Corps 19-25 Placeing Higher

[BlueStainGlass]

What if DCI adopted WGI final numbers? WGI does 15. I know im PSA they go from 60-70 down to 30 down to 15 in 3 shows. If this activity keeps growing with soundsport groups moving to open class it could be a good change.

[C.Holland]

you've also just killed your ticket sales for thursday, and friday.

[BlueStainGlass]

Its currently 39 ->25 -> 12. We have added I believe 2 more corps and don't think anybody folded. Also a chance that an open corps that didn't do finals will. How does 42->26-> really hurt? You will get more butts in seats from the 3 additional corps family. People will still go Thursday and Friday because no guarantee groups make it especially in that 13-17 area.

[2muchcoffeeman]

you've also just killed your ticket sales for thursday, and friday.

This, indeed, may be the most compelling reason to limit the number of corps in the final show. "Killed" is overstating it -- lots of people would pay to see Crown, or their kids' corps, 3 days in a row -- but it probably would reduce demand for Thursday and Friday somewhat.

But the question on the table is not selling tickets; it's creating conditions that make it more possible for 19-25 corps to get a competitive foothold. If you're DCI and if you believe reducing competitive inertia is important to the long-term health of the activity, then Thursday and Friday tickets aren't your primary concern. Creating a more competitive field for Nationals Week is your concern because in the long run, that is what will create demand (i.e., kids showing up for auditions).

[corpsband]

This, indeed, may be the most compelling reason to limit the number of corps in the final show. "Killed" is overstating it -- lots of people would pay to see Crown, or their kids' corps, 3 days in a row -- but it probably would reduce demand for Thursday and Friday somewhat.

But the question on the table is not selling tickets; it's creating conditions that make it more possible for 19-25 corps to get a competitive foothold. If you're DCI and if you believe reducing competitive inertia is important to the long-term health of the activity, then Thursday and Friday tickets aren't your primary concern. Creating a more competitive field for Nationals Week is your concern because in the long run, that is what will create demand (i.e., kids showing up for auditions).

Doesn't setting (what are, I'll grant you, artificial ) boundaries for performing Friday and Saturday night actually create a competitive incentive to improve? Letting all corps perform every night would appear to remove that incentive and have the reverse effect. A 12th place corps has an incentive to increase the spread from the nearest competitors in order to receive the "reward" of one last performance.

Furthermore you're assuming that "once a 12th place corps, always a 12 place corps". I suspect there are many (most?) corps for whom 12th place was just a stepping stone to further advancement. IOW "we made finals this year, let's beat [10th] place corps next season". I'd posit that a corps which is content with sitting in 12th place will ultimately fall out of finals in short order. So if you finish 12th place, better plan on beating 11th next season!

I get what your saying about the difference being statistically very small. In terms of quality, perhaps 12,13 and 14 are nearly identical. To that I'd simply say "distinguish yourself".

[2muchcoffeeman]

I think what you say is generally true, but none of it really has a nexus to the number of corps performing on finals night. And I think you undermine your own argument for setting a limit on the number of Saturday corps. How? Because you say the important thing to a corps is placement -- i.e., a complacent 12th place corps will fall in its placement.

Sure, performers love to perform and they all want the opportunity to do one more show on Saturday. But this is a competitive activity and the overarching reason why corps compete for a spot in finals is because it is the same thing as competing for the highest placement possible. A 13th-place corps competes on Friday not to be in finals, but to be 12th. The fact that the 12th-place corps happens to be on the program on Saturday is an artifact of a committee sitting around 40+ years ago and deciding that "Finals" should be 12 corps. It could have just as easily decided it should be 10, or 15.

If the Saturday competition comprised (pick a number) corps, the 13th-place corps would still compete to be 12th. And the 12th would compete to be 11th. The number of corps on the program on that day won't change that. And the rest of it remains true: Slack off even a little bit and you'll get passed.

Edited May 24, 2016 by 2muchcoffeeman

[corpsband]

I think what you say is generally true, but none of it really has a nexus to the number of corps performing on finals night. And I think you undermine your own argument for setting a limit on the number of Saturday corps. How? Because you say the important thing to a corps is placement -- i.e., a complacent 12th place corps will fall in its placement.

Sure, performers love to perform and they all want the opportunity to do one more show on Saturday. But this is a competitive activity and the overarching reason why corps compete for a chance to take the field Saturday is because competing for a spot in finals is the same thing as competing for the highest placement possible. A 13th-place corps competes on Friday not to be in finals, but to be 12th. The fact that the 12th-place corps happens to be on the program on Saturday is an artifact of a committee sitting around 40+ years ago and deciding that "Finals" should be 12 corps. It could have just as easily decided it should be 10, or 15.

If the Saturday competition comprised (pick a number) corps, the 13th-place corps would still compete to be 12th. And the 12th would compete to be 11th. The number of corps on the program on that day won't change that. And the rest of it remains true: Slack off even a little bit and you'll get passed.

Making the Saturday night show is a goal all it's own. It's a plateau (no matter how arbitrary). It's not the same as "trying to make 13th" because (and only because) 12th place earns you a third performance. The goal is real even if the criteria are completely arbitrary. Aspiring to attain a goal is part and parcel of the competitive nature of drum corps. And getting to perform saturday night is a reward all it's own -- even if you come in 12th and leave 12th.

