What do you think the champions of yesteryear would score today?

[GUARDLING]

I don't buy the cleanliness argument on here. Corps were much cleaner back then on certain aspects that are overlooked today. The layering stuff is a bunch of fluff, imho, that doesn't always add to the show and often feels forced because every feels they have to do it. Basically we're getting shows stuffed with clutter ( a lot of the times, not always) that doesn't really add to the show, but adds to the score. Sometimes less is more. I'm thinking Star '93 here.

The sheets are so different, but it's been interesting to read what's been thrown around in this thread. I could see where some of these current shows would be considered a bunch of clutter that hides the intent of the show.

So, I know this won't be a popular opinion, but it's the flip side of the coin.

I think you really need to go back to some videos of some of the early champions and take another look. I did ( and I NEVER watch videos ) and its amazing the dirt you can see, especially in a era of precision . Amazed me actually. Now not that it wasn't great for the time and freakin exciting..it was. Im not disrespecting anything from then either I marched it, taught it , responsible for it also...lol

I totally agree less can be more and some things can be very forced ( bad pacing or programming IMO ) I think the multi layering is outrageous and make any move so much more interesting BUT with that said it needs to be very planned and make sense to not just movement and music but to the actually sequence itself. One thing relating to another. This is what should be evaluated in many areas. Even clutter as you mentioned could have a purpose OR just bad design or performance,

Edited July 24, 2014 by GUARDLING

[George Dixon]

The idea that some of you seem to think that Star 91 would be more competitive than early 2000s Cavaliers in this Era is absolutely absurd.

this is ALL opinion and conjecture - no way of testing any of this... SO, with that said, it's his opinion vs. yours and neither deserves the label "absolutely absurd"

I happen to agree Star 91 would be competitive today - so... but respect that you feel differently!

[jjeffeory]

I think you really need to go back to some videos of some of the early champions and take another look. I did ( and I NEVER watch videos ) and its amazing the dirt you can see, especially in a era of precision . Amazed me actually. Now not that it wasn't great for the time and freakin exciting..it was. Im not disrespecting anything from then either I marched it, taught it , responsible for it also...lol

I totally agree less can be more and some things can be very forced ( bad pacing or programming IMO ) I think the multi layering is outrageous and make any move so much more interesting BUT with that said it needs to be very planned and make sense to not just movement and music but to the actually sequence itself. One thing relating to another. This is what should be evaluated in many areas. Even clutter as you mentioned could have a purpose OR just bad design or performance,

Championship dirt then, championship dirt now. Same corps too. More difficult drill then, more difficult guard now. There's always a trade-off it seems. I've gone back and looked at videos and the averages have shifted. You can not simply look at one corps versus another corps, you have to look at one year from a large sample of corps versus a sample from another year. Remember, we're not just judging corps trends; we're also examining judging trends based upon criteria set during a specific year. So, basically, if the criteria is different, the outcomes will be too.

Attention to good forms and people being in step important then, uniform posture between almost every corps the norm now. Just apples and oranges, imho.

The clutter is uniform throughout; there's no options or variety allowed; either you layer and clutter, or you don't score well on today's sheets. So naturally, the DCI palate adjusts to expect the clutter, just like with anything (food especially).

I've been seeing some great spinning in several corps this year though! Nice to have that flavor back in shows more often.

[GUARDLING]

Championship dirt then, championship dirt now. Same corps too. More difficult drill then, more difficult guard now. There's always a trade-off it seems. I've gone back and looked at videos and the averages have shifted. You can not simply look at one corps versus another corps, you have to look at one year from a large sample of corps versus a sample from another year. Remember, we're not just judging corps trends; we're also examining judging trends based upon criteria set during a specific year. So, basically, if the criteria is different, the outcomes will be too.

Attention to good forms and people being in step important then, uniform posture between almost every corps the norm now. Just apples and oranges, imho.

The clutter is uniform throughout; there's no options or variety allowed; either you layer and clutter, or you don't score well on today's sheets. So naturally, the DCI palate adjusts to expect the clutter, just like with anything (food especially).

I've been seeing some great spinning in several corps this year though! Nice to have that flavor back in shows more often.

I do know the criteria of back then , Thats why I put myself also out there and even based on the criteria of each time to corps of the time it was an eye opener BUT with that said VIDEOS also show way more than what is seen at a show, even by the experts. It's easy to nit pic something when you can go back over and over and study. Its 1 reason I almost never go back BUT it also could be why people who weren't part of it BITD only look at a video and only see one thing. I suspect the same will be in the future with members then to corps now.

