Cainan Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 (edited) Ahh.. how refreshing... constructive and well thought out debate... I LOVE IT!!! I don't think I said that score and placement is the SOLE definition of success, but it is a huge part of it... If that's how I was interpreted, then I didn't get my point across as intended. Success is relative to the individual corps. Each and every group needs to set their own bar height. If you are the Blue Devils, anything outside of top 4 is probably NOT considered a successful season. Heck, in 1987, they placed 4th after winning in 86... they had a HUGE staff and membership turnover the next year. In 1990, my corps, the Freelancers, missed out on Finals. I to this day consider that an unsuccessful season. I still would not trade that summer away for the world, but competitively, we didn't get the job done. Now on the other end of the spectrum, say Pioneer... Placement probably doesn't matter too much for this group so long as all the members and staff come away from the season with a positive experience, and the corps remains economically viable, then by their standards... THAT would probably constitute a successful season. But to be fair, I and a lot of people consider Pioneer to be the exception, rather than the norm in World Class. I love Pioneer and absolutely NO disrespect is intended here, but I think the whole ethos of the organisation is much better suited to Open Class, but that's just my opinion. In World Class, I wouldn't necessarily say that winning a championship is the sole indicator of success, but I would say that being COMPETITIVE is... Edited November 24, 2011 by Cainan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Ahh.. how refreshing... constructive and well thought out debate... I LOVE IT!!! I don't think I said that score and placement is the SOLE definition of success, but it is a huge part of it... If that's how I was interpreted, then I didn't get my point across as intended. Success is relative to the individual corps. Each and every group needs to set their own bar height. If you are the Blue Devils, anything outside of top 4 is probably NOT considered a successful season. Heck, in 1987, they placed 4th after winning in 86... they had a HUGE staff and membership turnover the next year. In 1990, my corps, the Freelancers, missed out on Finals. I to this day consider that an unsuccessful season. I still would not trade that summer away for the world, but competitively, we didn't get the job done. Now on the other end of the spectrum, say Pioneer... Placement probably doesn't matter too much for this group so long as all the members and staff come away from the season with a positive experience, and the corps remains economically viable, then by their standards... THAT would probably constitute a successful season. But to be fair, I and a lot of people consider Pioneer to be the exception, rather than the norm in World Class. I love Pioneer and absolutely NO disrespect is intended here, but I think the whole ethos of the organisation is much better suited to Open Class, but that's just my opinion. In World Class, I wouldn't necessarily say that winning a championship is the sole indicator of success, but I would say that being COMPETITIVE is... That's cool; I mostly agree with this, and I think that success is defined in several different ways, including by the current year's membership & staff (for example, I would consider Glassmen a successful corps, but it's possible that 2011 Glassmen members & staff would consider their season unsuccessful for dropping in placement from the previous year). 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.