G-8/everyone else audition camp disparity

[BRASSO]

They're not grabbing the talent -- the talent is walking in the front door. And therein lies the quandary -- do you tell a kid they can't march where they want to march?

If you tell a kid who's dream is to march Crown that he can't march at another WC corps, get some experience, and transfer corps, he'll just keep showing up at Crown auditions and never march anywhere else in WC. This is already happening (see millions of threads complaining about why kids who are cut don't go march elsewhere). The limited-transfer rule would just make things worse.

We tell people all the time they can't get what they want.... in all areas of life. From the rejection of the job we applied for, to school application rejection, to rejections on a request for a date, to rejections on a business loan, to... you name it.

The concept of Corps being tougher on automatic transfer rules is NOT a new concept in Drum Corps. It's been done before in Drum Corps and done so successfully... where both previous Corps, member, and new Corps worked things out well.... but where the easy move between Corps was not done in such an open door policy fashion as it is today. Since the top Corps gets the benefit of not having to train a recruit in the fundamentals that were learned in the lower tier Corps, just have the top Corps pay a " finders fee " to the lower tier Corps that they bled of their talent. That seems fair to me. The top tier Corps gets the talented marcher, the lower tier Corps gets some need coin to rebuild with from losing the talented marcher they trained for the top Corps.

Edited November 22, 2010 by BRASSO

[charlie1223]

We tell people all the time they can't get what they want.... in all areas of life. From the rejection of the job we applied for, to school application rejection, to rejections on a request for a date, to rejections on a business loan, to... you name it.

The concept of CAorps being tougher on automatic transfer rules is NOT a new concept in Drum Corps. It'sd been done before in Drum Corps and done so successfully... where both previous Corps, member, and new Corps worked things out well.... but where the easy move between Corps wasa not done in such a too easy fashion as it is today. Since the top Corps gets the benefit of not having to train a a kid in the fundamentals that were learned in the lower tier Corps, just have the top Corps pay a " finders fee " to the lower tier Caorps that they bled of their talent. That seems fair to me.

So you think its more important that each "corps" is treated fairly instead of each "corps member"?!

What we always forgot is that corps are made up of people. People are what matter not the corps name, or reputation, or talent level, or what place they came in. That doesn't matter. It's people. And people find value in drum corps no matter what talent level the corps is.

The organization/ corps is just an indifferent piece of the drum corps puzzle. Who cares if Pio never wins. And who cares if their competitive level is lower than Blue Devils. The kids still do it to get experience, they still learn, they still grow and develop. Then those kids can go to Blue Devils and be champs if they want. That's the kids choice.

Why do we need every corps with the same probability of coming in first? We don't need that! We need to have great corps, good corps, and okay corps. We need to have the range. People who teach, perform and volunteer for Pio don't do it to win so why are you saying that they MUST do it to win and beat other corps?

[corpsband]

We tell people all the time they can't get what they want.... in all areas of life. From the rejection of the job we applied for, to school application rejection, to rejections on a request for a date, to rejections on a business loan, to... you name it.

Right but based on what criteria? Most kids can't make top level corps without some experience. If you block that pathway all that happens is the (a) top corps talent declines *and* (b) lower corps lose the kids who were there getting experience. Where's the win in that?

The concept of Corps being tougher on automatic transfer rules is NOT a new concept in Drum Corps. It's been done before in Drum Corps and done so successfully... where both previous Corps, member, and new Corps worked things out well.... but where the easy move between Corps was not done in such an open door policy fashion as it is today. Since the top Corps gets the benefit of not having to train a recruit in the fundamentals that were learned in the lower tier Corps, just have the top Corps pay a " finders fee " to the lower tier Corps that they bled of their talent. That seems fair to me. The top tier gets the talented marcher, the lower tier Corps gets some dough to rebuild with.

There was a different attitude in the past rather than a different set of rules. You stayed with the corps you started with -- it's just how it was. Drum corps was also a much more local activity. I don't think implementing a rule is going to change things back to the way they used to be.

