BRASSO Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Depends on who the judges are. Judge Judy is reportedly very tough on those that don't have a proper narration downpat when they come before her to be judged. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry7184 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 (edited) 2002 Cavaliers. Edited July 25, 2016 by henry7184 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadevilina Crown Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 I would rank them as follows: 1. Cadets 2005 2. Cavaliers 2002 3. Blue Devils 2014 4. Blue Devils 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
general_tsos_chicken2 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 cadets 05 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilme861 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Blue Devils 2014. There's a reason that score was as high as it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry7184 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 (edited) Blue Devils 2014. There's a reason that score was as high as it was. I find a 99.65 to be an impossibility. I know it's not saying they were 0.35 from being perfect, but when you have a maximum of 100 points, a 99.65 should be 0.35 from perfect. If a judge gives a 19.9 in a caption, that 19.9 should mean something, not just that they were 0.2 better than the corps they gave a 19.7 to, but that's neither hear nor there. I don't think 2014 BD was a better show, in design, demand or execution, than 2002 Cavaliers or 2005 Cadets. Edited July 25, 2016 by henry7184 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilme861 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 I find a 99.65 to be an impossibility. I know it's not saying they were 0.35 from being perfect, but when you have a maximum of 100 points, a 99.65 should be 0.35 from perfect. If a judge gives a 19.9 in a caption, that 19.9 should mean something, not just that they were 0.2 better than the corps they gave a 19.7 to, but that's neither hear nor there. I don't think 2014 BD was a better show, in design, demand or execution, than 2002 Cavaliers or 2005 Cadets. We're going to agree to disagree. I've been lucky enough to see all 4 shows and no one executed like 2014. We can sit here and debate design and demand all day long as that is more subjective but execution is more cut and dry. That show though is still the only show I've seen where I was literally awestruck by their execution. But again, my opinion and we'll disagree on it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry7184 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 We're going to agree to disagree. I've been lucky enough to see all 4 shows and no one executed like 2014. We can sit here and debate design and demand all day long as that is more subjective but execution is more cut and dry. That show though is still the only show I've seen where I was literally awestruck by their execution. But again, my opinion and we'll disagree on it Fair enough. I happen to think from a execution standpoint 2002 Cavies were about as perfect as perfect can be. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Dixon Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Well, technically, The Cadets in 2005 were the only drum corps to ever win every caption and every sub-caption. They had nothing but 1s across their score. Never been done before or since. With that kind of strength, I'd go with them. This. Second place BD 2014, extremely impressive corps in every measure. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachDrumCorps Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 I would give it to Cadets 2005. They won every caption, plain and simple 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.