Any lock for Top 3?

[cfirwin3]

(Numbering added above to clarify responses below.)

1. I'm not sure if this is correct, particularly as regards there having been "one obvious gold winner for a stretch of time" in many years prior to this decade. In the 38 years from 1972 through 2009, if CorpsReps is correct, only six DCI champions were undefeated (in 1977, 1982, 1994, 2000, 2002, 2009)--and one of those ended in a tie. And besides that, there were a number of close finishes, perhaps most notably (other than the three ties) in 1980, when three corps who have never yet won were less than one point from first place: 27th Lancers, Bridgemen, and Spirit of Atlanta.

2. By contrast, in the first six years of this decade, the champion has been undefeated three times (2010, 2012, 2014).

3. While the G7 concept is/was basically a marketing/financial ploy aiming to lock down a permanent elite status for certain corps, if membership were to be decided based on, for instance, having an average rank over a period of seven years of better than 8th place--a standard by which Carolina Crown, as it happens, would only have first qualified in 2009, six months before the G7 scheme was announced--then there was a G7 in place as early as 1986. For another example: in 1989, the seventh-place corps scored just 5.2 pts. behind the champion, compared to 7.8 pts. in 2013, 8.2 pts. in 2014, and 7.3 pts. in 2015.

4. Pete answered this one sufficiently. (As it happens, last year, for the first time since the G7 were announced early in 2010, two non-G7 corps placed ahead of G7 corps.)

To clarify,

1. Meaning through the 90's-00's we knew pretty well at prelims who was going to win at finals.

2. See above... I'm not making any statements so deep as to compare undefeated records.

3. Oh yes, I know it was more competitive in the 70's and 80's. I was limiting my comments to a period of time in the 90's to 00's Blue Devils, Cadets, Cavaliers with a couple of refreshing moments for Phantom and SCV. Those 3 were the only reasonable/dependable winners... in practice: the G3

4. The antiquated remark is a jab at the origination of the term... not actually coming from drumcorps but from a foreign policy structure tied to developed nations, post 9/11. It's like buying a house with oak cabinets and wallpaper trim in the kitchen... dated.

[cfirwin3]

Just a nit: they can't be "constantly bookin' it" and also "parking and blowing".

Nit... nit... 😉

[jjeffeory]

I tend to agree with you. The old style of just marching around the field...no matter how well it is done...just isn't good enough. It's all about "100 yards of theater".

So if I get you right, something like Machine (Cavaliers 2006), Between Angels and Demons ( Cadets 2011), and E=mc2 ( Crown ) aren't "100 yards of theater"?

Even the way you've described it "the old style of just marching around the field" implies an unfair bias against those style of shows, which is exactly my point ...

...and this is a conversation that I've had with various people on here over time, where they would say what BD does or even the DCI Champion does has no bearing on what other corps do.

There should be room for a clean and innovative drill-centric show to score as many points as a staging-centeric show. Also, staging happens in drill-centric shows too, so that's a little confusing.

Edited July 7, 2016 by jjeffeory

[MikeRapp]

To me, Machine and Frameworks were the last of the great old style drum corps shows. But Machine foreshadowed what BD institutionalized, which is a show concept that uses guard as equal actors in a dramatic production. Angels and Demons and everything Crown has done solidified it.

Bluecoats are proving its not about having a story theme, but rather a concept that treats guard and dance as equal parts of the whole. The days of flags and rifles just spinning and twirling are over.

[N.E. Brigand]

To clarify,

1. Meaning through the 90's-00's we knew pretty well at prelims who was going to win at finals.

2. See above... I'm not making any statements so deep as to compare undefeated records.

3. Oh yes, I know it was more competitive in the 70's and 80's. I was limiting my comments to a period of time in the 90's to 00's Blue Devils, Cadets, Cavaliers with a couple of refreshing moments for Phantom and SCV. Those 3 were the only reasonable/dependable winners... in practice: the G3

4. The antiquated remark is a jab at the origination of the term... not actually coming from drumcorps but from a foreign policy structure tied to developed nations, post 9/11. It's like buying a house with oak cabinets and wallpaper trim in the kitchen... dated.