As for the finder's fee -- what exactly does this accomplish? It disincentives a top tier corps from accepting a kid who has worked hard to be good enough to make his corps of choice? Why do we want that? And how does the finder's fee help the corps who loses the kid? They spent 2 or 3 years training a kid and then get some $$ back when the kid leaves? It doesn't make any sense to the lower tier corps. They should be figuring out how to make the kid want to stay not making a small profit when they leave.

[BRASSO]

Right but based on what criteria? Most kids can't make top level corps without some experience. If you block that pathway all that happens is the (a) top corps talent declines *and* (b) lower corps lose the kids who were there getting experience. Where's the win in that?

There was a different attitude in the past rather than a different set of rules. You stayed with the corps you started with -- it's just how it was. Drum corps was also a much more local activity. I don't think implementing a rule is going to change things back to the way they used to be.

As for the finder's fee -- what exactly does this accomplish? It disincentives a top tier corps from accepting a kid who has worked hard to be good enough to make his corps of choice? Why do we want that? And how does the finder's fee help the corps who loses the kid? They spent 2 or 3 years training a kid and then get some $$ back when the kid leaves? It doesn't make any sense to the lower tier corps. They should be figuring out how to make the kid want to stay not making a small profit when they leave.

Look, I come from the starting point where the top Corps get the numbers at camp to pick and choose then discard the rest, but keep their money. They hold all the good cards in their hand in this game. That's not going to help the lower Corps to get better. Most kids who are cut are a) crushed and b) lost their money. Many are in no mental state at this point to go find another Corps to try out for. Some are, but not in the numbers that we'd all presumbably like to see. Give the cut kid a partial refund.... also, make the Top Corps have to pay a finders fee if they take in a kid from a lower tier Corps. No, it's not a perfect solutiuon. But it sure is a lot better than doing what we do now which is have the lower tier Corps become nothing more than a training ground to perpetuate the top few Corps at the top ... FOREVER. Sure we have a couple of Corps that are able to break through the system for a " cup of coffee " stint within the top 3, before eventually either falling back or more usually , going broke with the heavy financial toll to reach the top and so wind up disappearing altogether. If a top Corps has to choose between 2 recruits.. one where they've got to pay a finders fee, and the other recruit where they do not, maybe they take the kid they don't don't have to pay a finders fee to. And if the kid goes back to his previous Corps... along with others, then guess what ? Maybe that lower tier Corps gets some momentum going and if they see light at the end of the tunnel, then in time, maybe kids won't feel the compelling need to leave as they will see that the Corps that the are with has a real shot of moving up and in time becoming just like the Top Corps that they wanted to be in all along. And that Corps will be the one they are in. Look, nothing against the Cadevaliers, but this trifecta doesn't generate all that much sympathy from me. They'll do ok if we shake things up a bit. They're not afraid of REAL competition. Or are they ? I say make some changes in transfer rules. Otherwise, we really are talking about the same Corps pretty much at the top forever. And that is getting pretty stale, imo.

Edited November 23, 2010 by BRASSO

[CrownStarr]

Look, I come from the starting point where the top Corps get the numbers at camp to pick and choose then discard the rest, but keep their money. They hold all the good cards in their hand in this game. That's not going to help the lower Corps to get better. Most kids who are cut are a) crushed and b) lost their money. Many are in no mental state at this point to go find another Corps to try out for. Some are, but not in the numbers that we'd all presumbably like to see. Give the cut kid a partial refund.... also, make the Top Corps have to pay a finders fee if they take in a kid from a lower tier Corps. No, it's not a perfect solutiuon. But it sure is a lot better than doing what we do now which is have the lower tier Corps become nothing more than a training ground to perpetuate the top few Corps at the top ... FOREVER. Sure we have a couple of Corps that are able to break through the system for a " cup of coffee " stint within the top 3, before eventually either falling back or more usually , going broke with the heavy financial toll to reach the top and so wind up disappearing altogether. If a top Corps has to choose between 2 recruits.. one where they've got to pay a finders fee, and the other recruit where they do not, maybe they take the kid they don't don't have to pay a finders fee to. And if the kid goes back to his previous Corps... along with others, then guess what ? Maybe that lower tier Corps gets some momentum going and if they see light at the end of the tunnel, then in time, maybe kids won't feel the compelling need to leave as they will see that the Corps that the are with has a real shot of moving up and in time becoming just like the Top Corps that they wanted to be in all along. And that Corps will be the one they are in. Look, nothing against the Cadevaliers, but this trifecta doesn't generate all that much sympathy from me. They'll do ok if we shake things up a bit. They're not afraid of REAL competition. Or are they ? I say make some changes in transfer rules. Otherwise, we really are talking about the same Corps pretty much at the top forever. And that is getting pretty stale, imo.

