stop the corps folding

[Pete Freedman]

Any rule change that increases uncertainty in championship rankings, necessarily punishes the current top corps hugely.

False!!! Unless, of course, you want to mainly support a monopoly type system then the answer would be true. Within any competitive environment, whether it be competitive athletics or the world of capitalistic business, the rules and regulations should support 'impartial fairness' amongst all entities involved so that any entity can achieve success or failure via said competition. In sports the underdog, via rules and regulations, should have an equal shot at the title as the top dogs (ie see the past few years in NCAA Basketball with Butler having a shot at the title, or when in NASCAR Alan Kulwicki won the title as a low-budget single owner/driver); and in the world of business the small underfunded corporations should be able to bite into the profit margins of the top dogs through fair marketing practices and thus become more and more profitable and successful via rules and regulations which promote fair competition (ie see the rise of Samuel Adams Beer Company). Rules supporting a single organization in a monopoly situation, or rules which support impartial fairness of competition; those are your choices.

Ok, let me rephrase it for you (and I think only for you):

Any rule change that increases uncertainty in championship rankings, necessarily will anger the current top corps hugely. Because they won't be winning anymore, see?

I think that led to the next point which was that it would therefore accelerate the MiM process.

[Slingerland]

Any rule change that increases uncertainty in championship rankings, necessarily will anger the current top corps hugely. Because they won't be winning anymore, see?

The Cadets and BD and Crown (lately) don't win all the time because of the rules. They win because they've assembled very good staffs and have programs designed to efficiently teach their members how to achieve at the highest levels. Success is a process, not a given. Corps that have lost touch with their process (like Cavaliers lately, for ex) pay a price, competitively.

The talent levels of the members in the WC corps in the top 14 or 15 really aren't that different. The talent differences in the adults who oversee, manage and teach at those organizations, on the other hand, are huge. Putting spending caps or member penalties on the top corps won't help the corps at the bottom of the competitive ladder; only inspired leadership and a dedication to building a program and a process will do that.

Change the rules to G bugles and no electronics next year, and BD will still be in the top 3, most likely, and Pioneer will still be in the bottom 3. Swap the staffs at those two corps, on the other hand, and it's likely that you'll see each experience a shift in placement.

Edited August 20, 2013 by Slingerland

[Stu]

Ok, let me rephrase it for you (and I think only for you):

Any rule change that increases uncertainty in championship rankings, necessarily will anger the current top corps hugely. Because they won't be winning anymore, see?

I think that led to the next point which was that it would therefore accelerate the MiM process.

This I agree with; because within any activity, whether in sports or business, a rule that increases uncertainty of success (via impartial competitive rules) certainly will 'greatly anger', not punish, but 'greatly anger' someone who has been and is accustomed to rules which have long supported their successful monopoly.

[Pete Freedman]

... Pro football teams can be thought of as "football schools"...

You 'cannot' be serious!!!!!!!!!! While they have coaches who 'guide and instruct' players, the Dallas Cowboys, Pittsburgh Steelers, Baltimore Ravens, et al are not 'schools' by any definition of the word; not even remotely close. They do not consist of teachers and students, but consist entirely of professional career adults, some who manage and some who do the grunt work, just like all other professional corporations.

They shouldn't call the players' bosses coaches then, because coaches are teachers.

Who cares, Stu? The definitions of things are vague, and that's ok because those definitions (sport, school) are not important at all in decision making. To make decisions based on semantics is to not only use a semantic argument (generally a fallacy) but to create policy based on it. Whether drum corps or football teams are sports, schools, both or neither is irrelevant except perhaps as reminders of the underlying characteristics that do matter.

In our case there is neither player poaching nor spiraling player salaries (at least these are not said to be a crisis threatening the activity), so there is no need for rules that were created to prevent those things in other sports.

Maybe these rules would help in some other way, but not because drum corps is "a sport". That's my only point with that.

[BRASSO]

Not because they choose to audition. It would be because they are actually marching with them. There is a competitive and financial advantage gained from being able to replenish your ranks with veterans from other corps. I personally know people who ended up marching with top corps, such as Cadets, Cavaliers, etc, who would not have been able to get in there without the seasoning they received at another corps. Those corps received a benefit from the other corps, perhaps while they were arguing that those lower corps should get less money and even be bumped from performing at the same show with them. I'd like to see them give something back for effectively being a feeder corps.

My sentiments exactly... and have been a proponent of some level of workable consideration for years, and have said as much here on DCP.

