Jump to content

Restructuring Classes


Recommended Posts

In another thread there a point came up that seemed like it might be interesting to discuss as a standalone topic... the idea of restructuring classes in order to have greater competitive parity within each class, and the ability for more corps to succeed at the top level of their tier.

In many ways, these tiers already exists, more or less, organically... and this is just formalizing this divide into clearer classes.

Based on last years rankings, it could look something like this...

World Class

The Cadets*

Blue Devils*

The Cavaliers*

Carolina Crown*

Phantom Regiment*

Santa Clara Vanguard*

Bluecoats*

Boston Crusaders*

Blue Knights

Madison Scouts

Blue Stars

Spirit of Atlanta

Glassmen

Troopers

The Academy

* TOC Participant

----------------------

Open Class

Colts

Crossmen

Pacific Crest

Mandarins

Teal Sound

Blue Devils B

Oregon Crusaders

Cascades

Vanguard Cadets

Jersey Surf

Spartans

Pioneer

The Yokohama Scouts

Revolution

----------------------

A Class

Genesis

7th Regiment

Music City

Jubal

Legends

Raiders

Forte

Colt Cadets

Les Stentors

Racine Scouts

Blue Saints

Spirit of Newark/NJ

Gold

Impulse

Velvet Knights

Spokane Thunder

Blue Devils C

Edited by danielray
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've actually put a little thought into this and structured it a little differently. Basically it would be the same as the old Div I/II/III set-up, but slightly different in how corps are classified.

DCI would be split into perfect thirds to make up the classes. The top 3 corps in II and III would move up a class the next year, and the bottom three in I and II would move down a class. That way the classifications are about competitiveness, not money and other stuff. As an added side effect, it would prevent the same corps from consistently medaling in II and III so those groups get more competitive and interesting.

That's just what I thought of though, probably not a good idea and definitely not gonna happen. Other than BDB and SCVC dominating every year and never thinking about moving up, I don't see a problem with the way things are now.

Edited by MetalTones2012
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Replied here from another thread instead....

Does anybody sit and watch mobile phone companies compete? No? Oh....no wonder we can't name the 21st-place mobile phone company.
Generally a good idea not to be emphatic about something you know nothing about. There are loads and loads of companies out there and divisions of large firms that do nothing all day long but just WATCH the mobile industry compete and are generating hundreds of millions in the process. You can't name the 21st place because it doesn't exist.... just as it doesn't exist in many sectors. Competition, without restraint, attains a higher-level and loads of consolidation in the process. Loads of smaller groups stop competing against each other and combine resources and strengths to attain a higher level. There should be more consolidation in drum corps.
If you have a structural or logistical reason for putting corps into separate divisions, let's hear it. But dividing them up just to create more artificial titles is so lame, it might cost DCI audience on principle alone.
People don't closely watch what happens in the 15th-21st place of something.... there is always interest in the action at the top. This makes it more interesting... less predictable.
Also note that the only way divisional alignment would cause competition for any position to become "more fierce" is if more effort is made (i.e. more travel) to bring the closest-matched competitors together all the time. That's what DCI (prodded by the G7) did with their 2011 opening weekend. Apparently, it wasn't worth the cost, as they aren't doing it again in 2012.
Check out the way it was suggested... there are natural clusters in geographic regions to make it work. A Class should only tour regionally, though I see A Class as a temporary solution... and hopefully they would consolidate and move up.

It is completely pointless, for example, that you have VK, Impulse, Gold and Pacific Crest all in the same region competing for talent... just as you have Cascades, Oregon Crusaders and Spokane Thunder also competing for the same talent, resources and support.

With VK, Impulse, etc. the fact that both exist separately at all is only due to egos and personal issues, rather than practical, logical, business decisions. It is an absolute waste.

Edited by danielray
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's necessary to do this; I prefer an absolute scale with all participants. That way all corps know where they stand in comparison with everyone. They can decide who they aim to be competitive with. This is a youth activity, so no need to break the groups down any further for sure.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCI should be structured by financial/logistical ability first and competitive outcome second. If DCI were structured based on infrastructure alone, the Top 12 would look vastly different.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCI would be split into perfect thirds to make up the classes. The top 3 corps in II and III would move up a class the next year, and the bottom three in I and II would move down a class. That way the classifications are about competitiveness, not money and other stuff. As an added side effect, it would prevent the same corps from consistently medaling in II and III so those groups get more competitive and interesting.

You'd create some unintended consequences with this plan forcing Open Class corps to take on new touring and financial demands of World Class competition that they're not ready to commit to. Could BD and SCV organizations really support and fund two World Class corps? Doubtful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone please stop the madness! :devil:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've actually put a little thought into this and structured it a little differently. Basically it would be the same as the old Div I/II/III set-up, but slightly different in how corps are classified.

DCI would be split into perfect thirds to make up the classes. The top 3 corps in II and III would move up a class the next year, and the bottom three in I and II would move down a class. That way the classifications are about competitiveness, not money and other stuff. As an added side effect, it would prevent the same corps from consistently medaling in II and III so those groups get more competitive and interesting.

That's just what I thought of though, probably not a good idea and definitely not gonna happen. Other than BDB and SCVC dominating every year and never thinking about moving up, I don't see a problem with the way things are now.

So instead of the same corps medaling every year, the same corps would medal every OTHER year.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...