DCP DCI Round Table Discussion

[mobrien]

Cavaliers don't win a lot because they spend a lot of money - they win because they have a better developed management system and a recruiting vibe that attracts many of the best potential talent. The myth that the top corps win because they're "rich" is just that - a myth. Cavaliers' budget is routinely the same or less than corps that are several spots down from them. One area in which they DO do exceptionally well is in merchandise sales, but that follows success on the field - not the other way around. If Crossmen were seen as being hot, they'd be selling a lot more t-shirts too.

And your objection to my suggestion that WGI is the model misses the whole point. Until someone at the DCI office starts understanding that they have to LEAD rather than follow, they'll never be able to grow the activity. You have to create the format from the top, then invite people to join. Until the format is in place, no one will start a competing unit. I like Acheson, and respect what he's done in steering clear of the disaster he was facing in the 90s, but he's not a visionary. He's a manager.

And what the activity needs now is a visionary at the top. They need a Pete Rozelle; someone who can lead the 'owners' to do what's in their best interest. That person doesn't seem to be working in the office, unfortunately.

Edited October 11, 2010 by mobrien

[BRASSO]

Cavaliers don't win a lot because they spend a lot of money - they win because they have a better developed management system and a recruiting vibe that attracts many of the best potential talent. The myth that the top corps win because they're "rich" is just that - a myth. Cavaliers' budget is routinely the same or less than corps that are several spots down from them.

Top Corps " win " because.... they " win ".

Theres no " draft ".... or transfer rules ".... or salary cap ", etc. There's no parity in Drum Corps.

The reason 3 Corps have won over 80% of the DCI Titles since 1972 is because that " recruiting vibe " you refer to tells the potential recruit that one of these Corps is going to be in contention to get the recruit a Championship ring.

Pioneer might have a better " management system " in place than the Cavaliers in terms of how they utilize their available resources. It doesn't matter to a potential recruit that is looking to march with the best.

Edited October 11, 2010 by BRASSO

[mobrien]

Pioneer might have a better " management system " in place than the Cavaliers in terms of how they utilize their available resources. It doesn't matter to a potential recruit that is looking to march with the best.

That requires some stretch of the imagination - sort of like saying that the local newstand has just as good or a better management system than Borders. If that were true, wouldn't the newsstand owner be selling more product?

It's a competitive society that these corps have all signed up for - those at the top will be those who are best managed. There is nothing physically restricting Pioneer or Spirit or Glassmen from winning next year - all they have to do is come up with better programs and decide that they want to WIN rather than just compete. The fact that most of the corps in the bottom half of WC aren't even TRYING to win is going to make them less appealing to potential members - change the attitudes, and you change the game.

But I've given up hope that anyone at that level cares enough to try.

Edited October 11, 2010 by mobrien

[tommytimp]

That requires some stretch of the imagination - sort of like saying that the local newstand has just as good or a better management system than Borders. If that were true, wouldn't the newsstand owner be selling more product?

It's a competitive society that these corps have all signed up for - those at the top will be those who are best managed. There is nothing physically restricting Pioneer or Spirit or Glassmen from winning next year - all they have to do is come up with better programs and decide that they want to WIN rather than just compete. The fact that most of the corps in the bottom half of WC aren't even TRYING to win is going to make them less appealing to potential members - change the attitudes, and you change the game.

But I've given up hope that anyone at that level cares enough to try.

It's entirely possible that "winning" is defined differently by all three of those corps. We all pretty much know how BD defines winning. Do we know how Pioneer or Spirit defines it? Or the Troopers? Because if everyone defines it as "winning DCI this season," almost everyone's goals and strategy and mission statement suck, since only one corps wins DCI every year. I don't believe everyone defines winning the same way, of course. And per your newsstand analogy, I'd hope that the newsstand guy has a goal defined by the size of his business, and not by the size of his jimmy, if you take my meaning. I'd hope most corps are that way.

For my part, when I joined Geneseo the goal was "Top 12 in 83." Period. Goal not achieved, many people left prior to 84. By the time I aged out, with a continuously shrinking corps, the goal was finally just to do our best and hope that takes us where we think we should be.

[mobrien]

It's entirely possible that "winning" is defined differently by all three of those corps. We all pretty much know how BD defines winning. Do we know how Pioneer or Spirit defines it? Or the Troopers? Because if everyone defines it as "winning DCI this season," almost everyone's goals and strategy and mission statement suck, since only one corps wins DCI every year. I don't believe everyone defines winning the same way, of course. And per your newsstand analogy, I'd hope that the newsstand guy has a goal defined by the size of his business, and not by the size of his jimmy, if you take my meaning. I'd hope most corps are that way.

For my part, when I joined Geneseo the goal was "Top 12 in 83." Period. Goal not achieved, many people left prior to 84. By the time I aged out, with a continuously shrinking corps, the goal was finally just to do our best and hope that takes us where we think we should be.

I agree that there should be different metrics for success, but if you're playing in the "major leagues" of your chosen sport - which is what World Class is supposed to be, then competitive success is the primary metric. If it's just about teaching kids how to manage themselves and work as a team, then that's what Open Class is for.