The fact of the matter is, the Blue Devils Feeder Corps are not neccessarily their B and C corps. Their " feeder Corps " are the Corps whose best marchers they select to bring in to their Corps each season to help them stay right where they've been for the last 35 years. Its a FANTASTIC system if you are David Gibbs el al, lets face it. The system works perfectly for the Blue Devils (and the other few elites ) Does it lead to more marchers throughout the activity however ? Lead to more Corps ? lead to more competition up at the top ? lead to the growth of more fans ? Lead to more stability across the board for the entire activity ? Lead to growth of the activity all across the board ? Lead to fairer revenue streams among the member Corps ?

Edited August 20, 2013 by BRASSO

[GUARDLING]

My sentiments exactly... and have been a proponent of some level of workable consideration for years, and have said as much here on DCP.

The fact of the matter is, the Blue Devils Feeder Corps are not neccessarily their B and C corps. Their " feeder Corps " are the Corps whose best marchers they select to bring in to their Corps each season to help them stay right where they've been for the last 35 years. Its a FANTASTIC system if you are David Gibbs el al, lets face it. The system works perfectly for the Blue Devils (and the other few elites ) Does it lead to more marchers throughout the activity however ? Lead to more Corps ? lead to more competition up at the top ? lead to the growth of more fans ? Lead to more stability across the board for the entire activity ? Lead to growth of the activity all across the board ? Lead to fairer revenue streams among the member Corps ?

WOW!!! Bd is responsible for alot Oh and the other Elites......i would like to know when ELITE became a dirty word..I remember BITD admiring the " ELITE " and wanted to be just like them :smile:/>

Edited August 20, 2013 by GUARDLING

[Pete Freedman]

The Cadets and BD and Crown (lately) don't win all the time because of the rules. They win because they've assembled very good staffs and have programs designed to efficiently teach their members how to achieve at the highest levels. Success is a process, not a given. Corps that have lost touch with their process (like Cavaliers lately, for ex) pay a price, competitively.

Yes, although some could respond by saying that the same would be true in, say, football if they never had the draft and various other leveling policies. The same few teams would win every year. And you could rightly credit the top teams for that.

So the policies in this thread aren't trying to change rules designed to keep BD at the top, but rather to introduce rules that hurt them competitively for no reason other than to help the lower corps in order to increase competition and unpredictability. Some call that unfair, others call it fair. I say it's difficult to implement when MiM is strong.

The talent levels of the members in the WC corps in the top 14 or 15 really aren't that different. The talent differences in the adults who manage and teach at those organizations, on the other hand, are huge. Putting spending caps or member penalties on the top corps won't help the corps at the bottom of the competitive ladder; only inspired leadership and a dedication to building a program and a process will do that.

Change the rules to G bugles and no electronics next year, and BD will still be in the top 3, most likely, and Pioneer will still be in the bottom 3. Swap the staffs at those two corps, on the other hand, and it's likely that you'll see each experience a shift in placement.

That's it! Random instructor assignments!

(I'm kidding. No I'm not. Yes I am.)

[Stu]

The Cadets and BD and Crown (lately) don't win all the time because of the rules. They win because they've assembled very good staffs and have programs designed to efficiently teach their members how to achieve at the highest levels. Success is a process, not a given. Corps that have lost touch with their process (like Cavaliers lately, for ex) pay a price, competitively.

The talent levels of the members in the WC corps in the top 14 or 15 really aren't that different. The talent differences in the adults who manage and teach at those organizations, on the other hand, are huge. Putting spending caps or member penalties on the top corps won't help the corps at the bottom of the competitive ladder; only inspired leadership and a dedication to building a program and a process will do that.

Change the rules to G bugles and no electronics next year, and BD will still be in the top 3, most likely, and Pioneer will still be in the bottom 3. Swap the staffs at those two corps, on the other hand, and it's likely that you'll see each experience a shift in placement.

