JimF-LowBari Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 (edited) In 1973 many thousands of people said yes, that IS worth paying for, night after night. Tastes change, goals change, techniques change, instruments change. Different does not necessarily mean better or worse. If those 13 and under corps (Commodors 72, for instance) didn't exist back then, would we have today's BD? Probably not. If you don't want to pay to see them, that just means you don't want to support them. If you don't support the lower placing corps, how will they ever become higher placing corps? And sorry for the insult, but I felt one good insult deserved another. And I must say I'm continually amazed at the snobbery which seems to go hand in hand with drum corps participation. You mean that 24th DCI place corps in 1973? Who screwed up and let them survive? Interesting also that the last place DCA Prelims corps in 1974 dang near won it in the early 80s and did win in 1996. So just how the #### are new corps supposed to survive if they have to be "excellent" right off the bat? Still stand by the "If you're not the best, you're not worth it" as one of many causes of 400 -> 40... Edited February 4, 2011 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 honestly, which live events didn't have a larger audience back then? What are you talking about? All the top four major-league sports in America draw far more today than they did in 1972. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 You mean that 24th DCI place corps in 1973? Who screwed up and let them survive? Interesting also that the last place DCA Prelims corps in 1974 dang near won it in the early 80s and did win in 1996. Carolina Crown finished last in 1990. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 What are you talking about? All the top four major-league sports in America draw far more today than they did in 1972. Hmmmmm, interesting thought just hit me as the MINOR Leagues of baseball and hockey are going gangbusters as compared to early 1970s. Have a local AHL club nearby since late 1930s and just hosted the All-Star game with 10-11K people attending. Even built a new arena about 10 years back because 7K seats were not enough. Also a AA baseball team that moved here in the late 1980s. About that time minor league baseball went from being an albatrose to the big leagues to Holy #### we CAN make money off of this thing!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Brace Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 When we get to the point of "If you're not perceived as being the best, you're not worthy to (fill in the blank)" then yes. And DCI is heading to that point with G-7/8 and mentality of some of the post I've seen over the years from some posters. Yes, DCP <> DCI BoD but DCP does = segment of paying fans. And what is "excellence"? Top corps, top3, top 7/8, top ?????..... And what about the non-excellent corps, should they fade away? Paying fans already determine excellence. When they go out for a hot dog, or into the parking lot when lesser placing corps are performing, they, whether they recognize it or not, are making a determination. And, they are hurting those kid's feelings. Sad little drum corps kids with no one to watch them perform...kind of like kids who ride the bench at baseball. The message to both groups...get better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruckner8 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 When we get to the point of "If you're not perceived as being the best, you're not worthy to (fill in the blank)" then yes. And DCI is heading to that point with G-7/8 and mentality of some of the post I've seen over the years from some posters. Yes, DCP <> DCI BoD but DCP does = segment of paying fans. And what is "excellence"? Top corps, top3, top 7/8, top ?????..... And what about the non-excellent corps, should they fade away? Nope, never said they should fade away. Just said I'm not going to watch/listen/pay for them. And if that attitude LEADS to only 10 corps remaining (unlikely), I'm fine with it as long as all 10 of them are awesome (ie, attrition by sucking; which no one has ever said is likely). In my pee-wee t-ball example, I was very clear that it's important to the people involved, but I can't watch it. So, the people involved can use all of their own resources to keep it going. If other 3rd party individuals see value in it, and want to give their money to it, more power to them and the organization. By now, the entire conversation turns away from excellence and entertainment--and the value markets put on such--over to a "politico-cultural" question about supporting an organization "for the greater good," regardless of any objective metrics on the inputs or the outputs. I have strong feelings on that too, but I'm not going there. I'm just bringing it up now, because I think some of the people being critical of me are already looking at it this way, and don't even know it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 You mean that 24th DCI place corps in 1973? Who screwed up and let them survive? Interesting also that the last place DCA Prelims corps in 1974 dang near won it in the early 80s and did win in 1996. So just how the #### are new