Edited May 25, 2016 by corpsband

[2muchcoffeeman]

Sure, finals is a real goal. "Making finals" and being among the "top 12" are equivalent. Competing for the highest placement possible is, by definition, competing to "make finals." And if they are equivalent ideas, then the motivation to compete is, in theory, equivalent all along the spectrum, from highest placement to lowest. The only variable left to consider, then, is the point along the number line where you determine who moves on to Saturday. So, why 12? Why not 15 or 25?

But even if I were to accept your premise, how does preserving an arbitrarily set limit, which has the effect of encouraging talent migration up the ladder to a greater degree than otherwise would be the case, help 19-25 corps become more competitive?

Indeed, "making finals" is an all-too-real goal, one that warps membership patterns and concentrates talent at the top, contributing to competitive inertia. That's the puzzle the OP is trying to solve here.

Edited May 25, 2016 by 2muchcoffeeman

[corpsband]

Sure, finals is a real goal. "Making finals" and being among the "top 12" are equivalent. Competing for the highest placement possible is, by definition, competing to "make finals." And if they are equivalent ideas, then the motivation to compete is, in theory, equivalent all along the spectrum, from highest placement to lowest. The only variable left to consider, then, is the point along the number line where you determine who moves on to Saturday. So, why 12? Why not 15 or 25?

But even if I were to accept your premise, how does preserving an arbitrarily set limit, which has the effect of encouraging talent migration up the ladder to a greater degree than otherwise would be the case, help 19-25 corps become more competitive?

Indeed, "making finals" is an all-too-real goal, one that warps membership patterns and concentrates talent at the top, contributing to competitive inertia. That's the puzzle the OP is trying to solve here.

While it's very fashionable to blame the corps above you for "sucking up all the talent", I'd like to point out that the "lower" corps have all the cards in this situation.

They have first access to the member.

They have the opportunity to:

• provide an experience members don't want to lose
• inspire loyalty in the member
• convince the member that this corps is moving up and they can be a part of that
• give the member a show design that excites and inspires them
• create an environment where the members know the corps will better each year because the corps is TEACHING the member to be better and better
• make the whole member experience (logistics, admin, food, etc...) equal in quality to those "finalist" corps

There's nothing more exciting than being part of a program which is taking strides forward. Everyone is on a mission. Everyone is excited. Everyone is part of something special. Things are happening in THAT corps that just aren't happening in any other corps.

If the corps staff believes "the fix is in" and they have no chance of moving up, then the corps members will undoubtedly move on to another corps. And it matters little if that staff thinks that said belief is never shared with the members. It will creep into every part of the organization.

The same thing goes for "we're just training members for the finalist corps".

All these members who are "moving up" are currently in your corps. Why aren't you using them as well as those finalist corps seem to do? Why aren't they taking your corps to finals?

Instead of looking at finalists corps and complaining losing about all your talent to them, maybe take a look at WHY those members are leaving. What are those corps doing that you're not?

I don't buy the "we're just training members for those upper corps". This isn't 1970. Kids who are marching corps today have probably been marching for four years in a competitive marching band. They come to their first corps knowing far more than in the past. Heck look at what goes on at the top of the HS activity. Those HS programs are the true "feeder" corps of today.

Hypothetical: Give BD an entire class of high school graduates. Do you think that corps is going place out of finals? HECK NO. Because BD is doing all the other things right. And in their 2nd or 3rd year I'd bet those kids would be contenders.

Anywho...

Sure you could move the limit down to 15. But that just means the 16th place corps will be complaining in the same fashion as 13th is now. It's all arbitrary -- it doesn't matter *where* you set the boundary, the boundary will be arbitrary.

Just food for thought. Probably be flamed to kingdom come for this post.

No matter what -- some kids are gonna jump around. And that's ok. With what they're paying, kids should be free to march where they want to / can. But I think there's a lot more to the story than some would have us believe.

[cixelsyd]

While it's very fashionable to blame the corps above you for "sucking up all the talent", I'd like to point out that the "lower" corps have all the cards in this situation.

They have first access to the member.

That is not necessarily true. Often, the finalist corps have first access to the member. Finalists may be the first corps they see, or the first corps they audition for.

There's nothing more exciting than being part of a program which is taking strides forward. Everyone is on a mission. Everyone is excited. Everyone is part of something special. Things are happening in THAT corps that just aren't happening in any other corps.

If the corps staff believes "the fix is in" and they have no chance of moving up, then the corps members will undoubtedly move on to another corps. And it matters little if that staff thinks that said belief is never shared with the members. It will creep into every part of the organization.

The same thing goes for "we're just training members for the finalist corps".

All these members who are "moving up" are currently in your corps. Why aren't you using them as well as those finalist corps seem to do? Why aren't they taking your corps to finals?

Because since the "world class" system was instituted in 2003, hardly any corps from the 19-25 has climbed into finals at all, much less in the 3-4 year period that your stereotypical HS graduate would be eligible to participate. If you want a chance to march in DCI finals, there are only 16-17 corps who can take you there.