Minneapolis Corps Directors Meeting

[Liahona]

Your comments Keyboard Guy are spot-on.

First...Do you always have to quote with an annoying font and size?...lol It is interesting that you have used tahoma font. It actually in 20pt format is the best font to use for a "headline" on the web. Try using DCP etiquette please.

Second...back on topic....

Your comments Keyboard Guy are spot-on. I happen to think that there is a recognition among the elite --the G7 that perhaps they have --in fact-- gone too far and made the "art form" less accessible and as you might say "unreachable" to the general public and to a wider audience. I think they run the risk of not only alienating their core audience --that has been their loyal base through thick and thin, but they have little chance of building the overall audience by exposing it to a new and curious fan base in the future. I think they understand this and may even be interested in simplifying or abandoning the competitive judging all together ---although you'll soon see that there is a vocal backlash against this idea and it will start to show up here almost immediately.

A recognition among the elite? When the heck did that ever matter to the "powers that be"? Who's fault was that anyway if that is even the case which I find hard to believe from those set of EGOS. As far as alienating the core audience....ATTENTION PLEASE..this has already happened!!!

But all you have to do is go to the scores summary page from the Atlanta Regional on the DCI.org page and click on expanded view and if you are like me, you start to laugh. 10ths of points in 30+ categories for 20+ corps and it is all so subjective and unsupported by fact that it reminds me of Animal House and being put on "double secret probation". I think adding more entertainment value to a show (like Madison has done year in and year out) must be the future of drum corps. And I can see G7 abandoning the grind AND EXPENSE of the current format to stage instead 6 - 10 three-day weekends of a totally rehearsed show format in major stadiums, in major markets across the country. They'd have days off on Monday and Thursday and be available to compete in DCI shows on Tuesday and Wednesday enroute to the next 3-day SPECTACULAR show site. Their show, their format, their outcome can be whatever they as producer/partners want it to be and I think they have the resources to open up as early as June, 2011 with or without the blessing of DCI. Others disagree. But time will tell.

I think we can all can perhaps agree that the scoring system is not perfect. I for one would like to see some changes in this regard. As far as "double secret probation" that is laughable at best...it always easy to point out FLAWS in something. It is another entirely to actually come up with viable solutions for the same.

[Martin I. Zing]

Do you always have to quote with an annoying font and size?

And color. I believe this is called "style". Suggest you look into it and consider developing your own.

[JimF-LowBari]

And color. I believe this is called "style". Suggest you look into it and consider developing your own.

Some perfer substance over style...... Personally it just looks more like "trying to be different".....

[Martin I. Zing]

As far as alienating the core audience....ATTENTION PLEASE..this has already happened!!!

Agreed. It started long ago. Now tell us something new.

I think we can all can perhaps agree that the scoring system is not perfect. I for one would like to see some changes in this regard. As far as "double secret probation" that is laughable at best...it always easy to point out FLAWS in something. It is another entirely to actually come up with viable solutions for the same.

". . . I think they understand this and may even be interested in simplifying or abandoning the competitive judging all together " ---Martin I. Zing

Gee, I thought this is a pretty viable and dramatic solution at the same time. I don't know how many times I can say it on here before it starts to sink in but . . . the scoring system is a house of cards that has been used for the most part to falsely motivate young adults in order to get them to work towards hazy and constantly shifting goals in a summer filled with ambiquous quests.

Meanwhile, to the person sitting in the stands --both jaded veteran and rookie, contest scores have very little substanative meaning and over the years have become even more multi-layered and meaningless as the choice of music has become more obsure and less "humable". So this is why you continue to see words on these boards like esotheric and unfriendly and less reachable or "touchable". This results in fewer emotional connections, and in the long run, smaller crowds and less repeat business. Overall, the activity loses crowd appeal and its growth potential slows down both from inside and outside the ranks. The judging becomes less meaningful if the "crowd favorite" continues to finish further down the order because the audiences' opinion is rejected. In exchange for their opinion --AND THEIR DOLLAR, the audience likes to feel that they are being told they are correct and their hunches are being REINFORCED.

Drum corps --perhaps more than any other single "industry" is often guilty of offending their audience because of their elitist, inbred judging criteria. The only other groups I quickly think have violated these trusts over the years might be opera and beauty pageants, but even opera --now seen in movie theatres and PFV-- has changed in recent years to reflect a combination of younger stars finally moving into popular roles over the older more traditional "divas".

