drumlaw80 Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 (edited) The following is the rule changes proposal that I would like to make at the next DCA Rules Congress - DCA Parity -- Rule Change Proposal Whereas, in the best business interests of Drum Corps Associates and all of its member corps, 1.1 Any DCA corps that has won three consecutive DCA Championships shall be declared a "DCA Grand Champion," and shall automatically be put into competitive-exhibition status for the following DCA World Championship. 1.2 Every DCA corps must allow and encourage its members to participate in I&E, and no corps is allowed to conduct an unrelated rehearsal or sectional on the I&E Performance Night. 7 Edited January 15, 2011 by drumlaw80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84BDsop Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 The following is the rule changes proposal that I would like to make at the next DCA Rules Congress - DCA Parity -- Rule Change Proposal Whereas, in the best business interests of Drum Corps Associates and all of its member corps, 1.1 Any DCA corps that has won three consecutive DCA Championships shall be declared a "DCA Grand Champion," and shall automatically be put into competitive-exhibition status for the following DCA World Championship. 1.2 Every DCA corps must allow and encourage its members to participate in I&E, and no corps is allowed to conduct an unrelated rehearsal or sectional on the I&E Performance Night. I MIGHT agree to 1.2 just to level the field a little bit...although a corps simply taking I&E as a rest night is still going to have a sleep/rest advantage over a corps that does I&E heavily. If anything, one corps doing I&E and another corps doing a full rehearsal might end up equally tired. 1.1 I can't agree with...where's the incentive for members to return for an exhibition year? Especially if that year might be the only time they get to march in that particular corps? Plus there would always be the assertion to the following winner "they only won because XYZ wasn't allowed to compete." Why put an asterisk next to that champion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajlisko Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 I MIGHT agree to 1.2 just to level the field a little bit...although a corps simply taking I&E as a rest night is still going to have a sleep/rest advantage over a corps that does I&E heavily. If anything, one corps doing I&E and another corps doing a full rehearsal might end up equally tired. 1.1 I can't agree with...where's the incentive for members to return for an exhibition year? Especially if that year might be the only time they get to march in that particular corps? Plus there would always be the assertion to the following winner "they only won because XYZ wasn't allowed to compete." Why put an asterisk next to that champion? I don't quite see how either rule achieves "parity" ... doesn't fit the definition IMO ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Matczak Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 (edited) I don't quite see how either rule achieves "parity" ... doesn't fit the definition IMO ... they don't acheive parity,............they are parody Edited January 16, 2011 by Gary Matczak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 participating in I&E should be encouraged, not mandated. and the rest is just, well.....how do I put this....get laughed off the table 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TchMuzk Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Not sure why a corps should be penalized because they've put the right combinations together to win several times in a row Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegalEagle50 Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 The first one takes the competition out of the competition. Who would want to win thinking "were we really just 2nd place"? We do this activity for a lot of reasons and those who want to no longer compete but perform participate in alumni corps. Why would anyone want to spend an entire season paying high dues, spending hours upon hours practicing and traveling, all at their own personal expense, to essentially have a pointless season?? That would be a way to kill a corps. Titles do mean a lot Lee, and yes they do help recruit some people but this title you propose would be meaningless, both to the fans and the members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Ellis Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 I believe that excellence in any walk of life should be rewarded, not penalized. Lance Armstrong won the Tour de France year after year because he was the best rider - period. He didn't stay on top forever, and neither will the Bucs or any other DCA corps, but they deserve the top spot as long as they have the will and wherewithal to earn it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donny Drum Corps Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 I have a better idea...Why dont the other corps beat Reading? It is time that someone figures this out. DA 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOReason Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Perhaps the other member corps can pool together a fund to buy out Reading's staff. Silly idea? Yes. But certainly no more silly than this whole "Reading Rule" proposal. 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.