Sign in to follow this  
N.E. Brigand

Why would a corps ever find it "Justify"-able to use an overaged member?

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

As I understand it, 1977 Bridgemen never had an overage member on the field.  They had several long-time members that year who turned 22 while on tour, and the Corps had alternates ready to put in the day they turned 22.  Apparently DCI was checking age at some early show & that was how it all started.  This is why the rules now say 'you have to be 21 on x date to be eligible to march that season' 

As a side note.......ask someone who marched with Bayonne in 1977 how they feel about a certain corps from the mid-west who they feel ratted them out to DCI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, greg_orangecounty said:

As a side note.......ask someone who marched with Bayonne in 1977 how they feel about a certain corps from the mid-west who they feel ratted them out to DCI.

It’s not Cavies fault Bayonne didn’t follow the rules. And if Bayonne DID follow the rules as I’ve seen others say, it’s not Cavies fault DCI disqualified them. Don’t hate the player, hate the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The list of overage delinquents (SCV, Muchachos, Auburn, Crossmen, Bayonne and those not caught) comes with many nuances and motivations (some deliberate, some perhaps not known.)  I remember challenging one director and his priest moderator of a corps which, although quite competent, never did compete in DCI as they admitted they had overage members. "Keeping the 'kids' off the angry city streets in the late '60's and early '70's" was the excuse and rationale I was given. They thought the penalties weren't as important. When the Bishop transferred the priest moderator to another parish, the corps switched names and sponsoring parishes to the priest's new parish. The unit soon died when the rest of the activity didn't buy exceptions for some but not for all.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, greg_orangecounty said:

As a side note.......ask someone who marched with Bayonne in 1977 how they feel about a certain corps from the mid-west who they feel ratted them out to DCI.

or Muchachos about 75

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't think the issue is age as much as talent. Why bother with breaking the rules unless there is something (wildly?) superior about an over-age performer. And if that's true, seems like a lot of band/corps/music ed insiders probably know the person.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:

It’s not Cavies fault Bayonne didn’t follow the rules. And if Bayonne DID follow the rules as I’ve seen others say, it’s not Cavies fault DCI disqualified them. Don’t hate the player, hate the game. 

I don't think it was the Cavies in this case.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, xandandl said:

The list of overage delinquents (SCV, Muchachos, Auburn, Crossmen, Bayonne and those not caught) 

Auburn?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Fran Haring said:

I don't think it was the Cavies in this case.

I thought it was. No reason to be coy about it though. So maybe it was Phantom. My point is that it doesn’t matter who it was. The problem was with Bridgemen, not those who reported them. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mjoakes said:

Wouldn't think the issue is age as much as talent. Why bother with breaking the rules unless there is something (wildly?) superior about an over-age performer. And if that's true, seems like a lot of band/corps/music ed insiders probably know the person.

Exactly. Talent. Imagine if you designed significant portions of a show around a couple OOTW soloists, to capture valuable MusGE etc advantage. Or even a couple of featured Dancers.

Agree that persons with this level of chops would have some notoriety

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, xandandl said:

The list of overage delinquents (SCV, Muchachos, Auburn, Crossmen, Bayonne and those not caught) comes with many nuances and motivations (some deliberate, some perhaps not known.)  I remember challenging one director and his priest moderator of a corps which, although quite competent, never did compete in DCI as they admitted they had overage members. "Keeping the 'kids' off the angry city streets in the late '60's and early '70's" was the excuse and rationale I was given. They thought the penalties weren't as important. When the Bishop transferred the priest moderator to another parish, the corps switched names and sponsoring parishes to the priest's new parish. The unit soon died when the rest of the activity didn't buy exceptions for some but not for all.

In the case of 89 SCV, it was fraud by the overage members...forged documents that fooled everyone (including US authorities).  As soon as Gail found out, they were gone.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.