soccerguy315 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 if corps are going to only tour for a month and beat corps at quarterfinals that have been going all summer, wouldn't that lead to corps cutting down on touring time? Afterall, rehearsal days allow more practice time than show days. What if BD, Cavies, Phantom, SCV, and Cadets all did a 1 month tour so they could be sure to maximize their score come finals night. How many happy audience members would that make? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 if corps are going to only tour for a month and beat corps at quarterfinals that have been going all summer, wouldn't that lead to corps cutting down on touring time? Afterall, rehearsal days allow more practice time than show days.What if BD, Cavies, Phantom, SCV, and Cadets all did a 1 month tour so they could be sure to maximize their score come finals night. How many happy audience members would that make? Let's be realistic: the big corps won't subscribe to that. The top 5 or 6 are DCI's cash cows, and will be pimped as many places as possible. It's why those corps are anchors for shows to begin with. After we get into the 13-24 realm...well, if those corps do get beat (hypothetically, since there's a artifical barrier in place now)..then, yes, perhaps they should look at touring less in order to maximize the potential of their show. As much as I love to see all the units, I can't be the only one to notice that at most competitions (even regionals) the stands aren't exactly bursting at the seams then. IMO, if a ECJ/Spartans beats a corps like Esperanza/Pac Crest, then they earned it...more rehearsal time or not. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumcat Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 Let's be realistic: the big corps won't subscribe to that. The top 5 or 6 are DCI's cash cows, and will be pimped as many places as possible. It's why those corps are anchors for shows to begin with.After we get into the 13-24 realm...well, if those corps do get beat (hypothetically, since there's a artifical barrier in place now)..then, yes, perhaps they should look at touring less in order to maximize the potential of their show. As much as I love to see all the units, I can't be the only one to notice that at most competitions (even regionals) the stands aren't exactly bursting at the seams then. IMO, if a ECJ/Spartans beats a corps like Esperanza/Pac Crest, then they earned it...more rehearsal time or not. :) Maybe they're anchors because they're good? Maybe because they're the biggest draw, they're advertized the most? There's no artificial barrier. There is a financial barrier, and there are recruiting difficulties since kids want to go to winning corps, but there's nothing artificial. You're not suggesting that the corps in 13+ were slighted in their outcome, are you?If ECJ/Spartans want to leave New England for anything other than finals some day, then ya, they deserve it. Don't forget Crown was in their place a dozen years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 ... but there's nothing artificial. You're not suggesting that the corps in 13+ were slighted in their outcome, are you?If ECJ/Spartans want to leave New England for anything other than finals some day, then ya, they deserve it. Don't forget Crown was in their place a dozen years ago. I think the "artificial barrier" remark was referring to the barrier keeping DII and III corps from beating DI 13-24 corps (e.g., different scoring sheets, can't compete at Finals, etc.). He was saying maybe the lower tier Div I could theoretically be beat by an ECJ/Academy/etc, but we can't know for sure because of the artificial barrier keeping them seperate. Anyway, I'm torn on this topic. As bawker states, if a ECJ/Spartans beats a corps like Esperanza/Pac Crest, then they earned it...more rehearsal time or not. That's a very appealing vision -- a take-all-comers competitions. On the other hand, DCI has a right (and responsibility) to make sure that member corps remain healthy and compete in the best environment for that. They are trying to keep corps from jumping to Div I without being fully prepared for it (financially, organizationally as well as competively). Also, I could see the danger in a Div I being beaten in this way, trying to keep it from happening the next year, and making long-term unhealthy choices to compensate short-term. I know this is what corps oversight is for, but maybe DCI is worried about the potential. Like I said, I'm torn on this .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 (edited) Maybe they're anchors because they're good? Maybe because they're the biggest draw, they're advertized the most? There's no artificial barrier. There is a financial barrier, and there are recruiting difficulties since kids want to go to winning corps, but there's nothing artificial. You're not suggesting that the corps in 13+ were slighted in their outcome, are you?If ECJ/Spartans want to leave New England for anything other than finals some day, then ya, they deserve it. Don't forget Crown was in their place a dozen years ago. Of course they're anchors since they're good...that was implied in my original statement. The "artificial barrier" I refer to is the "you can't compete against Division I at Finals unless you move up next year" rule. I don't care what Division you're in, if you can compete, you deserve a shot. One wonders if the rule was put there for financial considerations ( I don't think you should have