I envision a day in the not too distant future --if DC is to survive-- when competitive scorekeeping is not necessarily the driving factor in the shows. And meanwhile the motivating hook for the performers is to then travel the country with friends, learn/perfect a skill, have some fun, perform before thousands, earn some scholarship money, make memories . . . and hopefully try to reduce the sun, blisters and the late nights just a little.

[ShortAndFast]

". . . I think they understand this and may even be interested in simplifying or abandoning the competitive judging all together " ---Martin I. Zing

Gee, I thought this is a pretty viable and dramatic solution at the same time. I don't know how many times I can say it on here before it starts to sink in but . . . the scoring system is a house of cards that has been used for the most part to falsely motivate young adults in order to get them to work towards hazy and constantly shifting goals in a summer filled with ambiquous quests.

Meanwhile, to the person sitting in the stands --both jaded veteran and rookie, contest scores have very little substanative meaning and over the years have become even more multi-layered and meaningless as the choice of music has become more obsure and less "humable". So this is why you continue to see words on these boards like esotheric and unfriendly and less reachable or "touchable". This results in fewer emotional connections, and in the long run, smaller crowds and less repeat business. Overall, the activity loses crowd appeal and its growth potential slows down both from inside and outside the ranks. The judging becomes less meaningful if the "crowd favorite" continues to finish further down the order because the audiences' opinion is rejected. In exchange for their opinion --AND THEIR DOLLAR, the audience likes to feel that they are being told they are correct and their hunches are being REINFORCED.

Drum corps --perhaps more than any other single "industry" is often guilty of offending their audience because of their elitist, inbred judging criteria. The only other groups I quickly think have violated these trusts over the years might be opera and beauty pageants, but even opera --now seen in movie theatres and PFV-- has changed in recent years to reflect a combination of younger stars finally moving into popular roles over the older more traditional "divas".

I envision a day in the not too distant future --if DC is to survive-- when competitive scorekeeping is not necessarily the driving factor in the shows. And meanwhile the motivating hook for the performers is to then travel the country with friends, learn/perfect a skill, have some fun, perform before thousands, earn some scholarship money, make memories . . . and hopefully try to reduce the sun, blisters and the late nights just a little.

I think that you would be a more interesting troll if you displayed even a little knowledge of the last couple decades of DCI. If you believe your own assessment of the state of DCI, which corps have lead the way in this style of show design? Which ones have proposed and voted for the judging system you dislike?

If I may restate your views: you believe that judging rewards esoteric material over popular material, that the Madison Scouts are awesome and entertaining, and that drum corps is losing its audience. Yet you seem to have uncritically swallowed a proposal to kick out the Madison Scouts, to present only the corps the judges currently have on top, and to ignore the current audience in favor of a scholastic one.

Why are you a G7 supporter? Have you even read their proposal?

[BRASSO]

". . . I think they understand this and may even be interested in simplifying or abandoning the competitive judging all together " ---Martin I. Zing

Gee, I thought this is a pretty viable and dramatic solution at the same time. I don't know how many times I can say it on here before it starts to sink in but . . . the scoring system is a house of cards that has been used for the most part to falsely motivate young adults in order to get them to work towards hazy and constantly shifting goals in a summer filled with ambiquous quests.

Meanwhile, to the person sitting in the stands --both jaded veteran and rookie, contest scores have very little substanative meaning and over the years have become even more multi-layered and meaningless as the choice of music has become more obsure and less "humable". So this is why you continue to see words on these boards like esotheric and unfriendly and less reachable or "touchable". This results in fewer emotional connections, and in the long run, smaller crowds and less repeat business. Overall, the activity loses crowd appeal and its growth potential slows down both from inside and outside the ranks. The judging becomes less meaningful if the "crowd favorite" continues to finish further down the order because the audiences' opinion is rejected. In exchange for their opinion --AND THEIR DOLLAR, the audience likes to feel that they are being told they are correct and their hunches are being REINFORCED.

Drum corps --perhaps more than any other single "industry" is often guilty of offending their audience because of their elitist, inbred judging criteria. The only other groups I quickly think have violated these trusts over the years might be opera and beauty pageants, but even opera --now seen in movie theatres and PFV-- has changed in recent years to reflect a combination of younger stars finally moving into popular roles over the older more traditional "divas".

