leadsop97 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Hmmm....interesting....I think it's a very good thing myself. If someone comes in who's better, they should get the spot I think...they deserve it. It's like that in everything basically. I didn't play baseball freshmen year of high school and then went out sophomore year and made varsity over kids who had been playing the year prior. It's just the way it is. If you're better, you deserve to get that better spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rd_Star_Brigade Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 You are right and I do'nt care for it in those place's either ! Seems the whole world has a " Do whatever it takes to win ." policy now-a-days. I know I sound old fashion but I can't help it ! LOL :) If you really want to be there, you will improve yourself. Thus it improves the corps. From a larger standpoint it increases value to the corps through competition which is one of the reasons for the corps to be there. The audience/judges don't want to hear people play that do not have the same work ethic as everyone else. Its that simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecoats88 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 when they refer to reauditions they were talking about former members who did not march in 2005, but came back to reaudition for the corps for the 2006 season. I do not know if all of the returning vets from the 2005 corps make the corps automatically or can be bumped, but in the article when they mentioned auditioners and reaudioners the reaudiotners where in reference to former members who did not march in 2005 and were trying to rejoin the corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonnyboy Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Previous poster is right, "re audition" means someone coming back after a year or more off. IMO almost every vet in every case gets a nod. Letting members know all spots are up for grabs is just a way for staff to get rid of vets they don't want, plain and simple. I see no problem in letting go of attitude problems, but I have a real problem in letting go of a hard working kid that may not be a top notch member. I personally think if you let a kid finish a season with your corps you have given him/her your stamp of approval. If the kid gave their all, you own them a spot, plain and simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiedler Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 when they refer to reauditions they were talking about former members who did not march in 2005, but came back to reaudition for the corps for the 2006 season. I do not know if all of the returning vets from the 2005 corps make the corps automatically or can be bumped, but in the article when they mentioned auditioners and reaudioners the reaudiotners where in reference to former members who did not march in 2005 and were trying to rejoin the corps. All veteran members of the Cavaliers must re-audition, whether from this past year or from another year previous. The veteran's have an advantage going in: 1. They've done it before at least once 2. They know the expectations If they chose to slack off in the fall and let their skills falter....who are they letting down besides themselves? the corps.... we're teaching life skills...status quo is moving backwards when other organizations are trying to move ahead of you. to each his own, the philosophy has served us well. jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jared_mello Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 You are right and I do'nt care for it in those place's either ! Seems the whole world has a " Do whatever it takes to win ." policy now-a-days. I know I sound old fashion but I can't help it ! LOL :) I do get your point of view, but in general, the vets gets cut mostly so for reasons pertaining to attitude. Simply, if a vet from the year before had a good attitude but not much natural talent, they'd have improved through the year naturally. Therefore, the next year in auditions, they'd have either proven to the staff that they could improve to a level befitting of the corps they're in, or are simply now good enough to deservingly succeed in their audition without any outside help (i.e. being a vet of the corps). If the person didn't have a good attitude, they either didn't improve as far as marching or playing goes and therefore another person deservingly gets their spot, or they simply got everyone else in the corps sided against them (as we all know, a negative attitude in drum corps, in its various forms, never works out for the person who has one). If that's the case, who is there wanting them back in the corps? Not the staff, because they had to deal with someone whose performance level is significantly lower than everyone else's in the corps, and not the members, because they'd have to spend another summer with someone whose disposition ###### all of them off. Generally, if there's a member with a great attitude but just doesn't improve to the necessary level to blend in with the corps (which is very extremely rare in my experience with three different corps), they'll either notice themselves that drum corps just isn't for them, they'll decide to go to a lower-scoring corps so the talent level of their fellow members isn't as high and they don't stick out negatively so distinctly, or the staff will disregard them having been a physical liability the season before, give them the spot again as a reward for their effors, and keep working to improve them the year afterwards. Hope that brought some understanding to your position and all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sday88 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I know that even back when I marched ('86-'88), I didn't have a guaranteed spot in '87 and '88. I don't recall having a formal audition process though. We just kinda went through the winter camps and were evaluated as we went. But I do know that in '87 especially, I was almost cut. Saved from that by the simple fact that all five of us tenors came back from '86. I was told this recently by another member of the tenor section who was told at the time by the caption head. In '88 I felt a little more secure, but it still wasn't a "given" that I was in. I'm quite sure that if someone better than me were to have tried out, they would have gotten the spot, and deservedly so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penguin Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 (edited) I'm pretty sure that most returning vets get enough leeway (especially if the staff is returning) that it would take some miraculous loss of talent or ability to lose their spot. It's more of a tactic to encourage new members to audition. Edited January 7, 2006 by Penguin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Boo Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 (edited) Holy Smokes ! I think that is just plain WRONG ! I mean I could see it if the vet was trouble. ie; can't get along with others, law breaker. But to cut them because they don't play the b-flat scale as well as some new person ? I could never do that to a member of my family ! JMHO They knew when auditioning as potential rookies that this is the policy in the corps that operate this way. They knew as rookies that they could eliminate a veteran that perhaps had sloughed off and didn't work as hard. And they accepted that reality to get a spot. So, they can't be very surprised if they slough off and someone comes in and takes their position in a latter year. As it's been said, though, veterans being cut VERY rarely ever happens. But making veterans audition for their old spot assures that they'll keep practicing during the off-season and won't just rest on their laurels. The policy helps keep quality high. But back to the original point...they knew what the policy was before they ever auditioned for such a corps the first time and they accepted that policy. Edited January 7, 2006 by Michael Boo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crownpit03 Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 From my observation as well, very FEW vets really ever get cut. Uhm Hi I am a vet that got cut 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.