Jump to content

2019 Predictions!


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, just_another_fanatic said:

What staff acquisitions did Crusaders get in the off-season that would help them beat either Crown or Coats? (BD/SCV has a lock on the top 2, me thinks). 

I would almost bet my life that BD and SCV will go 1-2 this year. Almost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, queenanne_1536 said:

I would almost bet my life that BD and SCV will go 1-2 this year. Almost.

do you have a crystal ball?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  1. Blue Devils
  2. Carolina Crown
  3. Bluecoats
  4. Santa Clara Vanguard
  5. Cavaliers
  6. Boston Crusaders
  7. Cadets
  8. Mandarins
  9. Blue Stars
  10. Phantom Regiment
  11. Blue Knights
  12. Crossmen
  13. Colts
  14. Spirit of Atlanta
  15. Madison Scouts
  16. The Academy
  17. Troopers
  18. Music City
  19. Pacific Crest
  20. Genesis
  21. Legends
  22. Spartans
  23. Seattle Cascades
  24. Gold
  25. Jersey Surf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, George Dixon said:

do you have a crystal ball?

No. I just understand how staffing, talent, time, design and trends work. It's also a fact that BD hasn't finished below 2nd since 2006, so they are the safest bet to remain top 2. Doesn't mean they are going to, but it's THE single safest bet one can make today. SCV lost to Bluecoats once in 2017 and BD twice in 2018. In the last two years, the only corps to beat them were Bluecoats (that once) and BD. They also dominated the captions at finals last year, losing only guard. The last time a corps, other than BD, won most (or all) captions was the 2005 Cadets. That's a promising trend for SCV, and is indicative of them having all the right pieces in place. In 2018, the only corps without any weaknesses were BD and SCV. So, yes, if there's a safe bet for anyone to remain in the top 3 (or 2) it's BD and SCV, and no one else.

Edited by queenanne_1536
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Incognito365 said:

Nobody is denying the design teams abilities. I'm just saying that these 3 shows we have from this design team are all VERY similar in style, and it's going to cause the corps to become stagnant until they take a risk. What's so hard to understand about that? I laid it out in full detail a few posts back. Lol.

I get your point, but would characterize Boston’s recent designs as being safe rather than similar or same.

I agree that they are at the level where artistic risks will be necessary to be best in the world. The staff is wise to not take too many artistic risks before Boston’s brass and percussion can consistently land punches on BD/SCV. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, queenanne_1536 said:

No. I just understand how staffing, talent, time, design and trends work. It's also a fact that BD hasn't finished below 2nd since 2006, so they are the safest bet to remain top 2. Doesn't mean they are going to, but it's THE single safest bet one can make today. SCV lost to Bluecoats once in 2017 and BD twice in 2018. In the last two years, the only corps to beat them were Bluecoats (that once) and BD. They also dominated the captions at finals last year, losing only guard. The last time a corps, other than BD, won most (or all) captions was the 2005 Cadets. That's a promising trend for SCV, and is indicative of them having all the right pieces in place. In 2018, the only corps without any weaknesses were BD and SCV. So, yes, if there's a safe bet for anyone to remain in the top 3 (or 2) it's BD and SCV, and no one else.

Careful, next thing you know they'll be telling you that last season doesn't count and how you can't compare season to season. :peek:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ediker said:

I get your point, but would characterize Boston’s recent designs as being safe rather than similar or same.

I agree that they are at the level where artistic risks will be necessary to be best in the world. The staff is wise to not take too many artistic risks before Boston’s brass and percussion can consistently land punches on BD/SCV. 

In my personal opinion, they are very similar designs. Hell one of them reused a prop from the other show. Lol.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ediker said:

I get your point, but would characterize Boston’s recent designs as being safe rather than similar or same.

I agree that they are at the level where artistic risks will be necessary to be best in the world. The staff is wise to not take too many artistic risks before Boston’s brass and percussion can consistently land punches on BD/SCV. 

I wouldn't say Boston's designs in 2016 and 2017 were safe. I would say they were smart. They were designed to be successful, and they were. They were not designed to medal or win. They were designed to get the corps back into the top 5, and they accomplished that. Now, if they want to move up and challenge for the medal, their design needs to reflect that. I'll reserve my judgement for if they have achieved that when I see the field show. I do think their musical book is a step up from last year, but that doesn't mean an improvement in placement, an improvement in the visual design, and/or an improvement in the overall design.

I always look back to Star in the late 80s. The '88 and '89 shows had tremendous success up to late July and early August. In '88 they beat everyone but BD and SCV. In '89, they beat everyone but SCV, and in both seasons they beat corps like Cadets and Cavies very late into the season. In '88 they placed 7th and finals and in '89 6th. Why? Because those shows were not designed to compete with the top 5 and once other corps cleaned up, they blew by Star. I scratched my head at '89 finals. I have to say I really liked the '89 show, but it was so obvious to me that the show the corps was given was far beneath their abilities. The staff flipped the switch in 1990 and the rest is history. At DCM in 1990, I knew they were going to catch Regiment soon and never look back. At DCM in 1990, I was pretty certain they were destined to finish in the top 3 by finals, because of the design. The 1990 design was not a design to get Star into the top 5 or top 3, it was a championship caliber design. 

Why did the staff at Star not flip that switch in '89? Why did they wait until 1990 to do it? I don't know, but I think Boston's staff is trying to figure out when to flip that switch. 

Edited by queenanne_1536
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, just_another_fanatic said:

What staff acquisitions did Crusaders get in the off-season that would help them beat either Crown or Coats? (BD/SCV has a lock on the top 2, me thinks). 

 

27 minutes ago, Ghost said:

Go back and read the post 2016 finals posts starting around October(?).

 

26 minutes ago, Incognito365 said:

They meant this year, not 2 years ago. 

Well then, let's try this again.  Boston signed up some great instructional talent in late 16, gave them nice contracts, told them what the organizations goals were, and left them alone. This is the start of their third year, and I imagine other than techs, etc. the key designers are still in place and working their plan.  When the new folks signed on, the auditions in late 16 brought better talent.  The results of 17 brought better talent leading into 18 and the talent for 19 has also improved and the designers are challenging the mm even more.  Should be a great year for the top 12 from last year.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...