Cavies Struggles

[BlueDevils92]

I will form my opinion after seeing them tonight in theaters. But, from what I'm hearing from my friends who have already seen them twice its looking more like.....

[ShutUpAndPlayYerGuitar]

Again, not trying to say that it is only visual, but the survived without Saucedo (if surviving is getting a silver and bronze medal), however, this is not the first time the have taken a huge dip when Michael has left... 1997 comes to mind (only two years after winning a championship). The difference in them being able to recover was that he came back in 1998.

I hate to say it, but I think this would be a very different season for them if they had Michael Gaines on staff.

I don't think Gaines wrote for them before 1998. Wouldn't be surprised if he consulted, especially after Brubaker's death. But I know 1995-1997 was done by some guy with a very Polish-sounding last name (that I'm too lazy to look up).

[Zeke]

I don't think Gaines wrote for them before 1998. Wouldn't be surprised if he consulted, especially after Brubaker's death. But I know 1995-1997 was done by some guy with a very Polish-sounding last name (that I'm too lazy to look up).

Greg Poklacki

[jwillis35]

Nobody wants to throw a corps under the bus, and I think all of us are hoping the kids push hard to the end, and that the staff can make something of this show. I'm sure the members are fantastic people, and the staff are all working hard just like any other corps. But in the competitive realm it isn't wrong for any of us to predict where they stand now or later down the road.

As of now I have them behind BD, Crown, Cadets, Bluecoats, SCV, Phantom, Madison, Blue Knights, Boston, and Sprit. That theoretically puts them in 11th.

How will they compare to a surging Blue Stars who, I am told, have major room for growth and a talented corps? How about Crossmen, Academy?

Yes, the Cavaliers will improve all season as one would expect. So will the others. All we can do at this point is to wish them well, but we can also call it the way we see it.

[charlie1223]

They just seem really really young like last year.

If you're young last year and young this year doesn't that imply that vets are not returning? I mean you can't young every year and still say you're retaining vets?

edit: Are you sure they were young last year? Because then this wouldn't be an issue of vet retention.

Edited June 24, 2013 by charlie1223

[GREENBLUE]

If you're young last year and young this year doesn't that imply that vets are not returning? I mean you can't young every year and still say you're retaining vets, no?

They had 50+ age outs last year.

[charlie1223]

They had 50+ age outs last year.

So then BlueDevils92 claim that they were young last year is false. I was actually questioning his accusation not doubting the Cavies. So they were older last year and now they are younger. Hence the difference in performance. The point is that you can't be young two years in a row without a difference in vet retention which if you're correct is not the case.

Edited June 24, 2013 by charlie1223

[GREENBLUE]

So then BlueDevils92 claim that they were young last year is false. I was actually questioning his accusation not doubting the Cavies. So they were older last year and now they are younger. Hence the difference in performance. The point is that you can't be young two years in a row without a difference in vet retention which if you're correct is not the case.

In all honesty, I think everyone was trying claim "age" as being the cause of last years problems. We all know that show design would be more to blame.

I remember last year in Indy watching the age out ceremony and counting the boys. I thought to myself, this is crazy, I thought it was a "young corps".

Edited June 24, 2013 by GREENBLUE

[OrlandoContraAlum]

This was brought up in the Sacramento thread so I figured I'd being it up in its own topic. The Cavies are struggling and by all accounts more than a year ago. Are they on a path to miss finals? We hear they have a young corps which if true at the least says their vets don't trust the system. Many Picked them to pop back into the top 5 but that doesn't seem likely. Are they destined to fall like Madison did when their staff and thinking changed so dramatically? Will they make the correct changes and pop back up like Phantom and SCV have done? I'm a huge Cavies fan but I fear the days of the dominant Cavies may not return or at the least will take awhile.... Thoughts?

Wes P

You cannot be dismissive about this.... Let me remind u that Spirit was last seasons 11th place drum corps... Now they're much better but Spirit may not be top 7-8 this year most likely... It's not inconceivable to see them in the double digits.

Just a little reminder for you: Last year's (eventual) 11th place corps beat last year's (eventual) 8th place corps far later in the season, and it worked out ok for the Green Team in August.

July 7th, Kalamazoo, MI

World Class

1 Bluecoats 78.650

2 Madison Scouts 75.150

3 Spirit 74.150

4 The Cavaliers 73.550

5 Blue Stars 71.400

6 Glassmen 69.500

7 Pioneer 56.800

[drummer5485]

So then BlueDevils92 claim that they were young last year is false. I was actually questioning his accusation not doubting the Cavies. So they were older last year and now they are younger. Hence the difference in performance. The point is that you can't be young two years in a row without a difference in vet retention which if you're correct is not the case.

"Young" in the sense that they had a lot of first year members. Just because they're aging out a lot of people doesn't mean those guys have been in the corps multiple years, we had a lot of rookouts every year I marched.. Especially when it comes to how Cavaliers run things it can take more than one year for a New Guy to completely catch on to the teaching and learning that goes on during the course of the season.

This year though, I paid attention to Facebook pics and there were a ton of blue shorts (rookie gear).

Blue shorts/white shirt is 2nd/rookout year Initiates gear, not New Guy gear