TOC/G7 Related Discussion

[Jeff Ream]

It was buzz among nostalgic old folks wanting to relive their youth. The show design pandered to this segment.

There wasn't that sort of buzz among young people, as the design felt dated and the Bridgemen were around in their grandparent's era. Kids have no clue who the Bridgemen even were.

I barely do... watched the Bridgemen as a kid on old 3/4" video cassettes. I only ever say them on video, because they folded before I had ever even heard of drum corps... and I started marching more than 20 years ago.

ok, so explain record number of applicants if it was so appealing to old people Dan?

Wait, you can't, that kills your argument.

[Slingerland]

The problem that DCI has however is that there really seems to be no enterprise quite like this one to model themselves after. And thats the rub, imo.

Totally disagree. There are any number of enterprises who were once either failing or dead in the water or stuck in low gear (like DCI), and have been revitalized with new thinking. The idea that DCI is somehow sui generis is a fail.

DCI could look at the NHL (even with the lockouts, a much bigger operation now than 20 years ago) or the NFL, both of which were once stale or failing operations, but got turned around with a dose of fresh blood and a desire to grow their businesses rather than accept second rate status.

And you seem to have misunderstood the task. I didn't tell you to look at Sears as a model of what to do, I asked you to come up with an analysis of why they're faiing. They might have more in common with DCI than you think.

Edited March 8, 2013 by Slingerland

[Jeff Ream]

Cavaliers went from 11th to 8th in '75 (a one-day jump that hasn't been achieved since).

Muchachos went from 7th to 4th in '74, Regiment went from 8th to 11th at the same show.

In all three cases, their Finals placement reflected their finals performance. Cavaliers and M's both turned it up on Finals night, PR had a totally flat performance.

There was more movement, more commonly, than there is today, and the numbers were allowed to reflect the performance more, and the design less.

hence why all captions minus GE should be weighted more towards the performer

[Jeff Ream]

I don't read his comments that way at all. He's simply calling for a model in which overall competitiveness is increased by greatly increasing the quality of what's out there in the current middle range of the pack. My position is that a drastic change in either the judging system or how the numbers are handled could help in this.

He's also calling for an increase in variety, something that it seems even the old timers on here would like to see too. I look at some of the corps in the lower half of the activity and wonder why they're all seeming to play it so safe, offering "lite" versions of shows that are being programmed at the top, and uniforms that are just cookie-cutter from the Uniforms R' Us collection.

If you think it's ok for DCI to muddle along with a very predictable line up of "best, better, and good" corps, who are more or less unchanged from year to year, then you're welcome to that opinion, but in terms of building fan interest and strengthening the overall activity, I don't see it as a good thing.

part of why there is such predictability is numbers management. people start low so they have room at the top. So maybe 14th place could get some 9's, but they can't because the judges have to leave room

[Jeff Ream]

Jeesh, H, get two double beds at least! />/>

Change happens. I think we all get that. And many of us agree that a change has to happen lest the perpetual decline continue.

But those who disagree with Dan's and Slingerland's approach are not, therefore, stuck in the status quo. (And if you're so certain that the status quo means certain doom I'll ask you the same question: Where's the market going to close tomorrow?)

I don't think they are villians at all (although I'm less convinced they're not shills, knowingly or not). I just don't believe their path forward is the correct one to spur the change that seems needed.

But, I'll tell ya', if they both start talking about "relevance" I'm really going to get freaked out.

You don't want to sit by me at finals? Aww, can I be on your list, too?

/>

funny thing though...people don't see how so much change over the last 15 years led to us where we are.

[Jeff Ream]

Competitive Inertia was only beginning to be established. Those were the "fairest times," since the whole thing was new.

As I've said in other posts, if you want real change, swap out the judges, completely, all of them. Ideally, we'd have a new judging panel for every single competing corps, pulled from Aliens, or at the very least, pulled from musical/entertainment/arts professionals who know NOTHING about drum corps, nor the egos involved. Let each judge read the sheets (that day, for all I care), and COME TO THEIR OWN CONCLUSION on what THEY THINK they should measure and how. Oh well, you'd need over 100 judges for a 12 corps show. Get rid of the field judges...corps only use them to "pander to points" anyway. "Look at how uniform we are!" (WHO CARES, if the result in the stands is absolute boring garbage!)

