Jeff Ream Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 2 hours ago, George Dixon said: Wasn’t Encorps the same bunch that announced a “partnership” with Cadets and then Yea/Cadets had to go on social media to explain that absolutely wasn’t the case? Embarrassing. Yup. No idea what was behind that in either direction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 2 hours ago, George Dixon said: Wasn’t Encorps the same bunch that announced a “partnership” with Cadets and then Yea/Cadets had to go on social media to explain that absolutely wasn’t the case? Embarrassing. The parallel with the statement that Cadets had to issue is striking. This from Cadets: "The Cadets posted on Facebook: Recently an unofficial post appeared on the Encorps social media pages announcing an alliance between The Cadets and Encorps. Despite the sharing of some resources, instruments, contacts, and best practices, there is not an official cooperative alliance or agreement between the two organizations, nor is there one planned for the near future. We wish Encorps the very best of luck as they prepare for their third season. If you are interested in more information regarding the 2020 Cadets or 2020 Encorps organizations please visit their websites at join.cadets.org or jamwithencorps.org. The Cadets apologize for any confusion or inconvenience this may have caused." And this from Encorps release: "Indeed, we were being offered shows in which we were asked to sign contracts. This signaled to us that we are cleared to FULLY participate in the 2020 season, for which we were preparing. This is what made their decision to not allow us to travel to championships even more puzzling." It seems that in both cases, Encorps made presumptions that turned out to be not true. In one case it hurt them reputationally with a firm "clarification" from Cadets, and the other that they might be afforded some special consideration to continue with fewer performers just because they were being offered shows with contracts. I, of course, am only speculating but I'd lay you odds that they were being offered specific performance opportunities contingent on them qualifying in every other way up to and including meeting the new 55 min rule. Maybe this was not made clear in each and every encounter, but the presumption of attaining some exemption was on Encorps' part, not DCI's. If one poster here can know the bylaws with such specificity that he discovered an error as an important source of confusion then, certainly, a performing unit seeking to attain such membership should reasonably be required to do the same thing proactively and inside-out. When I ask myself "How can this happen?", MikeD provided the clearest possible potential circumstance in that they had a significant executive change during that same time. Also, there seems a lack of clarity of what steps to follow to pass the reviews by DCI, although they state they had successfully met most of the requirements and DCI was happy with the '19 review. If they were unclear about something, it surely was the cloud around the 55/110 rule ($1 to Cixelsyd) and when it was to go into effect. The committee ratified it in October, which means it was generally and officially known and discussed over the prior 2019 season. It is not possible to imagine reasonable odds that Encorps was left completely in the dark about the rule change and when it was going to happen while at the same time they were being lauded for their success during 2019's season. So, as much as the OP desires it to be so, DCI is not the bad guy here. The membership wants a more-substantial presentation of drum corps at its WC formats and the 55/110 rule change is how they've voted to push for it. Drum Corps is hard, and it's impossible if enough members can't be attracted for whatever reason. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, cixelsyd said: Subsequent-year implementation is not the law. (<-- you should have stopped there.) There is plenty of precedent, however. Many equipment rule changes allowing more valves on brass, or adding A&E, have been done that way. Brass changes were even phased in over three years. All of these "precedents" are not. They are major changes that affected all WC corps. Those are not precedents for how DCI notifies groups attempting to gain membership what the rules and requirements are to do so. The sin of unpublished processes is only outdone by the entrenched presumptions of precedent. Edited January 1, 2020 by garfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 By the way. Happy New Year everyone! I appreciate the thoughtful and respectful discussion of DCP. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeRapp Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 (edited) On 12/29/2019 at 8:21 PM, DCIat14 said: Herein lies part of the issue. Let's take Cascades - their camps start significantly later than most of the other corps due to the school schedule in the Pacific Northwest. Therefore, some corps are in to their first performance while Seattle Cascades have only been in Spring Training for a week (if that). That is a HUGE gap to overcome! Their time to clean, perfect, and perform is significantly reduced due to this schedule - it would make very little sense to go East to turn around and come back West. That's a long trip! So not only do they need to attract members at an increased cost due to increased travel costs (it takes forever to get anywhere), they also must do so with the reputation of consistently being in the bottom of the pack. It isn't that the members aren't passionate about what they do, they just have a few more mountains to climb so-to-speak. ...but we don't talk about that. Open Class is often the place where kids gets hooked on drum corps. It gives members that might not have the opportunity otherwise to march and fall in love with an activity that many of us have had the experience to enjoy. It helps them build confidence and they look at the WC members with awe and wonder. In a few years, they decide "Hey, I want to try that WC thing!" and off they go! There are some WC corps (and very old, historical OC corps - to Garfield's point) who have off years, rough financial years, etc. This new policy leaves very little room for those rough years & creates situations where some of our currently successful WC corps would not be here today. THAT is concerning. Not to mention, I have seen some 40 member corps perform the pants off some shows. It's harder to perform with fewer people because the flaws stand out more. It's $700 and it's worth it to every single one of the open class members who get to warm-up next to the Blue Devils, or the Blue Knights, or the Boston Crusaders, or the Bluecoats. Sometimes things are worth more than the money they provide. It's about the experience and the fact that the members from those top Corps love giving back. Corps who have that passion will find a way to make that $700 work. If DCI takes that opportunity away by regulating a 55 member minimum (which is a full-bus), then they are limiting the success & growth of both open and world class. Open class deserves more respect than what you are giving them. Okay but if 55 isn’t the line, what is? You have to draw a line somewhere. 