corps_forever07 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 This is all so silly... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecoats88 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 not quite.since 1977 the CROSSMEN finnished OVER the BLUECOATS 19 times . to the COATS 10 going back 1990-2005 bluecoats -crossmen 6-----------10 back to 1980-1989 bluecoats ---crossmen 4 6 back to 1977 coats --------crossmen 0--- --- 3 not sure about 1979 or 1983 ? did Bluecoats field a corps those years ?? I like how you quoted me and said not quite to my comment and then proceeded to not show how I was wrong in my statement but to make statistical statements of your own that although accurate did not change the fact that my statement of in the last 20 years, since the Bluecoats moved into the top 25 in 1986, the Bluecoats and Crossmen have finished the season on top of each other exactly 10 times. And the time before 1986, yes I would agree that the Bluecoats did probably look towards Crossmen, along with many other corps, as corps they would like to catch. But the reason I only referenced back to 1986 was to show that since the Bluecoats made it to the Big Time, not placing lower than 15th, and only being out of finals twice, the Crossmen are no longer a corps the Bluecoats strive to catch but are a corps that we were competive with and often times beat. And to answer your other question no the Bluecoats did not field a corps in 1979 or 1983 which makes us the only corps to go inactive 2 seperate times in our history and then make finals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcifan2002 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 I like how you quoted me and said not quite to my comment and then proceeded to not show how I was wrong in my statement but to make statistical statements of your own that although accurate did not change the fact that my statement of in the last 20 years, since the Bluecoats moved into the top 25 in 1986, the Bluecoats and Crossmen have finished the season on top of each other exactly 10 times.And the time before 1986, yes I would agree that the Bluecoats did probably look towards Crossmen, along with many other corps, as corps they would like to catch. But the reason I only referenced back to 1986 was to show that since the Bluecoats made it to the Big Time, not placing lower than 15th, and only being out of finals twice, the Crossmen are no longer a corps the Bluecoats strive to catch but are a corps that we were competive with and often times beat. And to answer your other question no the Bluecoats did not field a corps in 1979 or 1983 which makes us the only corps to go inactive 2 seperate times in our history and then make finals. I am sorry but the BLUECOATS started out in 1977 not 1986. such as your sig. suggests . ( 1982-1988-the begining of it all ) back to the topic. my original point was that the BLUECOATS and CROSSMEN were very equal. not to compare the BLUECOATS with BD , CAVIES , MAD , SCV ,CADETS ,and PHANTOM. as the original poster suggests. you have proven this . thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcifan2002 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 ....currently? 1972 doesn't sound like too recent results.... ok this IS stupid. If that is the case 2004 BLUECOATS 2003 BLUECOATS 2003 BOSTON 2002 BOSTON In 2001 GLASSMEN. 2000 BOSTON ?????? makes no sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rut-roh Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 So how about the Bluecoats are the new Boston, who were the new Glassmen, who were the new Crossmen, who were the new Suncoast, who were the new Spirit, who were the new........ you get the picture. Point being, they need to do something OTHER than just finish in the top 5 or 6. It's a great accomplishment, for sure, and something that is difficult to do in this day and age. But as all those other corps have showed in the past, it only gets you so far. And the true legends of the activity are the corps who can break down that wall and go all the way. The last corps to do that was the Star of Indiana. So until the team from Canton can get past this point and start really playing with the big boys (and I am eager to see if they can, but won't predict they will or won't), they are on the second tier with all the rest. First tier (active corps): SCV, Blue Devils, Cadets, Cavaliers, Phantom Regiment, Madison Scouts. End of story. Somebody will have to finish ABOVE 5th place, and be able to stay there for more than one season for the structure of these tiers to realistically change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jared_mello Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 back to the topic.my original point was that the BLUECOATS and CROSSMEN were very equal. not to compare the BLUECOATS with BD , CAVIES , MAD , SCV ,CADETS ,and PHANTOM. as the original poster suggests. The TOPIC is about now, not results from the late 70's. The Bluecoats WERE comparable with the Crossmen? Who cares? The Cavaliers WERE comparable to the Troopers, and look at the two now. Crossmen DIDN'T MAKE FINALS last year, and that's a fact, not an opinion. The two are clearly not comparable any longer. THAT is a lot more on topic than you comparing two corps from over 20 years ago. You can obviously compare the Bluecoats and Madison of the present, because we were highly competitive throughout the season. We were tenths away from the Cadets this season, a single tenth from Phantom at a show, etc....as far as us officially being part of the upper echelon of drum corps, I'll agree that longevity is a key issue, and beating these corps would obviously be necessary. I'm surprised that there are eight pages about this, because it's clearly relative and a subject filled with bias. It depends where you're looking from, to determine how you view the issue. Simply put, its nothing more than a PERSONAL OPINION, how you judge "upper tier" drum corps; while some refer to DCI history and point out SCV's consistancy and Madison's excellence in the past, others may just mention that SCV finished in 8th and was competing with the Glassmen and the Blue Knights all season, and that we beat Madison, handily, on finals night. There obviously won't be a direct conclusion or right answer to this thread. Lots of good points raised, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jared_mello Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 ok this IS stupid. Give me a break. This coming from the poster who told me to "look forward" when I asked if Crossmen used flugals this past year, and after the Allentown show, thought the Xmen were a point behind SCV. Could you possibly be any more defensive? People have respect for the Crossmen