You know, for all that people complain about the G8 directors "using" the members to further their own goals, this is one of the most extreme examples I've seen of using the members as helpless cogs in a larger scheme. I agree with you that there's a problem in people's attitudes towards trying out for open class; we can try to change those attitudes, maybe try to change some other systemic aspects of the audition process, but restricting the members' free choice to try out for whatever corps they have their sights on is NOT the way to do it!

Edited November 23, 2010 by CrownStarr

[corpsband]

Look, I come from the starting point where the top Corps get the numbers at camp to pick and choose then discard the rest, but keep their money. They hold all the good cards in their hand in this game. That's not going to help the lower Corps to get better. Most kids who are cut are a) crushed and b) lost their money. Many are in no mental state at this point to go find another Corps to try out for. Some are, but not in the numbers that we'd all presumbably like to see. Give the cut kid a partial refund.... also, make the Top Corps have to pay a finders fee if they take in a kid from a lower tier Corps. No, it's not a perfect solutiuon. But it sure is a lot better than doing what we do now which is have the lower tier Corps become nothing more than a training ground to perpetuate the top few Corps at the top ... FOREVER. Sure we have a couple of Corps that are able to break through the system for a " cup of coffee " stint within the top 3, before eventually either falling back or more usually , going broke with the heavy financial toll to reach the top and so wind up disappearing altogether. If a top Corps has to choose between 2 recruits.. one where they've got to pay a finders fee, and the other recruit where they do not, maybe they take the kid they don't don't have to pay a finders fee to. And if the kid goes back to his previous Corps... along with others, then guess what ? Maybe that lower tier Corps gets some momentum going and if they see light at the end of the tunnel, then in time, maybe kids won't feel the compelling need to leave as they will see that the Corps that the are with has a real shot of moving up and in time becoming just like the Top Corps that they wanted to be in all along. And that Corps will be the one they are in. Look, nothing against the Cadevaliers, but this trifecta doesn't generate all that much sympathy from me. They'll do ok if we shake things up a bit. They're not afraid of REAL competition. Or are they ? I say make some changes in transfer rules. Otherwise, we really are talking about the same Corps pretty much at the top forever. And that is getting pretty stale, imo.

Not faulting what you're trying to accomplish but I think your analysis of what would happen under a your compensation rule is a little faulty.

kid wants to march BD : kid tries out for BD : kid fails : kid tries again next year because if he marches elsewhere he's stuck there :: result = lower tier WC corps loses kid

kid wants to march cadets : cadets want kid : auditions and makes it : cadets take finder fee from kids dues and eat the balance for one season (or they make him fundraise the fee) : result = lower tier corps loses kid

kid wants to march cavies : cavies say get experience : kid marches senior or open class for 2 seasons : back to cavies : makes it :: results = lower tier WC corps never sees kid

I don't think the finder fee thing would work out they way you're thinking it would.

In any case I think you're under-estimating the impact of the training/teaching that upper tier corps provide to their members and over estimating the "cream of the crop" effect. It's as much about what and how they're taught as it is about raw talent.

Take a 15th place corps entire membership and dump them into a top 3 program and what do you think you'd get? Closer to 15th or 3rd?

