danielray Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 And yet there are several transverse lines to choose from. Now had he called this "Dogs Playing Pool", I think most people would have been justifiably confused. And had they paid $55 to see a collection of paintings including one called "Dogs Playing Pool", I think they might even be justifiably upset. Hopefully the other 11 paintings would make up for the disappointment of the one with an unfortunate title, but if it is billed as the "best painting of the year" by [insert national art critic that will metaphorically represent DCI judges], they might be less inclined to keep respecting said critic's opinions and/or buying the publications that print them. Well... judging arts and entertainment is kind of weird. It is opinion, not science... Though in the future, we should be able to judge GE through measurements of individual kinesthetic response, fed into a server and averaged... to give a true overall average of the audience response. Until then, there is very little factual about it... and judging is pretty much .. or . Why get worked up over it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I was surprised to see Cavies taking part after all the early season rumblings by their Board, etc. But, the changes made to the format must have calmed them enough to participate. They participated because that is what they must do in order to not be left behind. They adapt to remain what is seen "relevant" and not "get left behind", not because they are pushing for it themselves. They simply are good at hedging their bets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulesBry Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I like Dogs Playing Poker too! Now had this been titled "Transverse Line", that could have been interesting, too. :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulesBry Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Well... judging arts and entertainment is kind of weird. It is opinion, not science... Though in the future, we should be able to judge GE through measurements of individual kinesthetic response, fed into a server and averaged... to give a true overall average of the audience response. Until then, there is very little factual about it... and judging is pretty much .. or . Why get worked up over it? True, but a bit more explanation from the DCI judges would be very helpful. As it is, the disconnect between many fans and the judging panels increases speculation of corruption. If there were more transparency, we at least might be better able to stomach decisions with which we disagree. On the other hand, why not get rid of judges altogether? If it's really so subjective as to be indecipherable, then what's the point at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Brace Posted August 9, 2011 Author Share Posted August 9, 2011 True, but a bit more explanation from the DCI judges would be very helpful. As it is, the disconnect between many fans and the judging panels increases speculation of corruption. If there were more transparency, we at least might be better able to stomach decisions with which we disagree. On the other hand, why not get rid of judges altogether? If it's really so subjective as to be indecipherable, then what's the point at all? And why does this matter? Does it impact your enjoyment of a drum corps show to know that maybe someone disgrees with your assessment? DCI and the corps want judges. DCI = the corps. DCI sets up the judging criteria and hires and evaluates their performance as judges. Why does a judge owe YOU an explanation? Their explanations are on an SD memory chip the corps get. They get the explanation, not you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Bari Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 True, but a bit more explanation from the DCI judges would be very helpful. As it is, the disconnect between many fans and the judging panels increases speculation of corruption. If there were more transparency, we at least might be better able to stomach decisions with which we disagree. On the other hand, why not get rid of judges altogether? If it's really so subjective as to be indecipherable, then what's the point at all? I would have to say that DCI and the Directors are INCREDIBLY happy right now with how the competetion aspect is going... Have you seen the DCP Boards? Oh yes you have... There is a LOT of talk going on about who will or will not win... I think this serves DCI AND ALL the Corps very well! Maybe getting you, and many others all worked up... is GOOD for the activity! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 True, but a bit more explanation from the DCI judges would be very helpful. As it is, the disconnect between many fans and the judging panels increases speculation of corruption. If there were more transparency, we at least might be better able to stomach decisions with which we disagree. On the other hand, why not get rid of judges altogether? If it's really so subjective as to be indecipherable, then what's the point at all? Corruption? Come on... First, it is a very very niche activity, and anyone who wants keep working needs to be dependable. Second, what is really at stake? I mean, DCI + corps, combined directly generate probably around $15-18M a year, and have the ability to influence indirect sales of probably another $6-10M a year for manufacturers... and those are generous estimates. This also doesn't flow in very big chunks... so, what's the financial benefit of any potential corruption? What is the gain? The number of people that currently see drum corps over the course of an entire season is less than the population of Fresno. The number who have ever seen it or even heard about it in their entire life is less than the population of Phoenix. Not a lot of point to any corruption here. I don't think there is anything nefarious going on here... just people have different tastes and different opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Jeff. This is not just a TOC phenomenon. In DCM for instance, placement in the previous year's DCM championships determined your pay for the following season's DCM shows. So, placement has always made a difference. The TOC corps pretty much have a lock on the Top 8 spots except for that Minn./Ind. based corps I would have liked to see Madison in the mix, but I believe that is philosophical point more than anything. I was surprised to see Cavies taking part after all the early season rumblings by their Board, etc. But, the changes made to the format must have calmed them enough to participate. of course Cavies agreed...more money and free marketing for them! They didnt host a show, so it's low risj kigh reward for them. but to continue to push just the top of the top...well....how many corps did we have 10 years ago? how many now? that's been their mode of operation all along. Great growth plan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) Here's an exercise.... Pick up the phone and try to book a band. The cost will range from a couple hundred to a couple hundred thousand... depending on the band. Some have a higher draw than others, so expect to get paid more. This draw is proven through their success in pulling in crowds or selling albums. It isn't about not working as hard... there are arguably some non-TOC corps that actually work harder than some TOC corps. It is about working smart and also putting out a product that creates a larger draw. Drum corps should be no different than in the rest of the music world... bands that make the largest revenues started out doing smaller tours that they paid for out of their own pocket until they could build their way up to making larger revenues. Did Blue Stars sit and lament that they were an A Class corps and that they weren't getting a fair shake, that they deserved greater revenues? Nope. Did Carolina Crown? They figured out ways to make more money OUTSIDE OF THE TOUR.... that they INVESTED into making the necessary improvements to their programs so that they could move up and eventually earn greater revenues on tour. Any other corps can do the same... nothing is stopping them. good points I concede. However...the DCI mission is to promote and benefit ALL of it's membercorps not just 8. so while some corps should do a lot more on their own, basically having the world told they suck cause they arent in the top 8 isnt good. not everyone can be in the top 8. this year we have the deepest top 15 in many, many years. so, whoever ends up 9-15 in this process is "no one special" because they arent TOC....and thats ########. rock bands arent part of cooperatives with a mission for the common good btw, so not a good analogy to make Edited August 9, 2011 by Jeff Ream Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Corps tend to me a bit more stable and in a bit healthier position than they had in recent years (especially in light of the economy). I like to think we've sort of found a bottom and the number of world class corps will gradually increase. I think you're wrong. one corps that got chase money said inan email "well, we liveanother year...we think". not so healthy eh? 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.