feeling that people may speak up more against proposed changes down the road. it seems every time a controversial proposal comes out, one or two make a stand, but then go with the flow. Maybe now, more will feel empowered to say no BOB, I agree with your words of warning. But, I do think that on the upside, this G7 debacle has revealed the elitism which does exist in a handful of directors. Things will never be the same. These directors have caused irreparable harm to their corps' credibility, and going forward, most non G7 directors will not be so easily led down the garden path. The mask has been taken off, revealing a twisted, self-centered philosophy that goes against the grain of what drum corps has been and continues to be.They may still be at the table, but they, in my judgement, have fewer chips than ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liahona Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 here's one possible benefit....the feeling that people may speak up more against proposed changes down the road. it seems every time a controversial proposal comes out, one or two make a stand, but then go with the flow. Maybe now, more will feel empowered to say no I have to agree with you Jeff on this one. Perhaps that MAY be the ultimate positive thing that come out of this...Only time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 Well, perhaps they'll wait until August 15th to send their letter to all the DCI show sponsors, declaring that they will not participate in any DCI events in 2011 and, thus, if the sponsors want them, they should run G7 events instead of DCI events. Once a Corps leaves DCI , unless there were Covenant not to Compete Clauses in DCI membership agreements, they'd just have to pay the exit fees ( if any )then they would be free to negotiate with whomever they wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 here's one possible benefit....the feeling that people may speak up more against proposed changes down the road. it seems every time a controversial proposal comes out, one or two make a stand, but then go with the flow. Maybe now, more will feel empowered to say no That's the way of the world. One or two strong willed personalities make a stand.......and the rest go along to get along. I see it in the business world all the time. I bet you do too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I would take them (Hop and the little hops) at their word: As they state in their presentation...there will be change next year. I think they fully intend that either DCI changes / adopts their proposal, or they will leave DCI. The possibilities could be exciting. Watching BD, Cavies and Cadets take turns winning every year (with the occasional once-every-ten-year surprise like PR a couple yrs ago) is becoming stale. If the G7 leaves, well, things will be different, way different. Maybe not so bad. Maybe it will be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMadMan Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I agree with those who say they think this was the ultimate eye-opener for the other member corps. I think the G7 (or Gibbs/Hoppy, at least) got a bit greedy and pushed this too fast. Why would they do this?? Well, perhaps it was ego...and I'm sure that did play into it a bit. Or perhaps it was the threat of a desperate need. We know Cadets have had some financial issues in the past few years. Maybe things are a bit worse there than we know. And Gibbs knew this challenge to his bingo operations was eminent, therefore threating his main revenue source. Coincidences? Maybe...maybe not. But the point is, now everybody is wise to their game. Even those who all along insisted that this isn't where things were headed. That was the G7's fatal mistake. And if BD, Cadets and Crown were to leave, would it really be the end of the world? Actually, I might bring some parity back to drum corps. Can't say that'd be a bad thing...nor would ridding the activity of toxic personalities be either. But I digress... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 That's the way of the world. One or two strong willed personalities make a stand.......and the rest go along to get along. I see it in the business world all the time. I bet you do too. I do and I don't....at my level, the mortgage industry is a little more entertaining and less ego driven. But maybe now, a change to that thought process in drum corps may be in order Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I agree with those who say they think this was the ultimate eye-opener for the other member corps. I think the G7 (or Gibbs/Hoppy, at least) got a bit greedy and pushed this too fast. Why would they do this?? Well, perhaps it was ego...and I'm sure that did play into it a bit. Or perhaps it was the threat of a desperate need. We know Cadets have had some financial issues in the past few years. Maybe things are a bit worse there than we know. And Gibbs knew this challenge to his bingo operations was eminent, therefore threating his main revenue source. Coincidences? Maybe...maybe not.But the point is, now everybody is wise to their game. Even those who all along insisted that this isn't where things were headed. That was the G7's fatal mistake. And if BD, Cadets and Crown were to leave, would it really be the end of the world? Actually, I might bring some parity back to drum corps. Can't say that'd be a bad thing...nor would ridding the activity of toxic personalities be either. But I digress... Only to have to next set of toxic personalities ,as you call it, take over probably within 20 seconds. Kind of like Hockey Dad said. It doesn't take long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I do and I don't....at my level, the mortgage industry is a little more entertaining and less ego driven. But maybe now, a change to that thought process in drum corps may be in order When you have an activity that is competition driven you will , and have always had " EGO DRIVEN " situations and people. The good and bad of it. All you have to do is read it on most of the DCP threads , including the present and the historical threads to see that. There,and in all aspects of life, business as well as past time activities lines that get crossed between what drives people. EGO leading to success, the need for recogintion which drives people to be the best at all costs, or the group activity that as a mass of people are led by dynamic personalities to reach a place of success or recognition never dreamed of by the individual. Ok youre problbly saying "what the hell did they just say"....haha sorry it's the Psychologist in me. Can you tell maybe I work in the Psych. field exactly on this subject. SORRY. Bottom line, admit or not we are in an activity that people crave many things, friendship, brotherhood, the lime light, that standing O, the spot light, recognition, MANY things, some good some you have to be careful of. SO, WHEW , sorry, change whatever, go back to whatever, and you see people are just people. People are fairly predictable......................................Ok Im done. Now how many out there said good?.....lol Thanks for letting me ramble a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 i agree. as a friend of mine said recently about a local band circuit he is involved in: "the good thing is the directors run it. the bad thing is the directors runs it" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts