Ghost Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 3 hours ago, Eleran said: I believe the plan at one point was to use Blue Devil's tarp from "As Dreams Are Made On" and have Jesus walk across it. Supposedly Judas was going to be used once Madison OK the transfer fee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2000Cadet Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 On 2/14/2018 at 2:10 PM, glory said: So did Cadets. Some people in the stands at finals thought Cadets easily gave us the most beautiful show of the night. Was it a first place show? No, but not because it wasn't quality. People forget that much of the Cadets design staff skedaddled before the season - and a significant percentage of members went with them. This wasn't a prime Cadets corps like some before it. I'd say they did great work creating a quality show under challenging circumstances. HH Sorry, I stand by what I said. You may have thought it was a quality program. I did not. Cadets have built a legacy that they should maintain. BD is able to live up to theirs. Why shouldn't Cadets? I will not dumb down my standards for Cadets because everyone else has chosen to. I know of what they're capable, and I won't settle for anything less. I'll always be critical when their shows seem as though they're begging for applause. When Cadets placed 4th in the past (90s), they were STILL the sh#t. 7 hours ago, cixelsyd said: When did 7th out of 40 become "sub par"? Refer to the bottom quoted post: 3 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: when from 1983 to about 2015 you were usually in the top 4 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 On 2/14/2018 at 6:47 AM, cixelsyd said: I just hope no one has so many props that they can spell out sentences with them. Been done, Star 1990. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonwoody Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 Happy Day-After-Valentines Day !! Have to read backwards to see what I have missed. Hope no one got their faces eaten up lol. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwillis35 Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 19 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: well looking at the recap....no tho i agree about the narration. tied for GE, which the narration definitely played a part in. 2nd in brass, 3rd in ensemble, 4th in percussion. 3rd field visual, 2nd ensemble and 4th guard. Yeah, that 4th in percussion didn't help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Since a number of people completely missed my point, some clarification would be a good idea. On 2/14/2018 at 12:33 PM, 2000Cadet said: These aren't unrealistic expectations. They should be able to find the best staff to make them competitive. If people are willing to accept the cadets being a 7th place corps, then i would suggest they raise their expectations. It is unfair to require members to pay the type of money their paying only to march in a sub par corps. I wouldn't do it. That's just me. 23 hours ago, cixelsyd said: When did 7th out of 40 become "sub par"? Evidently, I should have asked "when did 7th out of 40 become "a sub par corps?". I understand that 7th place is not their finest result in recent times, so pithy responses like these... 22 hours ago, HockeyDad said: About ten championships ago. 19 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: when from 1983 to about 2015 you were usually in the top 4 ... were not news to me. More importantly, to suggest that it is "unfair to require members to pay the type of money they are paying", as this poster did, is downright silly. It does not matter whether "sub par" is defined by the past record of the corps, or merely placing 7th or lower... either way, that makes for at least six "sub par" DCI finalists and a lot of other entertaining, worthwhile corps who owe their members refunds, according to this poster. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2000Cadet Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 2 hours ago, cixelsyd said: Since a number of people completely missed my point, some clarification would be a good idea. Evidently, I should have asked "when did 7th out of 40 become "a sub par corps?". I understand that 7th place is not their finest result in recent times, so pithy responses like these... ... were not news to me. More importantly, to suggest that it is "unfair to require members to pay the type of money they are paying", as this poster did, is downright silly. It does not matter whether "sub par" is defined by the past record of the corps, or merely placing 7th or lower... either way, that makes for at least six "sub par" DCI finalists and a lot of other entertaining, worthwhile corps who owe their members refunds, according to this poster. If that is what you want to take from it, so be it. I consider it sub-par for Cadets standards so if you don't like that, I can't help your feelings. I stand by what I said 100% regardless of whether or not you like it. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranintothedoor Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 (edited) I remember in 2005 our goal was never to beat anyone else but to be the best Cadets corps ever. While I agree that 7th in DCI is not typical or desirable, and while I agree that last year's show may not have been what we were hoping for, I think these are moot. The benchmark for the Cadets shouldn't be the DCI placement but rather how it stacks up to previous Cadets corps. That may not help last year's iteration IMO, but I think that is the standard we should be discussing. Super excited for 2018, regardless!!! :-D Edited February 20, 2018 by ranintothedoor grammerrrrrrr 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 4 hours ago, cixelsyd said: Since a number of people completely missed my point, some clarification would be a good idea. Evidently, I should have asked "when did 7th out of 40 become "a sub par corps?". I understand that 7th place is not their finest result in recent times, so pithy responses like these... ... were not news to me. More importantly, to suggest that it is "unfair to require members to pay the type of money they are paying", as this poster did, is downright silly. It does not matter whether "sub par" is defined by the past record of the corps, or merely placing 7th or lower... either way, that makes for at least six "sub par" DCI finalists and a lot of other entertaining, worthwhile corps who owe their members refunds, according to this poster. the problem is, as i alluded to in an earlier post only Tim K really touched in....is expectation. The Cadets first zigged, then they zagged. For a period of close to 30 years they were a trend setter. Always raising the bar. Doing the impossible. During the later portion of that amazing run, some design flaws started appearing that morphed tremendously in the last 5 years. And now, the corps that changed the game finds themselves consistently trying to catch up. And, while said here, sometimes bluntly, sometimes in veiled terms, major design choices are controlled by one person. A person who stated publicly he doesnt get WGI, which is the trend setting portion of the activity. With the incredible growth in WGI participation.....it became the driving force in design trends that carried over. Indoor guard started as an offshoot of what happened in the summer, just as band grew copying what corps did. But one person calls the shots, and it shows that person can't adapt to the times....or give up the control to let his people do it.And constantly trying to force a message into the shows draws major derision from fans. allowing someone else to be the driving force in design is the best thing that could happen. That's why people left. it wasn't money. it was frustration in the process. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 On 2/14/2018 at 12:14 PM, Jeff Ream said: agree...to a point. In the 90's, it was BD, Cadets, and a rotating cast, tho more often than not Cavies in that top 3 strata. SCV and Phantom snuck in there a time or two after Star left.. It was usually those 3/4 and the rest. Now add in Bloo, Crown and possibly Boston. Now the path to the top thickens. the competition is tighter than ever. So while attaining the top is always a goal, it's a lot harder to get in there. As for why they can't get the top staff to get them there...well......that's been discussed on enough threads on DCP to rival my post count I think the groupings now are: 1. Blue Devils. 2-7. Bluecoats, SCV, Crown, Boston, Cavies, Cadets. 8-11. Blue Knights, Phantom, Crossmen, Blue Stars. 12. 12th seems to be the only open spot that is vied for by several corps. BD has been so dominant, I can't see why they wouldn't be the overwhelming favorite in 2018. Until something changes...nothing changes. 1 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.