Bluecoats

[Phantom&Phitch]

i "presume" that the lower placing corps should not regularly receive more DCI-given opportunities than corps that score higher than they do, based on championship(s) won 18 years ago... i apologize that that sounds silly to me... i can tell that preference all adds up just fine in your head, and kudos to you for that. i wont even say that the bluecoats should have been that corps to go to the TOC even though it would have made more sense to me than madison... Boston deserved to go even those two tenths of a point more than blue did... and so true that it consisted of champions,.. but you know, you and i both know that the program was pushed as if they were currently the best 6 corps in DCI... if that was your first show, you might even come away with the impression that they were the only 6 corps that mattered, the only 6 corps worthy of any attention... that all other corps were somehow on a lower plane of existence... and that just isnt the case.

Secondly, i hardly see the relevance in stating what you think the majority of California fans would have preferred... if they had preferred Spirit over Madison because they had an amazing show in 1980, that would have had about the same merit as your proposal of their preferences... and i wont quantify that. Are the scouts an Icon?... yep, no argument there- i love to listen to 95 and 96 when i go run- but they are an icon who has been consistently bested on the field of competition by the bluecoats the last 5 years... and what do you call a group who consistently (being the key word there) beats an icon? apparently to you call them not that big of a deal... and call people who disagree with you bitter, or tell them to "get over it"... and thats your rightful opinion, so keep 'em comming. but you know... i still disagree with you.

and i heart you too rubble... good solo by the way! :)

this might be a bad analogy, but...

who do you think sells more concert tickets, The Rolling Stones? or Kelly Clarkson?

[liebot]

Are you kidding me? Yes, I am going to say that I'm entitled to my opinion because I feel like my opinion is completely 100% legitimate.

First, let me state that I am a huge Scouts' fan. I worshipped them when I first got into drum corps (which was four years ago... go ahead, make fun of me. I own all the Legacy DVDs and have watched them all repeatedly. 75 Scouts is one of my favorite shows).

When I think about the top-tier corps, I'm referring to a corps that I believe has a chance to jump into the top 3 the next year. I really don't see Madison doing this. The last time they placed in the top 4 was 1995 (which, in case you're taking notes about my attention to the history of drum corps, is my favorite show of all-time). Their staff has changed incredibly since that year (I'm not sure, Scott Boerma might be the only holdover), and their current staff still has to prove that they can design and perform a product worth of a top 3 (or 4) finish. As far as I'm concerned, they have just as much to prove as Bluecoats do (more so, actually, considering Scouts haven't beaten Coats at finals since 2000).

edit: sorry, that post was directed at scout9193 (Firefox isn't letting me use quotes right now for some reason).

Edited January 6, 2006 by TTitans909

[nero14]

this might be a bad analogy, but...

who do you think sells more concert tickets, The Rolling Stones? or Kelly Clarkson?

i dont know about concerts really... if it were record sales i'd say definitly clarkson by a landslide if you are talking about the past 3 or 4 years... do alot of people still go see the rolling stones in concert these days? i think i was just born too late to be able to fully appreciate their music for their time... (i'm 24)... but i do understand and appreciate that despite my lack of appreciation for them they are universally accepted as rock "icons"... so i see your point... and its not a bad analogy... i mean... and if you were comparing the bluecoats to clarkson, i'd honestly take that as a big compliment... she has had an amazing past 3 or 4 years or so... her latest album according to billboard's website has been on the charts for 57 weeks, and while it peaked in december of 2004, it is still the number 12 album being sold today (i had to look that up, i'm not a fan or anything)...

and Scout9193... i am 100% with you. thank you for that. (and i am being totally serious... i know many times, being nice is meant in a sarcastic way on here... but i'm being sincere)

Edited January 6, 2006 by nero14

[Phantom&Phitch]

i dont know about concerts really... if it were record sales i'd say definitly clarkson by a landslide if you are talking about the past 3 or 4 years... do alot of people still go see the rolling stones in concert these days? i think i was just born too late to be able to fully appreciate their music for their time... (i'm 24)... but i do understand and appreciate that despite my lack of appreciation for them they are universally accepted as rock "icons"... so i see your point... and its not a bad analogy... i mean... and if you were comparing the bluecoats to clarkson, i'd honestly take that as a big compliment... she has had an amazing past 3 or 4 years or so... her latest album according to billboard's website has been on the charts for 57 weeks, and while it peaked in december of 2004, it is still the number 12 album being sold today (i had to look that up, i'm not a fan or anything)...

and Scout9193... i am 100% with you. thank you for that. (and i am being totally serious... i know many times, being nice is meant in a sarcastic way on here... but i'm being sincere)

haha, im only 19, but Stones always have record concert ticket sales (this year they were only surpassed in the world by U2, but in the US they were #1 i believe)

heres another analogy....

julia roberts once made 20million a flick, would she make the same today? no, she's start a bit lower and work her way back up again if she proved successful

[Byron]

in terms of all-time top tier corps (that are still around)...here's my list

Cadets, Cavies, BD, Phantom, SCV, Madison

now, if we are talking about current top tier corps (which is what this thread began as)...

Cadets, Cavies, BD, Phantom, SCV

i love me some madison scouts, but the past couple of years just haven't been up to par with the level of a "top tier" drum corps. to me they are in the middle of the pack right now (certainly nothing to be ashamed of- they are still a GREAT corps!)

with SCV (and a bunch of people have said this) - one year does not make or break a reputation. two or three years...you're getting there (as far as "current top tier," not all-time). if SCV comes back strong next year - i guarantee everyone will just think of 2005 as a rebuilding year, trying new things out, due to staff changes, etc. (ala cbc 1991).

as far as Blooooooo is concerned...they are currently up in the air. if they can maintain their Top 5 status for a few more seasons, maybe break into the top 4...i can see them beginning to be considered a top tier. but for the time being - they are still a middle of pack corps. granted - one that is up-and-coming, but still middle of the pack).

none of that was meant to bash any corps or belittle them or really #### anyone off...just my opinion. (isn't it sad i have to say that in order to avoid being flamed for my opinion?)