I envision a day in the not too distant future --if DC is to survive-- when competitive scorekeeping is not necessarily the driving factor in the shows. And meanwhile the motivating hook for the performers is to then travel the country with friends, learn/perfect a skill, have some fun, perform before thousands, earn some scholarship money, make memories . . . and hopefully try to reduce the sun, blisters and the late nights just a little.

Nobody but you is suggesting that as a " solution ", that Corps deemphasize the competition aspect of Drum Corps... or move into a summer exhibition mode for the 7 weeks realm as you suggested above. Not DCI. Not the G-7. Fans are not clamoring to see Corps in exhibition as near as I can tell either. Thus your ending paragraph comment that you " envsion a day in the not too distant future when competitive scorekeeping " takes a back seat is simply not going to happen. This thread incidentally is about the latest info on the current G-7 proposal, as well as the DCI response. There is no suggestion in the current G-7 proposal to consider deemphasizing competition in their propsosal. Quite the contrary. The proposal calls for the group slotting system they are proposing mandate that the G-7 select their own judges for their segmented portion of the summer competitive season. The G-7 is not interested in deemphasizing the competitive nature of the activity. They are interested, in part, in positioning themselves with an even MORE competitive advantage by the opportunity ( as the proposal states ) to " manage the judges ". It might be helpful here on this thread to discuss what is presently before us, not something that is not currently being discussed, ie Corps do" exhibitiions ". Frankly, I see no call from anyone that Corps do " exhibitions". So lets just set that notion aside, as this is simply NOT going to happen anytime " soon " as you believe is about to happen. And PLEASE... lets get back to discussing the G-7 proposal as we understand it to be, as well as DCI 's response.... and we fans reactions to THAT. Otherwise, we'll get sidetracked on this thread on things that are not germane to the thread topic at all.. Thank You.

Edited August 3, 2010 by BRASSO

[Liahona]

Nobody but you is suggesting that as a " solution ", that Corps deemphasize the competition aspect of Drum Corps... or move into a summer exhibition mode for the 7 weeks realm as you suggested above. Not DCI. Not the G-7. Fans are not clamoring to see Corps in exhibition as near as I can tell either. Thus your ending paragraph comment that you " envsion a day in the not too distant future when competitive scorekeeping " takes a back seat is simply not going to happen. This thread incidentally is about the latest info on the current G-7 proposal, as well as the DCI response. There is no suggestion in the current G-7 proposal to consider deemphasizing competition in their propsosal. Quite the contrary. The proposal calls for the group slotting system they are proposing mandate that the G-7 select their own judges for their segmented portion of the summer competitive season. The G-7 is not interested in deemphasizing the competitive nature of the activity. They are interested, in part, in positioning themselves with an even MORE competitive advantage by the opportunity ( as the proposal states ) to " manage the judges ". It might be helpful here on this thread to discuss what is presently before us, not something that is not currently being discussed, ie Corps do" exhibitiions ". Frankly, I see no call from anyone that Corps do " exhibitions". So lets just set that notion aside, as this is simply NOT going to happen anytime " soon " as you believe is about to happen. And PLEASE... lets get back to discussing the G-7 proposal as we understand it to be, as well as DCI 's response.... and we fans reactions to THAT. Otherwise, we'll get sidetracked on this thread on things that are not germane to the thread topic at all.. Thank You.

BRASSO you are always so well spoken....my thoughts very similar to this...BRAVO!

[Martin I. Zing]

Nobody but you is suggesting that as a " solution ", that Corps deemphasize the competition aspect of Drum Corps... or move into a summer exhibition mode for the 7 weeks realm as you suggested above. Not DCI. Not the G-7. Fans are not clamoring to see Corps in exhibition as near as I can tell either. Thus your ending paragraph comment that you " envsion a day in the not too distant future when competitive scorekeeping " takes a back seat is simply not going to happen. This thread incidentally is about the latest info on the current G-7 proposal, as well as the DCI response. There is no suggestion in the current G-7 proposal to consider deemphasizing competition in their propsosal. Quite the contrary. The proposal calls for the group slotting system they are proposing mandate that the G-7 select their own judges for their segmented portion of the summer competitive season. The G-7 is not interested in deemphasizing the competitive nature of the activity. They are interested, in part, in positioning themselves with an even MORE competitive advantage by the opportunity ( as the proposal states ) to "manage the judges". It might be helpful here on this thread to discuss what is presently before us, not something that is not currently being discussed, ie Corps do" exhibitiions ". Frankly, I see no call from anyone that Corps do " exhibitions". So lets just set that notion aside, as this is simply NOT going to happen anytime " soon " as you believe is about to happen. And PLEASE... lets get back to discussing the G-7 proposal as we understand it to be, as well as DCI 's response.... and we fans reactions to THAT. Otherwise, we'll get sidetracked on this thread on things that are not germane to the thread topic at all.. Thank You.