I've already stated pretty clearly that I don't see room for growth at the top, because it's apparently too hard to do - and that I DO see room for growing the activity at the part-time, weekend only level if someone within DCI has the stones to take the ball and run with the concept. But that doesn't appear to be imminent, so I'm not sure it would ever happen.

[mobrien]

It's entirely possible that "winning" is defined differently by all three of those corps. We all pretty much know how BD defines winning. Do we know how Pioneer or Spirit defines it? Or the Troopers? Because if everyone defines it as "winning DCI this season," almost everyone's goals and strategy and mission statement suck, since only one corps wins DCI every year.

I agree that there should be different metrics for success, but if you're playing in the "major leagues" of your chosen sport - which is what World Class is supposed to be - then competitive success is the primary metric. If it's just about teaching kids how to manage themselves and work as a team, then that's what Open Class is for. But I don't see that most of the current WC corps have strategies for building themselves into the next champion. Blue Stars appear to have a plan, as did Crown 5 or 6 years ago, but there are too many others who are there just to be there. Accepting stagnation in the lower ranks is counter to the goal of growing participation and fan interest.

I've already stated pretty clearly that I don't see room for growth at the top, because it's apparently too hard to do - and that I DO see room for growing the activity at the part-time, weekend only level if someone within DCI has the stones to take the ball and run with the concept. But that doesn't appear to be imminent, so I'm not sure it would ever happen.

Edited October 11, 2010 by mobrien

[BRASSO]

That requires some stretch of the imagination - sort of like saying that the local newstand has just as good or a better management system than Borders. If that were true, wouldn't the newsstand owner be selling more product?

It's a competitive society that these corps have all signed up for - those at the top will be those who are best managed. There is nothing physically restricting Pioneer or Spirit or Glassmen from winning next year - all they have to do is come up with better programs and decide that they want to WIN rather than just compete. The fact that most of the corps in the bottom half of WC aren't even TRYING to win is going to make them less appealing to potential members - change the attitudes, and you change the game.

But I've given up hope that anyone at that level cares enough to try.

It is not incompatible at all to find that the local newstand runs a more efficient resource and management system than does a larger enterprise like Borders while selling less product than Borders.

GM sells a lot of cars. Many more cars in fact than some other smaller car manufacturers from around the world. Does that mean that because GM sold more cars that GM had a more efficient management system than did the smaller car manufactuers ? Well, I think you know the answer to this.

The Tampa Rays might be the most well managed team in all of baseball... from manager on the field to upper management. Conversely, the New York Yankees are a mess when it comes to management. Joe Girardi is an average field manager at best. Steinbrenner, the owner, is pretty much a dolt, and Brian Cashman, the GM overspends on players. But the Yankees win. Why ? Well, because they have players that want to go there, thats why. And why do they want tyo go there ? Because they will get payed well, and have a chance to win. The Yankees used to win even when manager Billy Martin was intoxicated for many of the games in the dugout. The Yankees won even when manager Joe Torre's eyelids would droop and he'd begin to snore in the dugout... and on and on. It's not the management. It's the players. And the best players routinely go to where the winners have gone before. It's not rocket science. Same with the Celtics, Lakers, Ohio State and Texas football, Uconn Women's Basketball, Duke Men's Basketball, etc. The best teams beget the best players. The Best players don't always win. But enough times to continue the pipeline to the best, year after year, after year.

Edited October 11, 2010 by BRASSO

[mobrien]

When a sports franchise sits on the bottom of the standings year after year, the devotees of the sport generally recognize that they do so because they are poorly managed. At one point, Cavaliers' Board voted to fold the corps at the end of that season (did you guys know this?) - what turned it around was a stroke of very good luck in the guise of Rosemont's pledge to help, and a totally new management team and staff that decided that being competitive (not "winning", but being competitive) had to become important again.

The rest, as they say, is history.

I'd love to see Spirit battling it out with Crown and Cadets. Pioneer being able to look down on 10 other corps who placed lower than them in prelims would be great. But until they decide to go there, all the hoping in the world ain't gonna matter.

BTW, Toyota has been the best-managed car company over the last 30 years - as evidenced by their sales and their products. If Subaru knew how to design and sell cars in the volume that Toyota does, they would. That doesn't mean that Subaru isn't "successful" (they are), but their success is tempered by the realization that someone else started with the same basic raw idea and smoked them in the marketplace. Of the two companies, one established a niche, the other became the world's biggest motor company. However the consumer - and the industry would be well served if there were 10 different companies as dedicated to becoming number one as Toyota was. Stronger competition breeds better products and more innovative ideas - the same way that drum corps would be helped if there were 12 or 13 corps every year who entered the season determined to try and take it all.

Edited October 11, 2010 by mobrien

[BRASSO]

When a sports franchise sits on the bottom of the standings year after year, the devotees of the sport generally recognize that they do so because they are poorly managed. At one point, Cavaliers' Board voted to fold the corps at the end of that season (did you guys know this?) - what turned it around was a stroke of very good luck in the guise of Rosemont's pledge to help, and a totally new management team and staff that decided that being competitive (not "winning", but being competitive) had to become important again.