organization, as do I, but look around for a second and notice that coming in 14th shows that there are problems with performance and show design, and as of now, they're not the corps they once were. Best of luck to the future, I expect to see them back soon. You don't need to go after other corps though (Crown as well, looking back on what you've said in the past) to defend your corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueR36 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 (edited) My "drum corps memories" really go back to 1987 and 88 in vivid detail ... I watched live on PBS in 88 and 89, in person in Buffalo in 90 ... then I marched with Bluecoats in 1991 and 92 and was on staff 93 ... and I've been a BIG fan of DCI (especially my Bluecoats) ever since (making it some shows every year and to Finals several times, but still too few for my taste) ... That said ... I commented with some Bluecoats friends last year how funny it was that I was a little disappointed when they finished in sixth in quarters and semi's and saw corps we thought they had a chance to beat move forward into the top four --- considering back when we marched and for much of the late 1990s, we were extremely excited when they seemingly locked up a DCI Finalist spot. It's funny how quickly attitudes can change -- from excited to see them in 12th to disappointment they're only in 6th a few years later. There are only two corps the Bluecoats have never beaten -- BD and Cadets. They haven't beaten Cavies in years (late 1980s) and beat SCV for the first time last year (I was actually a little disappointed when other corps got to say the same thing). The only currently corps the Bluecoats haven't beaten at DCI Finals are BD, Cadets, Cavies and Phantom. So, when making lists like this, the question has to be -- are we talking about what just happened and what's about to happen, or are we talking "all-time"? On the first list, Bluecoats deserve top-billing on the group immediately behing BD, Cadets, Cavies, Phantom and SCV (with SCV moving behind Bluecoats if they don't bounce back this year). Madison is right there with Bluecoats on that first list, along with Crown (Crown fans -- does this topic about the Bluecoats make you upset that CC's not a part of it, or give that happy "sly-like-a-fox, under-the-radar" feeling?) If we're talking "all-time," obviously SCV and Madison are well ahead of Bluecoats. And Crossmen, Glassmen, Boston, Crown, BKnights and even Spirit (although their great years were longer ago than the rest of those) are in a nice clump behind. For 2006, YES they deserve to be in the "elite" discussion. If you're putting together a ranking for the first half of the decade, not yet; if for the decade overall -- we'll see where they go from here. I'm just happy the Bluecoats are in a discussion along the lines of "are they among the elite" rather than "do they deserve to make finals." The whole talk about the TOC tour is old. If fans could've trade any two of those corps for a vintage VK for that tour, most would've agreed (and it would've been an interesting vote to see who would've been gone -- it might NOT have been Madison). Edited January 9, 2006 by BlueR36 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nero14 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 (edited) First tier (active corps): SCV, Blue Devils, Cadets, Cavaliers, Phantom Regiment, Madison Scouts.End of story. thats your story, which you are obviously welcome to, but just be aware that other people have different stories. (referring to a CURRENT list) I personally think we can agree on Cadets, Cavies, BD, SCV, and Phantom... no question in MY mind about those,,, no big deal... but you know,... my personal "teir"ing of those 5 is based on two things 1) their entire history, no doubt... which is why one SCV off year i dont think knocks them out of anyone's list... one year is a fluke 2) the RECENT HISTORY... for goodness sakes people... this is 2006... 2006!this is NOT the late 80s, and if it were, there would be a different dynamic within DCI, this isnt the early or mid 90s... things would be different then too.... this, my friends, is the year 2006... the past 5 years have been 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, and 2001, respectively...you divide "recent" however you want... but, let me say, if you are going to tell me that the late 80s are part of your recent history, i'm gonna say that you are taking your personal interpretation of the word "recent" to extremes, in my opinion. i'm not making the argument that the bluecoats should be on your "top 6 list" (again, referring to a current list)... thats up to you... we can all agree, i hope, that based on our universally accepted standards of determining rank, that the bluecoats are the 5th place corps in the world, behind the bluedevils by 0.8 points and in front of the madison scouts by 1.8 points... so from that point, we each can generate our own opinions about how the corps rank in status, and i think maybe status is the real issue that we are discussing... some of us apparently base current status on 33 years of the history of our activity and not current events or those based on the recent history, and thats a personal decision... in response to all the football analogies... i personally disagree with the "madison=notre dame and bluecoats= oregon ducks" ... i mean... good grief... 2005 wasnt a fluke year... i live in the south, so i'll put it in therms of the SEC because thats what i know best (played with UT's band for 3 years back in undergrad (the first UT))... if Georgia and LSU make it to the SEC championships for 5 years (hypothetically!) and, and say... you are an LSU fan and..LSU beats Georgia every time despite their very similar national rankings and records to that point... how are you going to feel when a georgia fan brushes off the last 5 years for comments about how back in the late 80s how awesome georgia was or in 95 when they went to a really big bowl game...I.E... which fan is REALLY the one being bitter? Edited January 9, 2006 by nero14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesmr Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 (edited) I like how you quoted me and said not quite to my comment and then proceeded to not show how I was wrong in my statement but to make statistical statements of your own that although accurate did not change the fact that my statement of in the last 20 years, since the Bluecoats moved into the top 25 in 1986, the Bluecoats and Crossmen have finished the season on top of each other exactly 10 times. This must be a candidate for Run-On Sentence Of The Year 2006. :P Mike in OH Edited January 9, 2006 by hughesmr 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.