why making Finals is so important

[Matt_S]

Yes I will conceede to that point. I will, however; maintain my standard for "excellence" as I had previously defined. the difference now being that I'll limit that standard to DIV I corps only.

Ah, but here's the rub. Let's say that Academy achieves excellence in Div I, let's say they even break 99 with their score. Well what happens if they move up to Div I next year? They're the same organization, the same staff, probably many of the very same kids. Let's say they even put out a better show, but they only score in the 80's and miss finals. Is their achievement any less "excellent" than in the previous year?

Heck, this essentially happened already. Magic notched a 99.05 in Div II finals back in 2002. Later that week, they scored an 84.50 and placed 11th in Div I Finals. I think we can agree that they were excellent when they were competing in Div II, so how would you judge the exact same product once it was in Div I? Would you not say that they still achieved excellence? If you think not, what changed from one night to the other? The corps they competed against? That has nothing to do with the product that Magic put on the field, so that can't possibly be it. All that changed was the standards that they were being held to.

So now I ask, is it fair to hold every corps and every performance to the same standard that we hold Cavaliers 2002? Forgive me, but when it comes to rewarding "excellence", I think our standards are a lot more fluid than that. For competitive purposes, yeah they're all on the same scale. But as fans, I think we have a seperate scale for each organization, regardless of Division lines, or whether a group is a corps or a band. There's excellence to be praised in a great number of performances, if you can bring yourself to recognize it.

[asifindnoarta]

Ah, but here's the rub. Let's say that Academy achieves excellence in Div I, let's say they even break 99 with their score. Well what happens if they move up to Div I next year? They're the same organization, the same staff, probably many of the very same kids. Let's say they even put out a better show, but they only score in the 80's and miss finals. Is their achievement any less "excellent" than in the previous year?

Heck, this essentially happened already. Magic notched a 99.05 in Div II finals back in 2002. Later that week, they scored an 84.50 and placed 11th in Div I Finals. I think we can agree that they were excellent when they were competing in Div II, so how would you judge the exact same product once it was in Div I? Would you not say that they still achieved excellence? If you think not, what changed from one night to the other? The corps they competed against? That has nothing to do with the product that Magic put on the field, so that can't possibly be it. All that changed was the standards that they were being held to.

So now I ask, is it fair to hold every corps and every performance to the same standard that we hold Cavaliers 2002? Forgive me, but when it comes to rewarding "excellence", I think our standards are a lot more fluid than that. For competitive purposes, yeah they're all on the same scale. But as fans, I think we have a seperate scale for each organization, regardless of Division lines, or whether a group is a corps or a band. There's excellence to be praised in a great number of performances, if you can bring yourself to recognize it.

Well we can recognize the Magic 2002 as excellent for DIV II and we can recognize Cavaliers 2002 as excellent for DIV I but at the end of the day Cavaliers 2002 is still the better show. And therefore more valuable as a show.

Edited July 7, 2006 by asifindnoarta

[Matt_S]

Okay. Now forget about divisions. Let's go back to that 8-member band. Couldn't you allow yourself to say they were excellent for having eight members? I would certainly say BRV was excellent for having 15 members. If you can acknowledge that there's an excellence there, even if it can't match Cavaliers 2002, I think that such a group would indeed be worth your time, and even your praise.

[asifindnoarta]

Okay. Now forget about divisions. Let's go back to that 8-member band. Couldn't you allow yourself to say they were excellent for having eight members? I would certainly say BRV was excellent for having 15 members. If you can acknowledge that there's an excellence there, even if it can't match Cavaliers 2002, I think that such a group would indeed be worth your time, and even your praise.

I would never attribute excellence to the amount of members a group has. No, I would not call a group excellent simply "for having eight members." If eight-member bands were better than 135 member bands then we wouldn't watch anything with over eight people in it. Unfortunately for the eight-member band, you simply need more than eight people to create anything great in the marching world.

[Matt_S]

But you just conceded that a group can be excellent for Div II, while another group can be excellent for Div I. Does that not strike you as somewhat arbitrary? What seperates a group in one Division from a group in another? Resources? Members? Practice time? Aren't these the same factors that would seperate an excellent small school with a 15-member band from an excellent larger school with two hundred?

[asifindnoarta]

But you just conceded that a group can be excellent for Div II, while another group can be excellent for Div I. Does that not strike you as somewhat arbitrary? What seperates a group in one Division from a group in another? Resources? Members? Practice time? Aren't these the same factors that would seperate an excellent small school with a 15-member band from an excellent larger school with two hundred?

No. The only factor that separates those two bands are 185 members.

Look, the best groups are the best groups. I don't care about numbers or resources or practice time or anything like that. I only care about good shows. Any show that isn't in the ballpark with Cavaliers 2002 isn't special to me. You can point out that the band only has eight kids; or that the members of that 13th place corps worked hard; or that the DIV II kids get a good experience too. Those are all just excuses and don't justify the poor quality of the product. So some kid joins the BIG RED BAND and as a result kicks the crack habbit and turns his life around. Well neat job kid but unless your band can out march the Blue Devils I really just don't care. YES, I will applaude you for your efforts, and YES, I will congratulate you for having a good experience but I will never call your band excellent unless they are as good as a top 3 corps.

I'm going to judge every marching group on the same scale. I'm not going to call a group excellent unless its excellent. If you have 8 kids in your band I just don't think you've got a shot at creating an excellent show. Corps like The Cadets, Star of Indiana, The Blue Devils and The Cavaliers have set the bar. Unless you are that good you are not excellent.