I think there was also more bitd then we realize like as you say with sheets today and having to do something..How many corps did company fronts, how many guards did 50 yard line visuals, I think there were things like that BITD also, the sheets may not have been very explicit about it BUT things were expected.

Many today only look at what some call a scatter drill and only think it was because a designer didnt know how to get from 1 point to another. I will admit I HAVE seen some not so great designers do this BUT If anyone had to choreograph a move like this it is a nightmare and very difficult. I know it doesn;t look it but it is. For me I dont like movement just to do it BUT when the layering of multi responsibilities works it's fantastic. But like all of the activity JMO...lol

Edited July 24, 2014 by GUARDLING

[zigzigZAG]

Sorry, disagree. Cavaliers 2002 were excellent visually, and although they won brass, that hornline was playing a whole note, half note festival that was nicely blended. They did not have the talent or the depth of Star 1991 and would get spanked by Star 1991 and by Star 1993 in brass.

As for the whole show, sure, it all depends on how it's judged. Cavaliers in 2002 were clean and good, especially with visual and guard, and brass and percussion were certainly no joke (although again I thought the horn book was easy). They would certainly fair fell today, as would a lot of shows.

Again, so much of this depends on how it's judged.

Yes - I've NEVER heard in three decades what would be considered a difficult brass book from Cavies. They've always been all about the visual. And if they play anything more than whole or half notes, they're invariably standing still.

However, I'd bet my house against Star '91 winning today. Let's not glorify the past. The demand and skill level and show complexity today is greater. There's just more going on.

[jake_the_hydra]

Except that without Star 91 there would be no Crown 13 or Cavies 02 amirite?

Of course. I've acknowledged that

[jake_the_hydra]

Yes - I've NEVER heard in three decades what would be considered a difficult brass book from Cavies. They've always been all about the visual. And if they play anything more than whole or half notes, they're invariably standing still.

However, I'd bet my house against Star '91 winning today. Let's not glorify the past. The demand and skill level and show complexity today is greater. There's just more going on.

You're right about star, but as far as the cavaliers horn lines, those are gross assumptions and over simplifications.

The whole note half note thing is simply untrue; being all about the visual is simply untrue. Go back and watch 2003 and 2004 especially.

Agree that 2002 didn't have as many runs or sixteenth notes or whatever as Star 91; still standard setting in terms of tone quality and color and ensemble skills. Some of you don't get it and that's fine, but what that organization achieved brass wise from 02-04 stands as some of the finest ensemble brass playing the activity has seen. When you compound that with what they were doing visually, simply phenomenal.

[whitedawn]

You're right about star, but as far as the cavaliers horn lines, those are gross assumptions and over simplifications.

The whole note half note thing is simply untrue; being all about the visual is simply untrue. Go back and watch 2003 and 2004 especially.

Agree that 2002 didn't have as many runs or sixteenth notes or whatever as Star 91; still standard setting in terms of tone quality and color and ensemble skills. Some of you don't get it and that's fine, but what that organization achieved brass wise from 02-04 stands as some of the finest ensemble brass playing the activity has seen. When you compound that with what they were doing visually, simply phenomenal.

Everyone gets it. You scored 99 back then by playing with quality, and no one cared if you didn't play and march at the same time. Go back and watch 2002. It's stunning how little playing is done by brass on the move. Stunning.

[Mello Dude]

Everyone gets it. You scored 99 back then by playing with quality, and no one cared if you didn't play and march at the same time. Go back and watch 2002. It's stunning how little playing is done by brass on the move. Stunning.

I give you 2010 BD for that prize.

[cfirwin3]

Some would win, some would not... nearly all would still contend (as in place around 1-4).

A few things to remember:

1. Some champions in some years won with a 95-ish score (the entire field was relatively low).

2. There is a large time frame where design essentially did not change... around the mid 80's to 2000-ish. With some outliers in there that used large props and set pieces THROUGHOUT that time period (including some corps in the 80's)

3. GE expectations are fluid, while most performance captions are not... i.e. brass sections can easily compete across many eras, while GE can't compare due to differences in expectations (notice I didn't say differences in QUALITY).

Now I told a friend last year (new to the activity) that SCV was a pretty good example of what classic drumcorps from the era mentioned above looked like. The 1999 champions are great examples of marching and playing. I think that they would rank around 3-5 currently due to the GE differences only. Either of those corps would win other captions, however.

But, BD 1996... I think they could still win... some Cadet shows from that time period as well. Some of those shows made use of staging and visuals that look very similar to contending shows today. I don't think that Star 91 would win today... but I do think that they could have won in 1999, or 2000 perhaps. It is all about the evolution of GE and the designs that drive it.