Jeff Ream Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 You know why corps went from 128 to 150, right? Format of most busses changed to be able to fit more on 3 busses. right, so 20 empty seats is full per you, but really it's 20 empty seats ( see other resurrected thread) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 Why not...?? Because then the staff can't drink and act more immature than the members??? :ph34r:/> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 So why should my corps be gimped because your corps sucks at fund raising? Spending caps, of any kind, won't solve any problems, even imaginary ones. It's like Jeff said, you have to change the judging system. And as for that, it's not the sheets...it's the judges themselves and the philosophy that is dictated to them, or that they bring with them. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeN Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 So why should my corps be gimped because your corps sucks at fund raising? Spending caps, of any kind, won't solve any problems, even imaginary ones. It's like Jeff said, you have to change the judging system. And as for that, it's not the sheets...it's the judges themselves and the philosophy that is dictated to them, or that they bring with them. This. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 While a spending cap wouldn't necessarily assuredly level the playing field, it sure wouldn't hurt. However, I also agree that the spending cap should ONLY apply to staff. With (x) amount of dollars left over, the corps can do whatever they want - it's their money. However, if each corps had to be prudent on who they're flying in when, and where from, and how much they're getting paid, it sure would help. Sure, you'd have corps that staff members would "take less money to work for" just like pro sports. Also, just like pro sports, the teams with the highest salary won't always win, and the teams under the salary cap would have a shot as well. I like the proposal. Here's a twist, though - beyond Staff salaries, let the corps spend whatever they want on everything else. If one corps wants to overspend on the best busses, and another corps wants to have the best food, or the best rehearsal facilities, or horns, or letting the kids sleep in hotel beds... cool. Whatever. I, too, have long thought about posting this idea on these forums... Anyone that thinks that drum corps staff are getting paid too much is absolutely insane. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 right, so 20 empty seats is full per you, but really it's 20 empty seats ( see other resurrected thread) This is not really a common thing. Corps either cap at 2 busses or go for 3 full. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 The term Consortia also means an agreement by that group to undertake an initiative beyond the resources of any one member; a cross-ownership type arrangement between entities which means they, by definition, are supposed actually 'help each other' prosper. Yes, DCI is a consortia, not a collective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerguy315 Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 Why not...?? Because then the staff can't drink and act more immature than the members??? zing! perhaps it would encourage too many staff-member hookups also 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 Anyone that thinks that drum corps staff are getting paid too much is absolutely insane. Indeed. And from BD to Pio all those staff members deserve a raise for the high level products they are putting together on the field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 (edited) Then again, the corps that don't see a problem pushing membership up to 150 and purchasing new toys every year to be avante guard and "pushing" the activity do not see the activity through the same lenses (money wise) the others do. How even is it to get sweet deals from horn and drum manufacturers times and again? This is HUGE not to mention other things. It's a catch 22, to get the endorsements and money you need to win and to win you need money. Having some CAP rules would not be the end of the world NOR punish those that have. Everyone wants new blood, but how can it ever happen if no one is allowed in? So you think if BD spent less money on their corps it would mean Spirit could push for a championship? And to your examples about caps. Should DCI ban corps from receiving sponsorships from Yamaha, etc because it creates an imbalance? And what's to be said about how Kids actually have an equal opportunity to march wherever they like? (Given talent and money restrictions) and that this has possibly more influence on the success of a corps competitively than how much a tech gets paid. I heard that every year since the early 2000's the oldest average aged corps won DCI (except 2008)... I don't know if this true but the kids performing are REALLY the only direct influencers to the number the judges write. Winning corps receive higher talent and there's very little that can be done to change that unless you dictate where kids should go and I hope no one suggests that! Edited February 4, 2013 by charlie1223 2 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.