Me thinks you (and a few others) are yet unable to step far enough back in order to see the bigger picture contained in the G7 proposal.

Your "fans" are the tiny group of existing DC fans --the 1800, that show up at places like Allentown, and continue to provide the chump change (God bless them!) to keep the activity limping along. They're not clamoring for anything because either they don't know any better or they are brainwashed or have a vested interest as you might.

IN the new model, I'm not talking about those "traditional" fans. I'm interested --as I believe the G7 leadership is-- in cultivating a NEW wider audience that will number in the hundreds of thousands --just as Cirque du Soleil did. They will not be relying on the "Ringling and Shrine" core audience --so to speak, of DC. Therefore, competitive SCORES will not be all that important. Will they use some sort of scoring system? Maybe! Perhaps they will let the crowd use their cellphones to vote. Who knows? It doesn't matter now and it will matter less then. ONCE AGAIN, TRY TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX.

Will traditional, existing DC fans follow the G7 corps over to view their SPECTACULARS? Sure, some will. If for no other reason than curiosity. But DCI shows will still exist with their traditional 30+ categories of meaningless scorekeeping --for a few years until it starts to crumble, simplify or condense. As I wrote elsewhere, by then, there might be a demand for a G14 or G21.

BRASSO the word "exhibition" that you find so offensive is the one that I find so humorous because 90% of the kids stepping on the field every night CURRENTLY understand that they are in exhibition and have little chance of winning because despite whatever they are able to do, the rules and regs and instruction they have been given will PREVENT them from doing so. They are boxed in and over time, they've come to understand that they are surrounded by a pre-set of phoney baloney rules to keep them under a form of double secret probation. Meanwhile, as they travel the country, they also see BD keep winning and yet they see Madison and Cavies and Crown get the biggest ovations in city after city. You can't fool them forever just as you can't keep telling everyone on here that BLAST was a tremendous success because some people who read this actually saw it, while others have spent time in Branson, Missouri!

And consider that "manage the judges" just might TRANSLATE to mean eliminate the judges or "fix the judges" or the scores or the scoring process BECAUSE IT IS MEANINGLESS IN THE END which is what many think of it currently. You defend it vigorously and this my friend is an argument that you would lose in open court.

As for getting sidetracked in this discussion, might I suggest trying to get out of the oldtyme trench you're in and come up for a little fresh air and sunlight. DON'T INTERPRET THE ORIGINAL (NOW STALE) PROPOSAL SO LITERALLY. It was a starting point to bring the issue to the forefront and get the ball rolling and ignite the discussion. It has already evolved several times, you can count on it. Plus, so much has been written and analysis continues here and elsewhere 24/7 --so how can any of us keep current with a moving target? To begin with, try reading between the lines of their proposal just a little. Let your imaginaton fly. I think you've inhaled a few too many diesel fumes. Nevertheless, BRASSO, I hope you understood the main message and have interpretted it correctly. As mobrien and others have pointed out, it is a call for help. More money is needed if the activity is to survive . . . particularly among the upper tier of performing units. Expenses and debt are rising faster than revenue. Anyone with a glimpse at financials could understand this. When I first learned of the performance fees, I was astounded at how little they were. I can't imagine how these corps can make a go of it, so this call for help does not surprise me in the least.

Imagine taking a sharp sabre and slicing off the top 1/3rd of the stack of drum corps and you end up with the combined talent and resources of the top 7 drum corps at your disposal, with no pre-conceived rules or commitments for the summer of 2011. Start making lists of pros and cons, plus and minus. What could you do with it to MAXIMIZE the potential that you have inherited? That is how I view what might have happened here and I think this may have guided the leadership of G7 corps and led to their initial proposal. Think of it as a "wish-list." I think they took a serious multi-level look into their future, --INCLUDING A SERIOUS REVIEW OF SELF-INFLICTED MISTAKES FROM THEIR PAST-- and saw a bleak outlook, then started to consider options. This was one.

And BTW, I know it is easy to be critical but I find it cowardly to attack honesty.

[Martin I. Zing]

Some perfer substance over style...... Personally it just looks more like "trying to be different".....