Edited January 6, 2006 by Byron

[BlooooContra]

This thread is definitely making me smile tonight. :) Seeing Kelly Clarkson legitimtely brought up to make a DCI-related analogy totally made my night (and no, I'm not being sarcastic).

Let me just say this to simplify things.

As of right now:

The Cadets are a championship-level corps.

Phantom Regiment is a medalist.

The Bluecoats are a top 5 corps.

Madison is back in the top 6.

SCV is in 8th place.

Spirit is a DCI finalist.

Ok. So. Here's the fun part.

The "Top Tier" line can really be drawn anywhere, making whatever top tier arguments null and void. It's a slippery slope argument, which you logic buffs out there know, can never really be solved universally.

If you draw the line at medalists, then only 3 top tier corps exist RIGHT NOW. A corps' history doesn't mean anything. Try telling that to Star of Indiana when they came out of nowhere to burn up the ranks.

If you draw the line at 6, then Cadets, Cavies, Phantom, BD, Bluecoats, and Madison are all top tier corps.

It's subjective. We need to embrace that fact. The line exists in different places for different people. We should respect that. We should also realize that the PAST is exactly that. The PAST. Things can change. BK went from top 6 to what, 14th? Madison was in the top 6 and was out of finals 3 years later. Boston went from a perennial non-finalist to top 5, and has stuck around in finals ever since, making a return to 5th in 02.

Someone will chime in with "but they weren't consistent! they never won!" This doesn't mean that they weren't apart of the subjective "top tier" at one point though. Personally, I consider the top 6 to be top tier. That's just where I draw my line. Madison, thusly, is a top tier corps in my book. SCV is not. Why? Sheer placement in the most recent DCI finals.

Bottom line. Vietnam was a war-torn #### hole. It's now opened its doors and parts of the country are wonderful for backbacking travellers (like myself). If you said it's a war-torn hellhole now just because it once was, and was for a while, you'd be wrong. Such is DCI. What's now is now. :)

[monoemono]

To add more to the fray here--the myth of the "impenetrable" top 4-5 (depending on how you see it)

Let's dig back to @ 1980 finals placements, starting from 2005

BD

4 2 1 2 2 3 1 3 1 1 3 1 4 4 5 4 4 3 4 1 3 2 2 1 2 1

SCV

8 3 5 4 4 4 1 2 3 5 6 5 7 7 4 6 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 1 7

Cadets

1 4 3 3 2 1 4 1 2 3 2 2 1 2 6 1 5 4 1 4 1 1 1 3 7 10

Cavaliers

2 1 2 1 1 1 3 4 7 4 1 4 5 1 2 2 3 5 3 3 5 8 9 11 10 9

Phantom

3 5 4 5 6 7 8 8 4 1 5 3 3 8 3 4 2 6 5 10 8 4 4 4 5 5

Now, that's 26 years of DCI history--you can see why these corps are considered so highly--a couple have a few lower years, but the consistency of these groups to be competitive is remarkable.

It seems to me this is why Star was such a shocker back in the day. It seemed like they were pulling off an impossible feat, cracking this group and staying there.

Madison

6 8 8 14 11 10 6 6 5 6 4 6 6 5 7 9 7 1 6 7 4 5 5 5 3 6

So from the numbers perspective, not as impressive. Not nearly so many 4th, 3rd, 2nd, and first place finishes. But, they are surging--14th to 6th in 3 years...I'm surprised there isn't more Madison talk on these boards.

Now, having said all that...

They're frickin' MADISON for God's sake! Who the #### cares where they finish? They RULE! There is something to the idea of "iconic" status that in this case transcends finals placement. They could place dead last in quarters and I'm still jumping on my seat 'cause I get to see Madison. They have a history of kicking my a**, regardless of placement.

Do the Bluecoats get this same cred? They're getting there. I can't think of any other junior right now that has their own cheer that everyone knows.

The respect thing will come when they have more of those jump-out-of-your seat moments that Madison has even when they place 7th or 8th. The kind of "stick that in your pipe and smoke it" attitude they are famous for.

[dcifan2002]

He he he!

Do you mean that the Bluecoats are like the Crossmen or that more people like the Crossmen? For the Bluecoats to be more like the Crossmen, they would have pull a 2002 Madison. Unless you are saying that the Crossmen this year are emulating the Bluecoats, a la 1999...

Elmo Blatch

no, read what I wrote. i meant it as a complement.

THE CROSMEN usually finnish ahead of the BLUECOATS till recently.

It seems to me that as BONES shifted away from its Identity The BLUECOATS changed theres from BIG BAND to a more CROSSMEN like Jazz aproach.

THE CROSSMEN have only MiSSED finals 8 times since 1975 !

my point is the BLUECIOATS should look up to a corps like the CROSSMEN first before putting itself up with the top 6.

Edited January 6, 2006 by dcifan2002

[nero14]

my point is the BLUECIOATS should look up to a corps like the CROSSMEN first before putting itself up with the top 6.

that sure is an interresting point...

(?)

Edited January 6, 2006 by nero14

[sday88]

SCV has 6 titles:

1973, 1974, 1978, 1981, 1989, 1999

Sorry, I was afraid that might have happened. I just copied off of corpsreps.com and didn't think to look at the scores for any ties other than the Phantom one. My apologies.