Jump to content

Leveling the playing field


Recommended Posts

Life ain't fair.

"Life is arbitrary. People are fair or unfair." (Jef Mallett)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, Star was an over night success, I was thinking more along the lines of competing for a medal...but if you think about it, it makes the point I was shooting for. Why were they an over night success? Simple answer..Funding. They had the means available to them to be competitive quickly, and that's my point...$$$ would level the playing the field. Read my earlier posts in this topic for reasons why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, I think the "everyone deserves a trophy" has handicapped an entire generation in real life...but that's another discussion.

So maybe a better question would be, "If you could wave your magic wand and instantly have parity in DCI, would you do it?"

You wouldn't. Those organizations that are best managed, have the most aggressive leadership, and can recruit the best staff and members will win.

It's been like that pretty much forever. If you want to win, you set "win" as your default mode and then do the things necessary to get there. If the Troopers or Blue Stars or Seattle Cascades decided they wanted to win DCI, or at least, become more competitive, their Boards would vote to bring in leadership who could and would move the corps in that direction, then do the things necessary to underwrite that change in direction.

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

You wouldn't. Those organizations that are best managed, have the most aggressive leadership, and can recruit the best staff and members will win.

It's been like that pretty much forever. If you want to win, you set "win" as your default mode and then do the things necessary to get there. If the Troopers or Blue Stars or Seattle Cascades decided they wanted to win DCI, or at least, become more competitive, their Boards would vote to bring in leadership who could and would move the corps in that direction, then do the things necessary to underwrite that change in direction.

Ok, so let's say we're on the Troopers or Blue Stars board and we want to bring in the best staff/leadership...what would incentive that? $ perhaps? When you start looking at this as a business vs musicianship it is clear that the way to a "level the playing field" involves MONEY. Period. And this goes back to the other poster who talked about best managed, aggressive leadership, recruiting...yes, that does involve a skill set to accomplish..but come on, this all comes down to who has the most the money. IF corps figured out to how raise more, their competition level would raise, bottom line, period. Can't argue with that. It's pretty simple actually.

*Why was Star successful from the get go?* Did it have anything to do with money?* Hmmm.....

Edited by JKT90
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you start looking at this as a business vs musicianship it is clear that the way to a "level the playing field" involves MONEY. Period.

Money and leadership skills at the upper management levels, starting at the Board. I never said otherwise. Sometimes a superior corps director, with the knowledge of what makes for a good program, can work around the money angle. But generally speaking, yes, having the resources to spend, the vision of what your corps' shows can be, the knowledge of how to recruit the best members and get them to want it enough, and the drive to raise enough money, when necessary, are all parts of the game.

Edited by Slingerland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a follow-on to TerriTroops Move in idea, here is a far more radical suggestion to leveling the playing field...

What are you talking about? Why do we need to "level the playing field?" Are the odds-makers in Vegas complaining or something? So the "little guy" can have a shot at the brass ring (and thus cheapen the whole competitive aspect of the activity)? Because the vocal minority on DCP are tired of seeing BD/Cavaliers/Hopkins win all the time?

Never mind how to go about it; what's the point?

Peace,

Fred O.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you talking about? Why do we need to "level the playing field?" Are the odds-makers in Vegas complaining or something? So the "little guy" can have a shot at the brass ring (and thus cheapen the whole competitive aspect of the activity)? Because the vocal minority on DCP are tired of seeing BD/Cavaliers/Hopkins win all the time?

Never mind how to go about it; what's the point?

The fear is that permanent stratification of placement, with systemic obstacles that stifle competition, will lead to a loss of both members and fan interest (If no one but the current G7 has a shot of medaling in the next decade, then how can other corps hope to attract the best talent? And if they can't attract the best talent, how can they improve?) and so to a reduction in money available to corps, and thus to fewer corps. We looked at some stats back when the latest G7 controversy erupted in January, which appeared to show that DCI had far less competitive "churn" than other competitive activities claiming the moniker of "major league".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, in a way Star did. quick...name me other first year corps that became finalists, especially after the number of corps in existence started to shrink rapidly (note....not blaming that on DCI).

Spirit of Atlanta... when they were sponsored by a bank, and got the services of Jim Ott et al.

Money can't make it happen by itself.

Star started with Delucia, Kershner, et al.

Money + Staff = kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1374119930[/url]' post='3288357']

The fear is that permanent stratification of placement, with systemic obstacles that stifle competition, will lead to a loss of both members and fan interest (If no one but the current G7 has a shot of medaling in the next decade, then how can other corps hope to attract the best talent? And if they can't attract the best talent, how can they improve?) and so to a reduction in money available to corps, and thus to fewer corps. We looked at some stats back when the latest G7 controversy erupted in January, which appeared to show that DCI had far less competitive "churn" than other competitive activities claiming the moniker of "major league".

I think a big part is not because ppl are tired of seeing the same win all the time. For me at least, it's that this organization could be so much more, it could reach a much larger audience...it could at least be on par with US Soccer. It's such a great family oriented competitive sport that people aren't aware of.

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...