Even if you say, "well they only have eight kids so they're excellent for only having eight kids" you still can't say you're just as good as BD 2003. Any eight-member group will never be that good.

Edited July 7, 2006 by asifindnoarta

[Liam]

No. The only factor that separates those two bands are 185 members.

Look, the best groups are the best groups. I don't care about numbers or resources or practice time or anything like that. I only care about good shows. Any show that isn't in the ballpark with Cavaliers 2002 isn't special to me. You can point out that the band only has eight kids; or that the members of that 13th place corps worked hard; or that the DIV II kids get a good experience too. Those are all just excuses and don't justify the poor quality of the product. So some kid joins the BIG RED BAND and as a result kicks the crack habbit and turns his life around. Well neat job kid but unless your band can out march the Blue Devils I really just don't care. YES, I will applaude you for your efforts, and YES, I will congratulate you for having a good experience but I will never call your band excellent unless they are as good as a top 3 corps.

I'm going to judge every marching group on the same scale. I'm not going to call a group excellent unless its excellent. If you have 8 kids in your band I just don't think you've got a shot at creating an excellent show. Corps like The Cadets, Star of Indiana, The Blue Devils and The Cavaliers have set the bar. Unless you are that good you are not excellent.

Even if you say, "well they only have eight kids so they're excellent for only having eight kids" you still can't say you're just as good as BD 2003. Any eight-member group will never be that good.

But is there anything in your ratings scale between "excellent" and "poor"? As with most things in life, this is where the majority falls. To lump everything that is simply "not excellent" into the "poor" category I think does a disservice to all the gains and growth opportunities in between (and maybe even diminishes your potential enjoyment of the activity, if I may be so bold). What happens when a show comes along that blows away Cavaliers 2002? Will you then bemoan Cavies 2002 as "poor quality" because it doesn't live up to Troopers 2010 (for example :) )

Part (or maybe ALL) of what makes a show (or anything) "Excellent" is that it is so far above, better, etc. than the norm. If all the shows were of the quality of the ones you mention, wouldn't we still believe that some are "more excellent than others" ?($1 to George Orwell)

[Matt_S]

Well we can recognize the Magic 2002 as excellent for DIV II and we can recognize Cavaliers 2002 as excellent for DIV I

Corps like The Cadets, Star of Indiana, The Blue Devils and The Cavaliers have set the bar. Unless you are that good you are not excellent.

Please reconcile these two statements. You have contradicted yourself.

Edited July 7, 2006 by Maedhros

[asifindnoarta]

But is there anything in your ratings scale between "excellent" and "poor"? As with most things in life, this is where the majority falls. To lump everything that is simply "not excellent" into the "poor" category I think does a disservice to all the gains and growth opportunities in between (and maybe even diminishes your potential enjoyment of the activity, if I may be so bold). What happens when a show comes along that blows away Cavaliers 2002? Will you then bemoan Cavies 2002 as "poor quality" because it doesn't live up to Troopers 2010 (for example :) )

Part (or maybe ALL) of what makes a show (or anything) "Excellent" is that it is so far above, better, etc. than the norm. If all the shows were of the quality of the ones you mention, wouldn't we still believe that some are "more excellent than others" ?($1 to George Orwell)

Good points. Lets say that all the sudden every corps show becomes 10 times better than cavies 02! There would still be variation between every show and there would still be a spectrum of quality. In other words, discussions of quality ( like this one) would still exits. In this new magic Drum Corps world you would still have demanding elitists such as yours truly posting their dissatisfaction with the activity on forums such as this one. However, all the shows would be absurdly good. I think that world would be a better one in which to live. What I'm going for in the real world is radical progress to a point where every corps is absurdly entertaining and precise. This situation is ideal for we could look back on today and say, "wow! look how far we have come!" I want to get to that point. I want a Drum Coprs world that makes Cavies 2002 look like a hack job.

[Malibu]

No. The only factor that separates those two bands are 185 members.

Look, the best groups are the best groups. I don't care about numbers or resources or practice time or anything like that. I only care about good shows. Any show that isn't in the ballpark with Cavaliers 2002 isn't special to me. You can point out that the band only has eight kids; or that the members of that 13th place corps worked hard; or that the DIV II kids get a good experience too. Those are all just excuses and don't justify the poor quality of the product. So some kid joins the BIG RED BAND and as a result kicks the crack habbit and turns his life around. Well neat job kid but unless your band can out march the Blue Devils I really just don't care. YES, I will applaude you for your efforts, and YES, I will congratulate you for having a good experience but I will never call your band excellent unless they are as good as a top 3 corps.

I'm going to judge every marching group on the same scale. I'm not going to call a group excellent unless its excellent. If you have 8 kids in your band I just don't think you've got a shot at creating an excellent show. Corps like The Cadets, Star of Indiana, The Blue Devils and The Cavaliers have set the bar. Unless you are that good you are not excellent.

Even if you say, "well they only have eight kids so they're excellent for only having eight kids" you still can't say you're just as good as BD 2003. Any eight-member group will never be that good.

So corps that have beaten the Blue Devils, Cadets and Cavaliers fall where in your theory? Crossmen has beaten all these corps, not in finals but during a season. You only base what you think is the "best" with the top 3 in finals. I say bologna! I'm glad all corps are different and are ran differently. I wouldn't want to see all corps running around on the field with a concept like Cadets. It would get boring after while. It's like everyone having to eat the one and only flavor of ice cream.