perc2100 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 What are the transfer policies for club soccer? Club football? DCI isn't like a collegiate sport or professional league. DCI is a club sport. You pay into the club so you control where you go. The best clubs attract the best talent. The end. * when you say "club soccer" do you mean, like, Barcelona FC, or Manchester United? If so, the transfer policy is essentially there are two times during the year clubs can make transfers (called 'transfer windows'): usually sometime during the summer and sometime not long after the New Year. The club can transfer one of their players to another club for a "fee," and that player would have to go to that club. For example, a goal keeper at Chelsea who is the second or third stringer won't get much playing time, and his club will 'transfer' him to another club where the keeper will likely get regular playing time. Chelsea makes money, the other club gets a keeper, and the player gets playing time. Sometimes the transfer loans or short-term (for example an MLS player getting loaned to a European club during the winter when MLS is off season), and sometimes it could last for years. If a player is close to the end of the contract, the club who owns the contract will make money off of the transfer fee, but the player might negotiate a new long-term contract with his new club. Think of it as similar to American sports, however instead of playing a player for another player, or a player for draft picks or something (there is no draft in European club soccer), it's flat-out trading a player for $$. I think often the player can have a say on where he's being transferred to, or maybe the press just often makes it sound mutual. If you're not asking about professional club soccer, and more like collegiate/community "club" sports, then I apologize. With the greatest tournament in the world happening right now for the greatest sport on the planet, I definitely have soccer on my brain too much Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 If there was a large problem with members leaving a corps in the lurch mid-season to move to another corps, don't you think DCI would have created some sort of rule by now? Brasso has a solution in search of a problem with this one. AFAIK, there at least used to be a DCI rule that a member participating with a corps up to a certain part in the spring (maybe sometime early May?) cannot leave a corps w/out the corps' permission. This is to keep members who were cut from one corps and decide to march another corps from leaving their corps in the lurch in the event a spot opens up. As for members switching corps mid-season (without a corps folding mid-season), I honestly have never heard of that happening. I've heard of people getting injured or quitting, I've heard of people sitting at home with no corps commitments joining a corps over the summer to fill a hole, but I've never heard of, say, someone from Colts leaving the corps in June to fill a hole in SCV. That would be the ultimate in shi$$y and I'd like to think that NO corps would want to promote that kind of action. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 AFAIK, there at least used to be a DCI rule that a member participating with a corps up to a certain part in the spring (maybe sometime early May?) cannot leave a corps w/out the corps' permission. This is to keep members who were cut from one corps and decide to march another corps from leaving their corps in the lurch in the event a spot opens up. As for members switching corps mid-season (without a corps folding mid-season), I honestly have never heard of that happening. I've heard of people getting injured or quitting, I've heard of people sitting at home with no corps commitments joining a corps over the summer to fill a hole, but I've never heard of, say, someone from Colts leaving the corps in June to fill a hole in SCV. That would be the ultimate in shi$$y and I'd like to think that NO corps would want to promote that kind of action. yup yup yup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 What are you saying here ?.. that sports leagues ( or any organization for that matter ) don't put in rules until after.. AFTER ...they have "a problem "? Are you kidding ? We put in proactive rules in place all the time, in all organizations, to PREVENT future possible "problems" from cropping up. DCI is chock full of placement competitive inertia for its championships. You can't name me a single sports league in the world that has dozens of teams each year competing but where just 3 of them have won over 40% of the titles the last 35 years. You might not see this as " a problem" ( you're an alum of a Corps that wanted to rig the system even more to their benefit by permanently creating a 7 Corps permanent slotting system within their competitive division and under threats of extortion as their method of introduction of its proposal ). So of course you don't want any sensible and reasonable transfer policies even to be considered. The totally wide open system " upload " benefits your former Corps bigtime... and I " get " that as a result you don't want to even consider the possibility of a feasabiliity study to determine if DCI has a " problem " here with its highly unusual practice of having essentiallly no marcher transfer poliicies in place of any kind. Good grief, you'd think from reading things on DCP here that Drum Corps circuits have never had reasonable and sensible transfer policies in place before for their member Corps. But of course they have, and it worked out reasonably well.. and as intended..., and with realatively few complaints from parents and mnarchers too... and most