[MikeD]

Look, I come from the starting point where the top Corps get the numbers at camp to pick and choose then discard the rest, but keep their money. They hold all the good cards in their hand in this game. That's not going to help the lower Corps to get better. Most kids who are cut are a) crushed and b) lost their money. Many are in no mental state at this point to go find another Corps to try out for. Some are, but not in the numbers that we'd all presumbably like to see. Give the cut kid a partial refund.... also, make the Top Corps have to pay a finders fee if they take in a kid from a lower tier Corps. No, it's not a perfect solutiuon. But it sure is a lot better than doing what we do now which is have the lower tier Corps become nothing more than a training ground to perpetuate the top few Corps at the top ... FOREVER.

People should be free to march where they choose, period. As long as they are in good standing with corps A, they should be free to move to corps B if they want (and pass the audition) from season to season. That's how it was even pre-DCI. Why are you trying to punish success?

Sure we have a couple of Corps that are able to break through the system for a " cup of coffee " stint within the top 3, before eventually either falling back or more usually , going broke with the heavy financial toll to reach the top and so wind up disappearing altogether. If a top Corps has to choose between 2 recruits.. one where they've got to pay a finders fee, and the other recruit where they do not, maybe they take the kid they don't don't have to pay a finders fee to. And if the kid goes back to his previous Corps... along with others, then guess what ? Maybe that lower tier Corps gets some momentum going and if they see light at the end of the tunnel, then in time, maybe kids won't feel the compelling need to leave as they will see that the Corps that the are with has a real shot of moving up and in time becoming just like the Top Corps that they wanted to be in all along. And that Corps will be the one they are in.

So you want to punish the person who DID choose a lower level corps for a year or more but now wants to move on??? How is that fair to the member? Because they made the decision to march in a lower level corps they are now locked in there forever? You'll end up having fewer kids audition for THOSE corps if they know they are being forced to stay there year after year, regardless of the experience they as members desire.

[audiodb]

You know, for all that people complain about the G8 directors "using" the members to further their own goals, this is one of the most extreme examples I've seen of using the members as helpless cogs in a larger scheme. I agree with you that there's a problem in people's attitudes towards trying out for open class; we can try to change those attitudes, maybe try to change some other systemic aspects of the audition process, but restricting the members' free choice to try out for whatever corps they have their sights on is NOT the way to do it!

How does a "finder's fee", paid between corps, impair the member's free choice?

[mcjordansc]

Finder's fees? Compensation when a member changes corps? Do people even think before posting this stuff? These kids are paying to be part of an organization. A drum corps is not obligated to take a kid every year the kid wants to march, why would the same kid be obligated to march each year with the same corps? There are no multi year contracts here.

[Bruckner8]

How does a "finder's fee", paid between corps, impair the member's free choice?

Answer: If the fee is paid, it doesn't. If the fee is a deterrent, it does....it causes the payer to take pause, thus restricting the choice of the member, if the payer isn't willing to pay.

And THAT would stop kids from marching, saying to themselves "Screw it! If my dream corps refuses to pay finder's fees, I'm going to stop marching. I certainly don't want to march my old corps anymore."

Also, we're assuming the value of the audition experience is equivalent at both corps. That's not necessarily so, and each corps is at liberty to set their own price. The awesome thing about drum corps right now is that it's the free market doing exactly what it's supposed to do: Cause amazing excellence at the top, leave a lot of room for success in the middle and lower, and cause the absolutely inept to fail. There are no restrictions...anything goes. Any corps is able to rise from the ground up, using sound admin/org techniques to acquire staff and membership,etc,all the way to the top. The continued success of the few should be lauded and copied (Crown certainly took that to heart).

What I keep reading here are Socialist-like solutions trying to make everything "equal outcome," whether that be creative teams, membership, auditions, venues, and/or administrations. Some people here seem to think the drum corps world would be better if all resources flowed to DCI, and then DCI doled them out, from money, to admins, to instructors, to membership.

Cookie Cutter Drum Corps! No Thanks.