Looking for info from an old thread

[JimF-LowBari]

Then it's not fair and rather biased to include it in the graph. Either we include ALL corps EVERYWHERE in EVERY TIME PERIOD (on OR off the field) or ONLY include those corps that are competitive. Doing it the way it has been done creates a biased viewpoint designed only to shape public opinion into believing the activity is dying through the means of informative convenience. THIS is the problem I STILL have with this graph (no offense).

OK, you lost me on this one:

Counting competative corps only - OK

Counting all corps - OK

Counting corps (except parade) corps (IMO, would be in bwteen the other two options) - Not OK....

As for every time period see my response to rut-roh. From what I can tell the decline in corps began in the 60s or so.

[audiodb]

Since 1972 was chosen as the starting point, and 1972 was the year DCI was founded, doesn't it seem that the author is seeking to explicitly implicate that DCI is the main reason for this decline in numbers?

"Explicitly implicate"?

I haven't read the whole thread, but since the author apparently didn't draw such a conclusion himself, then perhaps you should get full credit for volunteering the theory.

If so, then why include corps in the total who didn't participate in DCI competition?? Unless we are now seeking to blame DCI for corps folding who didn't even compete in DCI.

I would try to avoid using the word "blame", personally. But if you want to believe that DCI's actions have no effect on the rest of the drum corps activity, you'll have to find some very deep sand in which to put your head.

If the intention of the author is NOT to implicate DCI in the decline of corps, then why not throw out the 1972 starting point and post a graph that goes back to the beginning of recorded drum corps history and include ALL corps (junior, senior, alumni, parade, standstill, military, whatever), regardless of their competitive status?

That's a lot of work. Would it suffice if we went back to 1963, and blamed the decline on DCA?

[markdewine]

b**bs Ya know...back in April of '65 some drum corps folded, and we're never gonna see them again ! (Appomattox 1865) :P b**bs Probably the fault of DCI LOL b**bs

[audiodb]

Nobody said it was. It's the numbers THEMSELVES that are being questioned. And they ARE very questionable. I'm puzzled as to why the graph author is not willing to post the full lists of corps (particularly in 1995 as I requested). If he has really done his homework (which I'm not FOR ONE MINUTE doubting that he has), he should have the full lists on an easy to access file that would be as simple as a copy and paste and wham - we have the lists and his point is proven and discussion then over. But, the fact that he is not willing to do that makes me very skeptical on the accuracy. I'm not calling him a liar. I'm not accusing him of fabricating. But, I am not willing to accept "I can assure you the 116 active corps from 1995 is absolutely correct" for an answer. Try something like THAT in a court of law sometime.

Well, this list only includes 101 corps, but that's because I only counted the ones that competed in field contests in 1995.

3e Régiment, QUE

Académie Musicale, QUE

Allegiance Elite, ALB

Americanos, WI

Arcs-en-Ciel (Pointe-du-Lac), QUE

Bandettes, ONT

Blue Devils B, CA

Blue Devils, CA

Blue Knights, CO

Blue Saints, ONT

Blue Stars, WI

Bluecoats, OH

Boston Crusaders, MA

Braves, MA

Cadets of Bergen County, NJ

Cadets of Dutch Boy, ONT

Capital Sound, WI

Cardinals, ONT

Carolina Crown, NC

Cascades, WA

Cavaliers, IL

Chevaliers, QUE

Citations, MA

Coachmen, MI

Colt Cadets, IA

Colts, IA

Conqueror II, ONT

Contemporary Youth Ensemble, ONT

Crossmen, DE

Décibels, QUE

Delta Brigade, AR

Dimension, QUE

Dream Warriors, MA

East Coast Jazz, MA

Emerald Knights, ONT

Empire Loyalists, ONT

Étoiles, QUE

Feux-Follets, QUE

Firebirds, NY

Fitchburg Kingsmen, MA

Genesee Quest, NY

Glassmen, OH

Golden Lancers, PA

Impact, QUE

Jersey Surf, NJ

Js, MA

Kips Bay Knight Club, NY

Kiwanis Kavaliers, ONT

Knights, IA

Lake Erie Regiment, PA

Lone Star, TX

Madison Scouts, WI

Magic, FL

Majestic, QUE

Mandarins, CA

Marion Cadets, OH

Marquis, WI

Mélomanes, QUE

Mirage, IL

Multi-Visions, QUE

Nite Express, IA

North Force, MN

Northern Aurora, MI

Northwind, ONT

Oakland Crusaders, ONT

Pacific Crest, CA

Patriots, NY

Pers-Clairs, QUE

Phantom Regiment Cadets, IL

Phantom Regiment, IL

Phoenix, MA

Phoenix, NJ

Pioneer, WI

Prince Hall Lancers, MO

Quest, NY

Racine Scouts, WI

Raiders, NJ

Railmen, NE

Ridge Raiders, ONT

Royal Cadets, MA

Royal Columbians, MA

Santa Clara Vanguard Cadets, CA

Santa Clara Vanguard, CA

Sénateurs (Joliette), QUE

Sentinelles, QUE

Southern Illusion, PA

Southwind, AL

Spartans, NH

Spectrum, NY

Spirit of Atlanta, GA

Spirit of Newark, NJ

Spirit of St. Louis, MO

St. John's, ONT

Stentors, QUE

Strutters, ALB

Suncoast Sound, FL

Trooper Cadets, WY

Troopers, WY

Vagabonds, PA

Velvet Knights, CA

William G. Lucas, NY

[rut-roh]

"Explicitly implicate"?