importantly it added a measure of stability to the association corps, even in uncertain and unstable times. I think he's saying that because there is no problem, it's not worth having a rule or over-thinking things. DCI has problems aplenty as it is, and spending time/resources crafting rules and penalties for something that is not even remotely a problem would be asinine 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) I think he's saying that because there is no problem, it's not worth having a rule or over-thinking things. DCI has problems aplenty as it is, and spending time/resources crafting rules and penalties for something that is not even remotely a problem would be asinine When a sports league made up of over 2 dozen teams loses teams, and has had just 3 teams win over 40% of its league titles the last 35 years ... and as a partial result of that, are losing fans , revenues, and tv exposure,etc you can bet your life that they would think that this is " a problem " for them. The fact thst some in our little insular bubble world don't think we have " a problem " does not mean that we don't. I'm not saying that the adoption of a reasonable and sensible transfer policy is a panacea thats going to cure all our lack of growth ills, but I do believe that I am the lone wolf barking at the moon on this where the vast majority seemingly of DCP'ers not even want to consider the possibility of reasonable and sensible transfer policies between competing teams is a future recipe for big time future " problems ". Now.. having said all this, I am no matryr, and don't want to die alone on a distant hill on a cause with no support ( on DCP anyway ), so I'm off my hill now.. but you've at least heard the lone wolf crying out in the wilderness on this, so I'm totally satisfied and at peace with that fact now anyway. Edited June 25, 2014 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candl Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 IMO the "pursuit of excellence" that gets a kid through the toil of spring training and tour will also motivate the kid to look for an opportunity to pursue even greater excellence (e.g. consider higher ranked corps) during the audition season. So, moving corps is understandable.However, though the kid only commits for one summer, corps invest that summer in teaching the kid skills that will benefit some corps long after the summer is over. (Clearly a kid will begin a subsequent season much more advanced and valuable to a corps than at the beginning of the previous season.) IMO the corps that invests in teaching the kid should be the corps that benefits from teaching the kid. So, IMO, if another corps will benefit from the kid's skills, then the corps that invested in teaching those skills - but won't receive the benefit - should be reimbursed. I think this could be the "transfer policy": "If a corps offers its vet a contract by September 1 and the kid subsequently signs a contract with a different corps, the new corps (NOT the kid) must then pay an "education reimbursement fee" of $5000 to the old corps." The intended consequences: A. Kids are free to change corps without restriction or financial burden. B. Yet parity will increase as the fee results in fewer corps accepting transfers. C. As corps become increasingly confident in the benefit they will receive for the education they provide the kids, more will be willing to maximize their investment in teaching. D. Yet corps only benefit if they display a comparable level of loyalty to the kid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xandandl Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 I seem to recall that March first was agreed by the directors as the cut off for corps hopping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 I seem to recall that March first was agreed by the directors as the cut off for corps hopping. I sense that date (March 1st) is too early; inasmuch some corps' are still auditioning, winter programs are still going on, etc. At one time it was June 1st, if I recall correctly....but that was a while ago. From a legal sense, one may be hard pressed to stop (or interfere with) any performance member from leaving one non profit organization (a corps) for another at anytime, contracts or not. Performing members are participating in non compensated roles as a hobby, of sorts----they may come and go as they please. Rather, I sense this would have to be deemed a "gentleman's agreement" between the organizations themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skevinp Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 What are you saying here ?.. that sports leagues ( or any organization for that matter ) don't put in rules until after.. AFTER ...they have "a problem "? Are you kidding ? We put in proactive rules in place all the time, in all organizations, to PREVENT future possible "problems" from cropping up. What is DCI's disruptive asteroid contingency policy? We can't risk not having one. And the Blue Devils win most of the time, so you can't tell me we don't need one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HornTeacher Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) What is DCI's disruptive asteroid contingency policy? We can't risk not having one. And the Blue Devils win most of the time, so you can't tell me we don't need one. If memory serves, any consideration of "asteroid contingency" went out along the times of the Sunset Regiment, Spacetown Cadets, Vanguard Rockets, Sky Ryders, or Mercury Thunderbolts -- although the occasional "Sunburst" still remains a very distinct possibility. Edited February 22, 2015 by HornTeacher 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.