If anything, the sheets took a step back in the last iteration because now they specifically mention "compared to other competitors." Ideally, the most objective process wouldn't even care what the others did; it would only compare the current performance against the criteria. And what if you're the first corps on? (Nothing to compare to!) Ya see...it's explicit admission of what we knew all along: Judges carry information from PRIOR performance (for YEARS even, as I claim in the CI theory)

If you did those two things (get fresh, non-connected judges and stop endorsing the comparative aspect), corps like Jersey Surf 2012 might even make the top 12, as they SHOULD.

well...that compared to competitors also can mean based on what you have seen so far this year on that sheet, not just knowing the numbers from last night. You have to set your personal benchmark somewhere

[Jeff Ream]

Even allowing for the ordinary measure of Internet exaggeration, it doesn't feel as if the anti-G7 crew want to see DCI evolve - except maybe in retrograde ways.

I understand the angst the G7 caused. I understand why some of its proposals caused a riot of accusation and blame. What I can't understand is how any reasonable fan can't understand that DCI has to do something and that regional touring models and other such "traditional" alternatives aren't it. The premise has to be for change. The premise might also have to be for sacrifice, as in not every corps might emerge with the same status, or even at all.

I don't meant to act as if I'm above the passions that inflame this discussion. What I am is thoroughly fatigued by the focus on blame. If the G7 blew it, that doesn't disqualify them from trying to make this work the next time.

Where's the market going to close tomorrow? I don't know. But I can tell you when it will fall. I know that will be the day after I make that big buy I've been putting off!

HH

I don't think the G7 is entirely to blame, though I do see them as ringleaders. they are the ones that pushed and pushed for change, change, change....then as things kept getting worse, they demanded power or they would be gone...even though they themselves admitted they didn't know exactly how to fix it. That's where my ire is.

[kickhaltsforlife]

ok, so explain record number of applicants if it was so appealing to old people Dan?

Wait, you can't, that kills your argument.

When he says things like what you quoted.. I really question how in touch he is with the activity.

Dan... did you go to any shows that Surf was at? All the Texas shows are HUGE band dork shows. I know.. I marched Crossmen... and I heard all the kids screaming at all of the Texas shows. Surf got a lot of love in Texas, the band geek capital of the world! Not to mention every show they were at! The three shows I saw them at kids were dancing along. And it wasn't just LMFAO they liked, it was In the Stone and the rest of it too! It was Land of Make Believe and the awesome baritone soloist. It was humor before the show even started. It wasn't old people reliving the past. Was the difficulty lacking in the visual design? Yeah... I'd say the drill was a little easy... but it was a very young corps, very new to drum corps. They took the perfect approach to the show. It was entertaining as hell... and they didn't have to run around the field doing random #### that makes no sense to get the crowd engaged.

Which BTW... our "best" corps.. BD doesn't do much to help bring NEW fans into the activity. Crown, Cadets, Phantom, Madison, Surf, Crossmen, SCV, each do worlds more to help bring new fans in by performing entertaining shows that appeal to largest percentage of fans. We still aren't getting to enough people.. but BDs product is NOT what we are looking for.

[danielray]

It is certainly not over dramatic to the corps and kids you want to remove from having any and all DCI support!!!!

What does it matter to those corps if they are in DCI or not? They currently get no money and little support from them. What is there to lose? They would be much better supported by an organization that is focused exclusively on their unique needs and interests.

Really? Think about how you just phrased the ownership of that corps: The 'Kids' little corps? Nope; The 'Community's' little corps? Nope; how about 'Our' little corps? Nope; or... was it 'My' (as in the singular possessive personal pronoun) little corps? Yep. So, just think about that for a moment as it applies to your contention that you are not an elitist.

Well, my business partner and I created it, run it, teach it and fund it out of pocket. The community has zero engagement. It's free for kids to participate.

If you build something, run it and fund it... can't really see who else it might belong to.

[cixelsyd]

I understand the angst the G7 caused. I understand why some of its proposals caused a riot of accusation and blame. What I can't understand is how any reasonable fan can't understand that DCI has to do something and that regional touring models and other such "traditional" alternatives aren't it.

No argument here.

By the way, DCI is doing something (TOC, combined Thursday prelims, new judging system, and now SoundSport/Drumline Battle). What do you think of those?

I don't meant to act as if I'm above the passions that inflame this discussion. What I am is thoroughly fatigued by the focus on blame. If the G7 blew it, that doesn't disqualify them from trying to make this work the next time.

Maybe not. But remember, it is the G7 Report that proposes to hurl most of open class overboard into regional circuits that no longer exist. If you want people here to open their minds to the G7, mentioning regional models or "tradition" (i.e. top X = member corps) is not helping your case.

What you see here from the people following this topic long term is a desire to find some logic behind whatever "change" is being proposed, and (like yourself) a more intelligent discussion free from the emotional BS and fearmongering from the "DCI will self-destruct in 5 seconds!" crowd.