Yes. Those are the words I used. I'm eager to know what the author was trying to say with this graph, and I asked a question about the intent...was it just to show that the number of corps has decreased? Was the use of the year 1972 significant to the point of implicating DCI as the reason for the decline? Since none of this is made clear in the graph, I'd really like to know, and I think the questions are absolutely legitimate and deserve to be answered. Do you have the answer?

I haven't read the whole thread, but since the author apparently didn't draw such a conclusion himself, then perhaps you should get full credit for volunteering the theory.

I have absolutely no idea what conclusions the author drew from all of this, nor do I see how anyone BUT the author could possibly know what conclusions he or she drew. That's why I asked the questions I asked. I'd like to know more about what the author intended to show with this graph, as stated above. I could care less about getting any credit for anything. Where that bit of nonsense came from, I have no idea. I feel these are legitimate questions. I feel they deserve to be answered. Hopefully, we'll hear from the actual author, but I won't hold my breath.

I would try to avoid using the word "blame", personally. But if you want to believe that DCI's actions have no effect on the rest of the drum corps activity, you'll have to find some very deep sand in which to put your head.

In all the time I have posted on DCP, when I have ever said that I believed DCI's actions have had no effect on the rest of the drum corps activity. I'll save you the time...I have NEVER said that, nor do I believe that. For the third time, I asked what I feel are legitimate questions about the intent of this particular graph...

Was it to simply show that the number of corps has decreased since 1972?

Was it to use the year 1972 to implicate DCI as the reason the number of corps has decreased since 1972?

That's a lot of work. Would it suffice if we went back to 1963, and blamed the decline on DCA?

If this author decides to use 1963 as the date, and uses only all-age and alumni corps as its frame of reference, I'd still be just as inquisitive about the intentions of what the author is trying to say. And it would be just as ridiculous to me to implicate DCA for the decline in the number of all-age corps since 1963 as it is to implicate DCI in the decline in the number of junior corps since 1972. The graph would be just as incomplete and raise just as many questions in my mind.

Edited March 29, 2006 by rut-roh

[audiodb]

You don't get my point....it has to FIRST be proven that this REALLY IS what happened and in the context of "DCI corps" (which is what the context of the question included) - BEFORE the question ITSELF is even relevant.

See..You are just blindly believing that "133 DCI corps folded over a 3 year period". I am not. I want proof. Until we have proof, the question YOU ASKED about "how and why it happened" cannot even be asked as a fair AND RELEVANT question yet.

Well, it's kind of hard to pin down exactly what a "DCI corps" or "DCI show" is. Consider that major shows like U.S. Open (1972) and World Open (1974) became "DCI shows" when they accepted DCI rules, judges and corps. If you count up all the corps that participated in those shows, the DCI regionals and championship week, you'll find about half the activity were "DCI corps" just three years into DCI's existence.

[rut-roh]

Personally speaking, I believe there is a fantastic discussion to be had here about the decline in overall numbers of drum corps since the mid 20th century. We can go on at length about contributing factors (including the impact of different circuits). There is so much to talk about and too many layers to count when it comes to what amounts to a deeply complex issue. The first thing we should do, the way I see it, is take this particular graph and chuck it out the window.

[markdewine]

rut-roh- The graph does tell us two things. How many, and when. The really crucial question is, of course, why? When we can piece together the answers to all the pertinent questions, (who, what, when, where, why, and how) I think we'll all have a better understanding of the issue. B)

[torn8o]

rut-roh- The graph does tell us two things. How many, and when. The really crucial question is, of course, why?

Now there you go again. Asking another "why" question based on the ASSUMPTION that the graph is right. Just blindly believing the graph when the graph might not be true! ***shaking my head***

Hey Markdewine, why do you beat up your spouse?

When we can piece together the answers to all the pertinent questions, (who, what, when, where, why, and how) I think we'll all have a better understanding of the issue. B)

NO! NONE of those questions are pertinent until we know IF the graph is even accurate. We don't know that yet. The graph author has not posted his list. Until he does...the only pertinent question to ask would be "IS the graph true?"

Markdewine...listen...you need to stop asking "who, what, when, where, why, and how" and replace your question with..."IS".

Hey Markdewine, why did you go to jail last year?

Worthless question, isn't it? So is all of the "who, what, when, where, why, and how" questions that you are trying to ask about this graph.

IS...IS....IS.... this graph accurate? That's the ONLY pertinent question that we can ask right now.

Edited March 29, 2006 by torn8o

[SkyRyder_FMM]

Thank you for doing that. Now, KEY in on the number of Division I corps from 1995 - 2005 and you will see the point that I have been harping on. THAT is where the activity is growing and personally is where it is MOST important because it's where DCI membership happens.

I understand what you are saying, but I do think you are overlooking the significant decline in the Div II/III bucket that occurred over the same period.

Year D1 D2/3 Total

1995 18 54 72

1996 20 44 64

1997 21 42 63

1998 19 37 56

1999 21 43 64

2000 19 46 65

2001 18 38 56

2002 19 40 59

2003 23 33 56

2004 24 28 52

2005 24 29 53

Div I increased from 18 units in 1995 to 24 units in 2005, while Div II/III declined from 54 units in 1995 to 29 uits in 2005. Overall, we went from 72 units in 1995 to 53 units in 2005. Again, I emphasize that these numbers only include those corps that actually competed at Championships. I have not had the time to attempt to compile list of the number of competitive units that did not attend Championships for each year, so I do not know how that factor would impact the total numbers.