Ehhhhhh... the thing is that the rules within DCI are driven by those who have the voting power and influence to keep/change the rules in their favor. BD, Cadets, yes they have great performers and great staff; but nobody can deny that part of what keeps them on top is their directors make sure the DCI competitive rules benefit just those who can financially afford the changes (ie themselves). You can come back with, well the other WC directors can out vote them (or rebel against them, see the reaction to the G7 proposal). However, this is akin to why any large group of people can be controlled by a select few; those who have the real power make the rules; they will always skew their rules in their favor; and they will most always be able to strong-arm others into complying with keeping them in power. If you want to place a kink into this power structure, somehow get a multi-billionaire to invest in turning all non-G7 corps into organizations which would make Star of Indiana look like a sand-lot kool-aid business. Then the current Top corps directors would no longer be able to drive the DCI rules/regulation bus. What really surprised me, however, was that after Crown spent all those years building and scratching, coming from a dead last place struggling corps to a top WC corps, Kevin Smith and Jim Coats decided to take a huge disrespectful dump on many other corps by signing onto the G7 proposal; but that is another issue for another thread.

[GUARDLING]

I'll say it AGAIN.....not that I disagree with SOME things that a few have posted BUT where's all the support of the little guy.....certainly isn't in the stands...just ask those who have been there as a MM :blink:/>

Edited August 20, 2013 by GUARDLING

[BRASSO]

The Cadets and BD and Crown (lately) don't win all the time because of the rules. They win because they've assembled very good staffs and have programs designed to efficiently teach their members how to achieve at the highest levels. Success is a process, not a given. Corps that have lost touch with their process (like Cavaliers lately, for ex) pay a price, competitively.

The talent levels of the members in the WC corps in the top 14 or 15 really aren't that different. The talent differences in the adults who oversee, manage and teach at those organizations, on the other hand, are huge. Putting spending caps or member penalties on the top corps won't help the corps at the bottom of the competitive ladder; only inspired leadership and a dedication to building a program and a process will do that.

Change the rules to G bugles and no electronics next year, and BD will still be in the top 3, most likely, and Pioneer will still be in the bottom 3. Swap the staffs at those two corps, on the other hand, and it's likely that you'll see each experience a shift in placement.

The Cadets and the Blue Devils DO win every year because of the unfettered unrestrained, uncompensated, unacknowleged receipt of the best marchers that cut their teeth on DCI Drum Corps at the lower level Corps, and as such their training wheels are off the little bikes and they are prepared to ride the big bikes now with no training wheels. The system continues the next season then as the lower tier Corps brings in the next one that wants to learn how to ride a bike and not fall off the bike.

You asked if we moved the BD staff to Pioneer and the Pioneer staff to BD what would happen ? But lets change the dynamic a bit. What if BD and the Pacific Crest were not allowed to take in any marchers from any other Corps for 36 months. They both keep their current staffs during this timeframe. After the 36 months, does Pacific Crest stay as further away in scores as they currently are now with BD ? Better yet, what if BD could not take in marchers from other Corps for 36 months, but the Bluecoats could. Both BD and Bluecoats kept their current staffs. After 36 months, who beats whom ? BD continues to beat the Bluecoats, or the Bluecoats overrtake BD ? Well, if its all the staff " instruction", and its " hard work ", and its " knowing how to win " and blah blah blah, then one would believe that BD in this scenario would continue to beat the Bluecoats. But I don't think so. The flow of unfettered talent to the Bluecoats in these 3 years from other Corps, coupled with Gibbs,and Downey, et al having to teach up their MM's ( like all the lower tier Corps have to do ) would result in BD taking their fall to the Bluecoats for certain after 36 months in my opinion. One might say, well you have created an unfair dynamic, Brasso,as you allowed the Bluecoats to take in experienced and talented MM's from other lower tier Corps for 36 months, but your scenario does not permit this for BD for THEIR 36 months.

I know. it would be unfair to BD for this scenario. But how is this all that different than what BD does now compared to others in WC Division competition ?

BD has had the cards stacked in their favor for 35 years, and its the influx of the best talent into their Corps that makes it a hellava lot easier to make the staff at BD look positively brilliant in their " ability to teach ". Sure, their staff is great. But its not like they don't have the talent to keep them right where they are each year, while simultaneously keeping the other Corps at bay, by seeing to it that they have to reinvent the wheel evey year. BD gets the best bikers, puts them on the best bikes that money can buy, and zoom... off they go. The staff gives them the tools to ride like the wind. The others are hooking up the training wheels to their bikes and showing the inexperienced young bikers how to adjust the mirrors, seats, handlebars, and how to pedal correctly. Imsgine if we has a race between the 2 teams. Who would win ? Did the winner have the best bike teachers ? Really ? To not understand the huge difference advantage here between BD and the lower WC Corps is not to be dealing in DCI Drum Corps reality, imo.

Edited August 20, 2013 by BRASSO