to run a "full" tour, or even be part of DCI's "Division I" touring model at all to go to Finals and compete... ), or to prevent another Magic 2002/SCVC 2000 from taking place. I'm all for financial solvency, of course, but we all know without these hoops to jump through Academy or ECJ or Spartans could have a legitimate shot at Semis, and even becoming a DCI member corps. I don't see why you can't compete against who you want to at Finals, and run your tour however you, the director, see fit. No one should have to "move up" to compete against anyone...even if Finals week is your only show. And, yes...Crown was in "their place" in 1993...but they still were allowed to compete with everyone else and finished 21st overall, almost taking out the Sky Ryders that year. :) Edited August 18, 2006 by bawker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StupidLikeAFox Posted August 18, 2006 Author Share Posted August 18, 2006 I think it's in a competitive corps best interest to tour as much as possible. More shows = more $$$, which is obvious. More shows also = more critique time, more time to get feedback from judges to improve shows. I think taking a month off from competition to rehearse would competitively set you back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 I think it's in a competitive corps best interest to tour as much as possible. More shows = more $$$, which is obvious. More shows also = more critique time, more time to get feedback from judges to improve shows. I think taking a month off from competition to rehearse would competitively set you back. In most cases, yes. But not every corps has the same challenges. If taking a month off allows you to gain some better recurits who wouldn't be able to march a full tour for whatever reason, would that make them more or less competitive? Hard to say. Also, who's to say that corps aren't or can't get independant critique while practicing? Run throughs for non-active judges/band judges/etc. while not exactly the same thing, still give a corps a relatively objective view of stuff to inprove upon. There's lots of knowledgable folks out there who help a corps improve in this manner. Moral of the story -- there is no one, single answer, and I applaud corps for each finding what works best for THEM in their circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 Moral of the story -- there is no one, single answer Yet, with this competition barrier, there is a defined answer: "Sorry, in order to play here you have to promise to move up." Does more time rehearsing and less tour equal better? The Crossmen came out late, yet they still didn't make Finals. So, no, not neccessarily. However, if a weekend /"relaxed schedule"/non Division I tour model corps is that good, then I'd rather see them on the DVDs/CDs. An activity that celebrates the competitive aspect so much (with fans that do as well) sells itself short here...everyone loves a good "David vs. Goliath". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 Yet, with this competition barrier, there is a defined answer: "Sorry, in order to play here you have to promise to move up."Does more time rehearsing and less tour equal better? The Crossmen came out late, yet they still didn't make Finals. So, no, not neccessarily. However, if a weekend /"relaxed schedule"/non Division I tour model corps is that good, then I'd rather see them on the DVDs/CDs. An activity that celebrates the competitive aspect so much (with fans that do as well) sells itself short here...everyone loves a good "David vs. Goliath". Yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you bawker -- specifically, I was responding to someone else's post that said basically (paraphrasing) "more shows = more critique = better competitively" As I stated earlier, I'm a little torn on the topic you're talking about here -- leaning towards your side that whatever works for each corps, they should get the right to see how they stack up if they so choose. I'm just a little concerned about corps overreaching and harming themselves (and therefore, the activity as a whole, IMO) in the long run and I understand the premise that DCI is looking out for this happenstance. We've all seen it happen to corps. Maybe I'm giving DCI too much benefit of the doubt here to do what they think is best. I'll have to think about it some more, I guess .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 Yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you bawker -- specifically, I was responding to someone else's post that said basically (paraphrasing) "more shows = more critique = better competitively"As I stated earlier, I'm a little torn on the topic you're talking about here -- leaning towards your side that whatever works for each corps, they should get the right to see how they stack up if they so choose. I'm just a little concerned about corps overreaching and harming themselves (and therefore, the activity as a whole, IMO) in the long run and I understand the premise that DCI is looking out for this happenstance. We've all seen it happen to corps. Maybe I'm giving DCI too much benefit of the doubt here to do what they think is best. I'll have to think about it some more, I guess .... Oh, I know you were...I suppose I was belaboring my point. :P I certainly don't think any corps should over-reach themselves financially...just that come Finals week, let the chips fall where they may, no matter what Division you're in. 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.