corps supposed to survive if they have to be "excellent" right off the bat? Still stand by the "If you're not the best, you're not worth it" as one of many causes of 400 -> 40... You're not WAY over-stating this 'argument' are you? Oddly enough, you kind of argue against your own point by point out that Blue Devils, the 24th place DCI corps in 1973, went on to become the 14 time DCI Champion: essentially, they excelled in order to thrive. That's EXACTLY how new corps have to 'operate' in order to thrive. They have to continue to improve, offer a competitive 'product' to prospective membership, and become "strong" both as a financially solvent and competitive institution. I'd agree, to an extent, with your Still stand by the "If you're not the best, you're not worth it" as one of many causes of 400 -> 40... assessment. If a corps is not giving membership a worthy product, people won't want to march and there will be no corps. I do think that a 'worthy product' is more than just competitive placement, but I would stipulate that often the two can go hand-in-hand. If a corps is on a downward slope for consecutive years competitively, and the corps doesn't make the necessary changes to 'right the ship,' then less people will buy souvies, less people will come to audition, and less money will be coming to the organization. I saw this happen with my own corps: I happened to be fortunate enough to be marching with them around their competitive peak, and as soon as they starting sliding down the ranks placement-wise there was less interest and the corps eventually folded due to lack of funds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Hmmmmm, interesting thought just hit me as the MINOR Leagues of baseball and hockey are going gangbusters as compared to early 1970s. Have a local AHL club nearby since late 1930s and just hosted the All-Star game with 10-11K people attending. Even built a new arena about 10 years back because 7K seats were not enough. Also a AA baseball team that moved here in the late 1980s. About that time minor league baseball went from being an albatrose to the big leagues to Holy #### we CAN make money off of this thing!!! Yeah, that had a LOT to do with marketing, I think. I'm originally from Columbus, and I can tell you that the product of their AAA baseball hasn't improved over the years: I grew up watching Don Mattingly, Derek Jeter, Bernie Williams, Jorge Posada, etc. play to moderately-empty stadiums. Now they team (affiliate with the Cleveland Indians and no longer the Yankees) has a beautiful stadium in prime real estate and sells-out frequently. Minor League baseball teams (with help from their MLB affiliates), and local communities have really gotten a grasp on how to market their product. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Oddly enough, you kind of argue against your own point by point out that Blue Devils, the 24th place DCI corps in 1973, went on to become the 14 time DCI Champion: essentially, they excelled in order to thrive. That's EXACTLY how new corps have to 'operate' in order to thrive. Except that a few would rather there only be 10 corps....at which point the 24th place corps would not exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 (edited) You're not WAY over-stating this 'argument' are you? Oddly enough, you kind of argue against your own point by point out that Blue Devils, the 24th place DCI corps in 1973, went on to become the 14 time DCI Champion: essentially, they excelled in order to thrive. That's EXACTLY how new corps have to 'operate' in order to thrive. They have to continue to improve, offer a competitive 'product' to prospective membership, and become "strong" both as a financially solvent and competitive institution. Main part of my point was even the best corps had to start somewhere. And for BD it was 24th in 1973 and they were not there in 1972 (corps started 1971?). BUT... if people consider 24th as sucky why bother coming out and getting that 24th place then? BYW - I was in that last place DCA corps. Lost track of how many people asked us why we were even bothering to come out on the field. Yeah.... seen this crap first hand. I'd agree, to an extent, with your assessment. If a corps is not giving membership a worthy product, people won't want to march and there will be no corps. I do think that a 'worthy product' is more than just competitive placement, but I would stipulate that often the two can go hand-in-hand. If a corps is on a downward slope for consecutive years competitively, and the corps doesn't make the necessary changes to 'right the ship,' then less people will buy souvies, less people will come to audition, and less money will be coming to the organization. I saw this happen with my own corps: I happened to be fortunate enough to be marching with them around their competitive peak, and as soon as they starting sliding down the ranks placement-wise there was less interest and the corps eventually folded due to lack of funds. But way too many people (IMO) only see worthy as the Finals position. And (on your next post) MLB and NHL really woke up to marketing the minor leagues (take note DCI...) Edited February 4, 2011 by JimF-LowBari 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.