Jump to content

2020 Rules Proposals


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, garfield said:

Actually, it's just the opposite.

It's not likely that clarinets will replace any one section, it is true that "making room" for WW will likely cut an, otherwise, fully qualified participant.  If you put some of them with a group of WW newly-entering the activity (and the battery and pit, but maybe fewer of them), and presuming you can get 55 of them in one place, you have the makings of a new drum corps just waiting for an ambitious team to take up the challenge, or for an existing corps to justify starting feeder programs in the lower classes.

I believe Any Instrument with NO increase in MM maximums is the only way new participants and new revenue are possible from changing the allowable instrumentation. 

At the end of the day that you describe, there are still 154 participants on the field. How does that square with the stated rationale of providing the experience to a larger number of young people?

If that indeed is the purpose of this proposal, then without a concurrent proposal to increase the size of the unit, it's a hollow statement. 154 = 154 = 154 all day long. You're just replacing current young people with other young people and the overall number of young people participating in the activity remains unchanged. You don't get "new participants and new revenue" from that -- unless this is all some cynical ploy to double the audition numbers by creating false hopes for thousands of young WW players.

Now, if the rationale were revised, and instead it were put this way . . . 

"Opening the drum corps activity to young musicians currently excluded, and closing the drum corps activity to young musicians currently included, is consistent with the DCI mission to offer the opportunity of the life-enriching benefits and enjoyment of marching music performing arts to a wider pool of young people worldwide.”

. . . then we'd have a more honest statement of intent, one with a vision of changing the nature of the activity, not some fig leaf about bringing more youth into it.

 

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

8 minutes ago, 2muchcoffeeman said:

At the end of the day that you describe, there are still 154 participants on the field. How does that square with the stated rationale of providing the experience to a larger number of young people?

If that indeed is the purpose of this proposal, it's a hollow statement. 154 = 154 = 154 all day long.

Now, if the rationale were revised, and instead it were put this way . . . 

"Opening the drum corps activity to young musicians currently excluded, and closing the drum corps activity to young musicians currently included, is consistent with the DCI mission to offer the opportunity of the life-enriching benefits and enjoyment of marching music performing arts to a wider pool of young people worldwide.”

. . . then we'd have a more honest statement of intent, one with a vision of changing the nature of the activity, not some fig leaf about bringing more youth into it.

Otherwise, you're just replacing current young people with other young people and the overall number of young people participating in the activity remains unchanged.

I get it, your math isn’t wrong.

It’s possible that the motivation is the potential availability of new marching members in new performing units. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, garfield said:

It’s possible that the motivation is the potential availability of new marching members in new performing units. 

I'll root for that. But if you want to create a new form of performing unit, why even bother with the rules governing the current form of performing units? Why bring this to a rules congress? If the idea is to add a new kind of DCI-administered circuit beyond the current drum-corps circuit, it seems the place to bring this to the floor is a business meeting, not a rules session.

It's like the CEO of Ford telling the board of directors that he wants to get into the boat business by making changes to their pickup trucks.

Edited by 2muchcoffeeman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Terri Schehr said:

I know Garfield said they aren’t but I can’t help but wonder if they’re letting Kathy be bad cop on this woodwinds proposal. 

One thing I gather, she could handle the pressure and the task.

In the “old days” they might find some individual voice to present any idea.  But now we see lots of committees, most of which, if you read the bylaws, are doing administrative tasks desired by the membership.  How would the membership et al introduce something for its own benefit if not brought forth by its formal representative?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 2muchcoffeeman said:

I'll root for that. But if you want to create a new form of performing unit, why even bother with the rules governing the current form of performing units? Why bring this to a rules congress? If the idea is to add a new kind of DCI-administered circuit beyond the current drum-corps circuit, it seems the place to bring this to the floor is a business meeting, not a rules session.

It's like the CEO of Ford telling the board of directors that he wants to get into the boat business by changing the way the company makes pickup trucks.

No, that’s not what I said.

I’ll try again after pizza.

Edited by garfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the size stays 154, adding woodwinds doesn't "open it up" to anyone. 

All it does is increase the competition for brass spots (or guard spots or percussion spots).

Madison's proposal would be like the NFL saying "ok, from now on, 6 of the 16 regular season games will be exhibitions." Fans, bluntly, don't count when it comes to the scoring system. Trained judges do.

Limits on mic'ing, yup, all in favor.

Live sampling, yeah, fine, whatever, but I hope there's space in the sheets to allow judges to whack those who try it when (not "if") something goes sidewise in live performance.

Judges off the field, whatever. The guard and visual people already decided that all of that sampling of detail was getting in the way of their marching band masterworks. 😎

 

 



 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Terri Schehr said:

I know Garfield said they aren’t but I can’t help but wonder if they’re letting Kathy be bad cop on this woodwinds proposal. 

Well, since Hopkins isn't in the room anymore, SOMEone had to do the job. 

  • Haha 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...