2019 Phantom Regiment

[queenanne_1536]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

You can't have it both ways. Pat's staff was still in place in 2009. So that is Pat's fault, correct? And if you say no, how can you place blame squarely on Dan with his previous top five, and winning, success prior to Pat showing up?

I never said anything about 2009, but I'm not sure I blame anyone for 2009. It was a different show. It was a risk. They didn't want 2009 to be anything like 2008. They were plagued with constant rewrites the whole season. Of course, that makes it hard to clean. Sh!t happens. I don't necessarily think there was any one reason 2009 was a struggle. It seems a perfect storm. 2010 was nice and they had four really good years (2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013).

Nothing is any one persons fault or one persons success. It's a team. Pat put the team in place for Regiment to be very successful from a competitive standpoint. He succeeded. That team unwound under Dan's leadership and now look where we are at. Again. People who are happy at work don't leave their jobs unless there is more money, they just want a change, they want more responsibility, or they just aren't happy. I've been through all of that. Of course, I don't know why Regiment's star staff left, but the point is they did.

Edited June 28, 2019 by queenanne_1536

[fatbrassboy]

10 minutes ago, queenanne_1536 said:

I never said anything about 2009, but I'm not sure I blame anyone for 2009. It was a different show. It was a risk. They didn't want 2009 to be anything like 2008. They were plagued with constant rewrites the whole season. Of course, that makes it hard to clean. Sh!t happens. I don't necessarily think there was any one reason 2009 was a struggle. It seems a perfect storm. 2010 was nice and they had four really good years (2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013).

Nothing is any one persons fault or one persons success. It's a team. Pat put the team in place for Regiment to be very successful from a competitive standpoint. He succeeded. That team unwound under Dan's leadership and now look where we are at. Again. People who are happy at work don't leave their jobs unless there is more money, they just want a change, they want more responsibility, or they just aren't happy. I've been through all of that. Of course, I don't know why Regiment's star staff left, but the point is they did.

Were they able to pay them enough? Were they given creative license? I doubt either of these happened.

[Lance]

I'm just getting a little sick of the over-arranging. The pieces the corps has covered the past few years have been really good...like impossible to mess up unless you try to fiddle with them entirely too much. 

[Continental]

13 minutes ago, queenanne_1536 said:

They didn't want 2009 to be anything like 2008. They were plagued with constant rewrites the whole season.

Gee - I thought they were plagued by a drill writer that brought out a sub-par product according to the judges which made the corps decide to almost "completely" re-write the drill from the beginning of the season onward.  Said drill writer got a lot of help with drill in 2008 from what I remember.

Yes they were plagued.  No, the drill wasn't that bad at the beginning in 2009 but someone or several people decided to rewrite almost the entire drill.  The rewrite made things worse for them because they could not recover due to the rewriting.  

And for those lamenting about 2010 - it was quite a mess at the beginning of the season, but it eventually grew strong.  I remember looking at their first show with Myron's drill and really questioning their ability to handle what he had written (as well as their ability to completely fill their tuba line because it was full of holes almost up to the past half of the season) 

[Stu]

19 hours ago, queenanne_1536 said:

Exactly. Spartacus came about because of Pat Seidling more than anyone else. Yes, I know that he was gone by then, but it's the staff and direction he put in place that led to Spartacus. He is the one that turned a Regiment, who declined in the late 90s, into a champion caliber corps by 2006. The hangover form him lingered for a couple years, then poof. That is evident by Regiment's pretty consistent drop since 2008, with 2012 being the brightest spot. Dan drove off all their great staff members. People who are happy at work typically don't leave unless they get offered more money or a higher position. 

 

11 minutes ago, queenanne_1536 said:

I never said anything about 2009, but I'm not sure I blame anyone for 2009. It was a different show. It was a risk. They didn't want 2009 to be anything like 2008. They were plagued with constant rewrites the whole season. Of course, that makes it hard to clean. Sh!t happens. I don't necessarily think there was any one reason 2009 was a struggle. It seems a perfect storm. 2010 was nice and they had four really good years (2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013).

Nothing is any one persons fault or one persons success. It's a team. Pat put the team in place for Regiment to be very successful from a competitive standpoint. He succeeded. That team unwound under Dan's leadership and now look where we are at. Again. People who are happy at work don't leave their jobs unless there is more money, they just want a change, they want more responsibility, or they just aren't happy. I've been through all of that. Of course, I don't know why Regiment's star staff left, but the point is they did.

I placed both of your posts back to back. Ummmmm..... You certainly are trying to have it both ways! You say Pat was responsible for the staff in 2008 even though he was gone. You say he was the reason for the win because it was his staff not Dan's. Then your latter post completely contradicts your former. It is a fact that Pat's staff was still completely intact in 2009 just like  in 2008; moreover, it started to break apart in 2010 and they left during the years you say were really good, 2010- 2013,  yet no credit is given to Dan by you. So which post is correct, the former or the latter?