And some prefer the King's English over . . . well never mind. Just teasin' JimF.

[BRASSO]

Me thinks you (and a few others) are yet unable to step far enough back in order to see the bigger picture contained in the G7 proposal.

Your "fans" are the tiny group of existing DC fans --the 1800, that show up at places like Allentown, and continue to provide the chump change (God bless them!) to keep the activity limping along. They're not clamoring for anything because either they don't know any better or they are brainwashed or have a vested interest as you might.

IN the new model, I'm not talking about those "traditional" fans. I'm interested --as I believe the G7 leadership is-- in cultivating a NEW wider audience that will number in the hundreds of thousands --just as Cirque du Soleil did. They will not be relying on the "Ringling and Shrine" core audience --so to speak, of DC. Therefore, competitive SCORES will not be all that important. Will they use some sort of scoring system? Maybe! Perhaps they will let the crowd use their cellphones to vote. Who knows? It doesn't matter now and it will matter less then. ONCE AGAIN, TRY TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX.

Will traditional, existing DC fans follow the G7 corps over to view their SPECTACULARS? Sure, some will. If for no other reason than curiosity. But DCI shows will still exist with their traditional 30+ categories of meaningless scorekeeping --for a few years until it starts to crumble, simplify or condense. As I wrote elsewhere, by then, there might be a demand for a G14 or G21.

BRASSO the word "exhibition" that you find so offensive is the one that I find so humorous because 90% of the kids stepping on the field every night CURRENTLY understand that they are in exhibition and have little chance of winning because despite whatever they are able to do, the rules and regs and instruction they have been given will PREVENT them from doing so. They are boxed in and over time, they've come to understand that they are surrounded by a pre-set of phoney baloney rules to keep them under a form of double secret probation. Meanwhile, as they travel the country, they also see BD keep winning and yet they see Madison and Cavies and Crown get the biggest ovations in city after city. You can't fool them forever just as you can't keep telling everyone on here that BLAST was a tremendous success because some people who read this actually saw it, while others have spent time in Branson, Missouri!

And consider that "manage the judges" just might TRANSLATE to mean eliminate the judges or "fix the judges" or the scores or the scoring process BECAUSE IT IS MEANINGLESS IN THE END which is what many think of it currently. You defend it vigorously and this my friend is an argument that you would lose in open court.

As for getting sidetracked in this discussion, might I suggest trying to get out of the oldtyme trench you're in and come up for a little fresh air and sunlight. DON'T INTERPRET THE ORIGINAL (NOW STALE) PROPOSAL SO LITERALLY. It was a starting point to bring the issue to the forefront and get the ball rolling and ignite the discussion. It has already evolved several times, you can count on it. Plus, so much has been written and analysis continues here and elsewhere 24/7 --so how can any of us keep current with a moving target? To begin with, try reading between the lines of their proposal just a little. Let your imaginaton fly. I think you've inhaled a few too many diesel fumes. Nevertheless, BRASSO, I hope you understood the main message and have interpretted it correctly. As mobrien and others have pointed out, it is a call for help. More money is needed if the activity is to survive . . . particularly among the upper tier of performing units. Expenses and debt are rising faster than revenue. Anyone with a glimpse at financials could understand this. When I first learned of the performance fees, I was astounded at how little they were. I can't imagine how these corps can make a go of it, so this call for help does not surprise me in the least.

Imagine taking a sharp sabre and slicing off the top 1/3rd of the stack of drum corps and you end up with the combined talent and resources of the top 7 drum corps at your disposal, with no pre-conceived rules or commitments for the summer of 2011. Start making lists of pros and cons, plus and minus. What could you do with it to MAXIMIZE the potential that you have inherited? That is how I view what might have happened here and I think this may have guided the leadership of G7 corps and led to their initial proposal. Think of it as a "wish-list." I think they took a serious multi-level look into their future, --INCLUDING A SERIOUS REVIEW OF SELF-INFLICTED MISTAKES FROM THEIR PAST-- and saw a bleak outlook, then started to consider options. This was one.

And BTW, I know it is easy to be critical but I find it cowardly to attack honesty.

Ok... now I understand more fully your 50 simultaneously moving parts going 50 different directions and have it down pat pretty well. Anything else I need to know about the G-7 proposal as you understand it to be.. or do you think you've about wrapped it up and explained it all by now ?

Edited August 3, 2010 by BRASSO