The rest, as they say, is history.

I'd love to see Spirit battling it out with Crown and Cadets. Pioneer being able to look down on 10 other corps who placed lower than them in prelims would be great. But until they decide to go there, all the hoping in the world ain't gonna matter.

BTW, Toyota has been the best-managed car company over the last 30 years - as evidenced by their sales and their products. If Subaru knew how to design and sell cars in the volume that Toyota does, they would. That doesn't mean that Subaru isn't "successful" (they are), but their success is tempered by the realization that someone else started with the same basic raw idea and smoked them in the marketplace.

There is no correlation to great management and the volume of somethng sold, nor to whether that organization is efficiently run or not. It's THE PRODUCT that matters, not the management. The US Government sells a lot of Bonds and Treasury Bills. Is the US Government a well managed, efficient organization ? I know, I know, it's a stupid question, as we know the answer. This illustrates my point..... as for Toyota, it was't so much that their ability to sell a lot of cars is what made them an efficient organization, it was their ability to turn those sales into shareholder wealth with proper financial use of the profit on the sale of those cars they sold, which in turn let to institutional investors, investing in Toyota stock. GM sold a lot of cars, but they mismanaged the profits from those cars, and eventually they cut corners on quality, and the whole thing unraveled for them, including investors willing to invest in their stock. GM still sells a lot of cars today ( although not as much as in the 60's ). But GM went broke essentially because the PRODUCT no longer was what the public wanted. ( are you listening DCI ? )

Edited October 11, 2010 by BRASSO

[Kaleb Birdsong]

Here we go. My first ever DCP reply/comment...what have you haha

1. What do you think about the music being played?

I love the music being played.Its that simple. Yes, some of it can be "boring" but who am I? Its all a matter of opinion and there a million different biases on why this music is good and that music is bad.

2. What do you about visuals? (Edit: I'll presume this refers to props, yes?)

I think that props work for some shows and for others they dont.I think a prop should be an interactive (moving?) object (non-mechanical) with the performers. Again weather or not it adds* is the opinion of the fans. On the subject of "should props be included in the scoring" i believe they should. If anything, it would go under the overall GE of the show right? If the prop is something cool and innovative and works with the show it will make it better and receive a high score and if it is distracting, has no purpose and takes away from the show it will get a lower score. again this is all subject to opinion and with a 327347547 different biases on why and why not.

3. How can we grow the activity?

Ill be honest, I'm just a kid that doesn't know much about economics and having the activity publicized on tv or internet or what ever media. I do know from experience that not many young people know about the activity. When I was in middle school starting in band, I never knew what drum corps was. Im sure I would have thought it was just as cool as I did when I discovered it in high school if I had just been exposed to it. Another thing I think would be cool is if there were more local shows. at places such as middle school and "obscure" places never though to have drum corps. Start up street teams in these small towns and communities a couple of days in advance (tell them months and weeks in advance and they will have forgotten by then ( they dont even know what drum corps is remember)) to get the word out. Just some thoughts of mine.

4. What is the purpose of drum corps?

I think the purpose of drum corps is to provide entertainment to an audience with levels of performance excellence not often seen in your everyday "staged act". Its purpose is also to provide youth with a medium of some of the best music,leadership, and performance education in the world.

5. What do you think about electronics?

I think electrons (like props) sometimes work and sometimes dont. Some of my personal pet-peeves about electronics is when they are used to back up bass and used to replace instruments that can just as easily be used such as chimes. They just need to be used tastefully. Some examples of tasteful electronic use (IMO) are the blue devils drum break in 09. The synthesizer produced this ambient deep noise for the background for the drum solo. Another instance was the 2010 cavaliers use during the "This Is My Rifle" bit. there was an electronic drum that was used to make the guitar wah-wah effect. Both very cool uses of electronics. One of my biases if want to call it that (i marched bd '10) was the glass breaking sound effects in the show. cant really take a mirror out on the field and break it can you? also totally relevant to the show concept.

6. Should we / how can we make drum corps more inclusive to the impoverished?

*I wont include minorities/race in my discussion.*

Should we? I think so.

How can we? There has to be a grant/scholarship/waiver/ect... of some sort. Where this money will come from I dont know. Fundraisers,donors???

7. How do you feel about the "G7" proposal? (Edit: For perspective, consider mentioning if you are an alum of or otherwise connected to a "G7" corps.)

My connection: I'm a member of the Blue Devils who are included in the G7 list of corps.

My thoughts: I think it would shrink drum corps as an activity. You need the smaller corps/feeder corps to give, not less capable, but less skilled performers as places to learn and getter better so they can have a chance at shooting for a higher more elite corps. I guarantee I would never have been able to make blue devils without marching open class with Memphis Sound first. It was there I learned what tour,marching.......what drum corps was all about! Its like minor league baseball or arena football. You gotta start somewhere. These smaller corps need to be treated equally as the top tier corps of DCI.