55 is a single full bus. If you can’t fill one bus, can you honestly make it on a tour? Seems like the more important question is, did someone make a mistake by approving them to move up from Soundsport? It looks like they missed some pretty important factors in their evaluation. Edited January 1, 2020 by MikeRapp 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybersnyder Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Not every non-scholastic marching band venture is going to be successful. When one fails, maybe it's just a failure and not a vast conspiracy to ward off future competitors.My blues/covers band isn't playing Madison Square Garden and it's not because Jason Aldean is holding us down, it's because we suck and have a sub 400 likes on Facebook, so we're doing local bars aka Sound Sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terri Schehr Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, garfield said: By the way. Happy New Year everyone! I appreciate the thoughtful and respectful discussion of DCP. I made it until 11pm central time. I’m a wuss. Happy New Year! 🎉🎊 Edited January 1, 2020 by Terri Schehr 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabe92 Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 5 hours ago, Cainan said: ^^^ THIS ^^^ If I am paying money to go watch a drum corps competition and these guys are on.. well... let's be honest, this is my hot dog corps. Now I get it that is not fair to the performers, but it is what it is. And I am just saying what a lot of people won't. To me, the big issue is why can they not recruit members? It's not as if there aren't high school music programs close by... The problem MUST be internal and not the fault of DCI. All DCI does is provide a contest schedule and a venue in which to compete. Do you know what The Academy, Blue Stars, Carolina Crown, Genesis, Jersey Surf, Mandarins, Music City and Pacific Crest all have in common? They all performed in DCI's "second tier" and are now succesful World Class units. Perhaps instead of complaing about DCI, they ought to be figuring out what made those corps so sucessful and how they used Open Class as a springboard. Or perhaps they should look at longstanding Open Class corps such as BDB, Gold, Guardians, Legends, Raiders, Southwind, Spartans and Vanguard Cadets and find out how they both recruit and retain members and try to emulate success. Just a thought. Perhaps when I go watch a drum corps show, I got a few more groups (lower ranking OC) for free in addition of the line up. Many time, those groups put out a great product and often gets more clapping and appreciation than bigger groups. Mandarins and blue stars did compete with 30 members not too long ago... raiders competed with 40 as early as last year. Carolina Crown was beatten by groups of less than 40 members for their first few years. Bdb didn’t look like today in the beginning.. in fact they looked like the BdC of today... which in turn looked like.. ugggh.... a group for beginners. A very cute, effective, well ran and well received group for beginners. By taking out the opportunity to start new drum corps at a achievable size there will be less and less drum corps until everything collapse. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 1 hour ago, garfield said: The parallel with the statement that Cadets had to issue is striking. This from Cadets: "The Cadets posted on Facebook: Recently an unofficial post appeared on the Encorps social media pages announcing an alliance between The Cadets and Encorps. Despite the sharing of some resources, instruments, contacts, and best practices, there is not an official cooperative alliance or agreement between the two organizations, nor is there one planned for the near future. We wish Encorps the very best of luck as they prepare for their third season. If you are interested in more information regarding the 2020 Cadets or 2020 Encorps organizations please visit their websites at join.cadets.org or jamwithencorps.org. The Cadets apologize for any confusion or inconvenience this may have caused." And this from Encorps release: "Indeed, we were being offered shows in which we were asked to sign contracts. This signaled to us that we are cleared to FULLY participate in the 2020 season, for which we were preparing. This is what made their decision to not allow us to travel to championships even more puzzling." It seems that in both cases, Encorps made presumptions that turned out to be not true. In one case it hurt them reputationally with a firm "clarification" from Cadets, and the other that they might be afforded some special consideration to continue with fewer performers just because they were being offered shows with contracts. I, of course, am only speculating but I'd lay you odds that they were being offered specific performance opportunities contingent on them qualifying in every other way up to and including meeting the new 55 min rule. Maybe this was not made clear in each and every encounter, but the presumption of attaining some exemption was on Encorps' part, not DCI's. If one poster here can know the bylaws with such specificity that he discovered an error as an important source of confusion then, certainly, a performing unit seeking to attain such membership should reasonably be required to do the same thing proactively and inside-out. When I ask myself "How can this happen?", MikeD provided the clearest possible potential circumstance in that they had a significant executive change during that same time. Also, there seems a lack of clarity of what steps to follow to pass the reviews by DCI, although they state they had successfully met most of the requirements and DCI was happy with the '19 review. If they were unclear about something, it surely was the cloud around the 55/110 rule ($1 to Cixelsyd) and when it was to go into effect. The committee ratified it in October, which means it was generally and officially known and discussed over the prior 2019 season. It is not possible to imagine reasonable odds that Encorps was left completely in the dark about the rule change and when it was going to happen while at the same time they were being lauded for their success during 2019's season. So, as much as the OP desires it to be so, DCI is not the bad guy here. The membership wants a more-substantial presentation of drum corps at its WC formats and the 55/110 rule change is how they've voted to push for it. Drum Corps is hard, and it's impossible if enough members can't be attracted for whatever reason. I also wonder if the some of the changes within YEA led to the confusion as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Just now, Jeff Ream said: I also wonder if the some of the changes within YEA led to the confusion as well. The Encorps situation would not be the first I've heard about. 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.