[EricS]

7 hours ago, geluf said:

I agree that Will Pitts doesn't deserve the *degree* of ragging he's getting in this thread...buuuuut I'm going to quibble slightly with the idea that his product is improving.

If it is, it isn't being borne out by the scoring.  In fact, one could fairly easily draw the *opposite* conclusion:

In 2016, Phantom scored 8th in Brass and 8th in Music Analysis

2017: 10th in Brass and 11th in Music Analysis

2018: 10th in Brass and 12th/10th in Music Analysis (2 judges)

Now in 2019, although we haven't had a regional yet, they seem to be scoring in a way that will drop those captions below 12th.

My take on Will is that he was thrown into way too much responsibility, way too soon.  He's barely 30 and the program coordinator and brass arranger for a (possibly former) Top 12 WC corps.  Now as an arranger I've always sort of considered him pretty middle-of-the-road.  He won't hurt you and he won't help you, so to speak...but there was nothing in his time at Phantom as an arranger to indicate that making him the arranger AND the program coordinator was in any way a good idea.  It looks like "favored son" status, to be honest, and I have to wonder if someone else, who wasn't so linked to Phantom's big 2000s push to grab their first non-shared gold, were to have output what Will has there to this point if they would even still be on-staff...let alone elevated to Program Coordinator.

This year's show concept and design are just not good. Full stop.  That buck stops somewhere: When it comes to show design, it stops at the Program Coordinator.  It's one of the major tenants of the job.  Will is taking a lot of heat, yes...but he's the Program Coordinator.  It comes with the territory.

I think if he were still just the Brass arranger he could be continuing to grow, but he got thrown in the deep end and doesn't have a life vest on.  That's on administration.

Saying it agaiin, why should PR  be relegated to someone like Pitts to "continue to grow."  I say it shouldln't.  His writing is about on par with sophomore composition class and he has no creativity..

[Stu]

9 minutes ago, Continental said:

Gee - I thought they were plagued by a drill writer that brought out a sub-par product according to the judges which made the corps decide to almost "completely" re-write the drill from the beginning of the season onward.  Said drill writer got a lot of help with drill in 2008 from what I remember.

Yes they were plagued.  No, the drill wasn't that bad at the beginning in 2009 but someone or several people decided to rewrite almost the entire drill.  The rewrite made things worse for them because they could not recover due to the rewriting.  

And for those lamenting about 2010 - it was quite a mess at the beginning of the season, but it eventually grew strong.  I remember looking at their first show with Myron's drill and really questioning their ability to handle what he had written (as well as their ability to completely fill their tuba line because it was full of holes almost up to the past half of the season) 

Nick Scotella. Drill writer in 2008. Young, maybe even a rookie drill writer in 2008. Check out Visual and GE scores for 2008. They rocked!!!! He also was the drill writer in 2009. He was scapegoated after 2009, in my opinion. Yes he did multiple rewites all season. Not because of his inadequacies; but because concept of The Red Violin was being changed after each show. He did what he was told (by the more experienced staff) who were scrabling to contextualize that violin. The exact same staff put together by Pat.

[Continental]

4 minutes ago, Stu said:

Nick Scotella. Drill writer in 2008. Young, maybe even a rookie drill writer in 2008. Check out Visual and GE scores for 2008. They rocked!!!! He also was the drill writer in 2009. He was scapegoated after 2009, in my opinion. Yes he did multiple rewites all season. Not because of his inadequacies; but because concept of The Red Violin was being changed after each show. He did what he was told (by the more experienced staff) who were scrabling to contextualize that violin. The exact same staff put together by Pat.

So he completed the season with Phantom in 2009?  

 

Edited June 29, 2019 by Continental

[queenanne_1536]

22 minutes ago, Stu said:

So which post is correct, the former or the latter?

Both posts are correct?

Edited June 29, 2019 by queenanne_1536

[Sutasaurus]

2 hours ago, phd-student-TTU said:

What kind of logic is that?

if you don’t feel the current alumni group is doing what it should to reach out to FMMs then offer to fix it, apply to work for them. As for my second comment....if people feel strongly about getting involved then they take the first step and not wait for the a  group to contact them. Don’t use the fact the alumni group didn’t come knocking on your door for your failure to get involved.

Having given up on drum corps as a hobby, I’ve directed my efforts to helping feed the food insecure. It’s something I take very seriously. When we moved to Arizona, I didn’t wait for the local food bank in Tucson to track me down for my work with the Greater Food Depository in Chicago. I took the task on myself! Guess what, they were THRILLED, to get the help!

Parting thought, typing your displeasure on a keyboard doesn’t cut it, taking action does.