OK, thanks for taking the time to clarify. As regards point #1, I would observe that for the 20 years 1990-2009, first place in Prelims was not the same as first place in Finals on seven occasions (1992, 1993, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2008), or 35%. For the six years 2010-2015, first place in Prelims was not the same as first place in Finals on two occasions (2013, 2015), or 33%. That's a trend in the wrong direction!

[RPK]

So if I get you right, something like Machine (Cavaliers 2007)

Machine was 2006

[RPK]

So if I get you right, something like Machine (Cavaliers 2007)

2007 was And So It Goes Edited July 7, 2016 by RPK

[cfirwin3]

OK, thanks for taking the time to clarify. As regards point #1, I would observe that for the 20 years 1990-2009, first place in Prelims was not the same as first place in Finals on seven occasions (1992, 1993, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2008), or 35%. For the six years 2010-2015, first place in Prelims was not the same as first place in Finals on two occasions (2013, 2015), or 33%. That's a trend in the wrong direction!

Yeah but 3 of those are a bit dubious in that the 'big surprise' was a tie rather than an upset. I also think that we started seeing a greater surge in outside potential contenders to the typical 3 before 2008.

I don't have enough interest... but it would be important to the discussion to compare the changes in point spread and the number of groups within 2-ish points from the top in finals week as time has progressed to the present day.

I'm guessing that there is a compression in point value spread and the number of groups within those spreads over the more recent years.

[cfirwin3]

To me, Machine and Frameworks were the last of the great old style drum corps shows. But Machine foreshadowed what BD institutionalized, which is a show concept that uses guard as equal actors in a dramatic production. Angels and Demons and everything Crown has done solidified it.

Bluecoats are proving its not about having a story theme, but rather a concept that treats guard and dance as equal parts of the whole. The days of flags and rifles just spinning and twirling are over.

Those Cavalier productions were pretty conceptual... as opposed to programmatic.

That's why the Bluecoats stuff isn't all too far from the mother ship.

[Pete Freedman]

I would say its a combination of both. As for your 2nd question, DCI could have more competitive parity( and thus more excitement, more fan growth, Corps numbers growth, this would bring, etc ) if it was willing to forego its acrchaic, obsolete, non progressive, backward policy of having no sensible and reasonable transfer policy implementation among its member Corps. All successful amateur youth sports leagues have this ( Drum Corps circuits prior to DCI used too as well... and successfully ). However, the elite DCI Corps that have so much influence in DCI would not sign on for this, plus there is no widespread appetite among the Scholastic Marching Band community, nor within DCI, for even a discussion on how this might work and be potentially benefical, long term to both the overall health and stability of the activity, and for a jump start for future growth prospects of DCI. Since there is no clarion call for what all other successful youth sports leagues do regarding this, DCI is pretty much stuck forever, imo, with treading water as an entity, and with little to no chance to ever substantially grow this activity both in the numbers of Corps, number of participants, numbers of fans, number of more Corps competing for titles, etc and so forth. Doing the same things over and over again, tends to produce the same results. As such, the Blue Devils are going to competitively dominate DCI in Titles won for the next half century, imo. Its ok, by me, as I'll be dead and gone during most of it, and the younger, newer fans seem to be ok with the status quo on this as well it would appear.

Nope. I'm calling you on this. The NCAA had a very limited transfer policy designed to address college concerns about recruiters partying and generally 'not bribing' players on campus. It only affected players in the 'elite' leagues where that would be a problem. But they got rid of those policies years ago.

I just checked Pop Warner's policy, which states (Article 10, Part C)

C. Once certified for a particular age/weight division, a participant

shall not be permitted to recertify to a lower division of play

during the current season under any circumstances, but based

on the information available shall be permitted to approve

recertification to a higher division of play.

Which means not only can they move up to a better team, they can do so during the current season, which DCI does not allow (DCI rule 1.2 IIRC)

What amateur sports league has transfer rules, Brasso?