MelloHorn13 Posted October 20, 2005 Share Posted October 20, 2005 And size of the corps does matter. No way a corps of 80 can compete sound wise with a 135 member corps. That is part of the reasoning of dividing Div II/III corps by size. The Bandettes or the Racine Scouts are not going to compete with 25-50 members with East Coast Jazz, Jersey Surf, Oregon Crusaders and the like. I get everything your saying, and not saying DCI is doing anything wrong, I'm saying that some of the things they do seem crazy. But one this this fact that size matters.... I have to somewhat disagree. Mandarins was never very big... didn't get bigger than 75 members(give or take) until after they went div 1, and they always did well. True, size does matter at somepoint., but smaller corps are capable taking out a corps with 30+ more than them. This past season.. Teal Sound and ECJ had the smaller DIV 2 corps.. the rest had 100+ members and we did fine agaisn't them. But again.. I know what you mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaguardguy Posted October 20, 2005 Share Posted October 20, 2005 (edited) There are exceptions to the rule, but they're just that: exceptions. For every instance you cite of a smaller corps beating a larger corps, I'm confident I can cite ten instances of larger corps beating smaller corps. I won't say that it's impossible for a 60-member corps to beat a 135-member corps, but I will say that the 60-member corps has a distinct disadvantage. The sheets reward a lot more than just individual technique and execution. There are ensemble captions, and all captions heavily take into account effect. Size contributes greatly to effect, and displays of technical proficiency by a larger number of members will be more heavily rewarded than the same proficiency by a smaller number of members (rightly so). Do I think II/III should reevaluate their judging criteria? Since DivIII corps have to compete against DivII corps for finalist spots, maybe the answer is to place more emphasis on execution and technique over effect and design? Maybe consider what WGI did placing a 60/40 scoring ratio in their equipment and movement captions with respects to the execution/vocabulary sub-captions? Since DivII/III is arguably (though I tend to disagree) a training ground for DivI, maybe they should focus more on individual technique and reward smaller ensembles that display high levels of individual performance over larger ensembles that may generate more effect but individually execute sloppily? I'm inclined to believe retooling the judging criteria for the II/III sheets is the best way to ensure a greater focus on the education of the individual marching member while ensuring a level playing field for corps regardless of size. Edit: Retooled a word or two Edited October 20, 2005 by vaguardguy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted October 20, 2005 Share Posted October 20, 2005 Minimum of 110 is no big deal for a corps applying for Div I. I'm afraid I must disagree with you (and apparently, DCI) on that point. By that guideline, not a single II/III corps in the entire activity would have been eligible to apply for division I status in either 2003 or 2004. I think that's setting the bar a bit too high. And size of the corps does matter. No way a corps of 80 can compete sound wise with a 135 member corps. While size is a factor, I think we've had enough 80-member corps prove their ability to compete throughout DCI's history, both on the score sheets and the decibel meter. Again, I just don't think it's reasonable to set a minimum standard for applying for division I that five of the 2005 division I field didn't meet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orpheus Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 There are exceptions to the rule, but they're just that: exceptions. For every instance you cite of a smaller corps beating a larger corps, I'm confident I can cite ten instances of larger corps beating smaller corps. I won't say that it's impossible for a 60-member corps to beat a 135-member corps, but I will say that the 60-member corps has a distinct disadvantage. Well, just to play devil's advocate, I could name any number of corps that have beaten other corps that are exactly the same size. Your argument only has merit if there are a significant examples of smaller corps that *should* have placed better but were discriminated against because of their size. Are the "exceptions" truly exceptions, or do they simply reflect the judges fair assessment of the performances in question? I mean, in a lot of cases, larger corps are larger because they have a history of success and therefore are able to attract more members, right? Maybe I'm just thinking too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIYAA Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 Think you guys have gotten way off topic here. I want to hear about "Who's new". Not judging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelloHorn13 Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 By that guideline, not a single II/III corps in the entire activity would have been eligible to apply for division I status in either 2003 or 2004. You right, but this is new. Blue Stars didn't have 110 when they applied. 02and03... Esperanza and Mandarins didn't have the numbers. Cap Reg and Cascades were around the 110 area when they advanced. I think corps can pull off the 110 members, but can they keep 110+ every season? that's the real question Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trumpetboy Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 Esperanza Marched about 110+ in 03 and a little bigger in 04, In 05 they dropped about 20+ people I think. Mandarins are the only corps that jumped to D1 with under 100 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumntuba2 Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Back to new corps... I heard somewhere that the Patriots (Rochester, NY) were going to try to come back as a Division III corps. Does anyone know anything about this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galen Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 And size of the corps does matter. No way a corps of 80 can compete sound wise with a 135 member corps. That is part of the reasoning of dividing Div II/III corps by size. The Bandettes or the Racine Scouts are not going to compete with 25-50 members with East Coast Jazz, Jersey Surf, Oregon Crusaders and the like. Historically, there have been times when a smaller corps has been pretty competitive with the big boys. Les Etoiles comes to mind for a couple of their seasons. 2 years in the mid 90's, they were a solid semifinalist corps, and in 96 they weren't too far out of finals. But I definitely see your point, and I think that kind of achievement would be a bit harder these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBones Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 I heard that a corps from Brocton Ma was at the DCI meetings in Chicago. Their name is Crimson Knights. Any new info? 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.