Not good...not good

[JimF-LowBari]

What's stopping DCI and the Drum Corps Community from taking the next level?

What would be the next level?

Not a flamer, interested in what you think is the next step for the Jr corps activity. (And I'm old enough to remember a few of them.)

[JimF-LowBari]

I like pork.

I like Drum Corps. Too bad there's so #### little of it left in my area anymore.

[audiodb]

How is this not saying the same thing?

Well, if that's what you meant, then fine. But again, if half as many corps draw half the audience, I wouldn't call that "failing to draw attendance".

So, if DCM was "successful" as you say...they'd still be doing it right?

Not necessarily.

Look at the 2005 DCM lineup. Notice what's different about it from any other year? Every DCM corps had another circuit they were participating in (either DCI or DCA). At that point, the DCM corps decided it was no longer necessary to run their own separate circuit. Same thing happened in the Garden State Circuit in 2002 - all the member corps were involved with DCI, so they decided it wasn't necessary to run their own circuit too.

So would you call that "failure"?

I guess it's all in what the definition of successful is. Let me ask you this...with less corps and less shows...DCM was growing in audience? In number of participants?

Would you expect their audience to grow after half their corps departed?

Let me ask you a similar question. DCI's audience is stable, but not growing. The number of participating units in DCI has been steadily decreasing throughout their history. Is DCI a "failure"?

Or just in "balancing their books? Because I can spend nothing...make nothing...do NOTHING and balance my books. In the end...accomplishment is zero.

DCM didn't do "nothing". They sanctioned over two dozen events in 2004 and 2005.

This is on topic. There are fewer drum corps today than 10 years ago. DCMs departure was part of that. Still...I've been to DCM events where with no admission fee...in Waukegan, IL, they failed to draw attendance. Kilties were the headliner with all the rest Div. III corps. So having the "right" show...with enough of the "right" corps does make a difference.

So I would argue it has less to do with the number of corps, but more with the quality of the corps that make up a show, circuit, division, etc.

Oh, if only it were that simple.

First of all, Waukegan was an anomaly. That show never drew, no matter who was there. I'm not from that area, so I don't know the particulars.

As far as quality of corps, there's a can of worms ready to open. Look at today's division II field. DCI's open-class champions of the 1970s would have a tough time catching any of the top nine division II units today. Now check the attendance numbers.

Quality corps don't guarantee attendance. Fans want to see a contest. Fans want to see the best in the world. Doesn't matter if "the best in the world" beat and blast their way through a program of squads, fronts and marking time - when that was the state of the art, the top of that competitive heap drew just as well as it does today.

Now, obviously, not everyone can be a top-quality corps. In competition, whenever someone "wins", someone else "loses" (or at least places lower). You say the secret to success for a circuit is to have the higher-quality corps. What should we do with the lower corps, Tom? Is there any way for them to "succeed" in your view?

[ScribeToo]

Oh and DCIU did kill some smaller mid-west corps….

See a few years ago we had this DCM thing; they had a regularly scheduled championship. All DCM corps had to go to the championship where their placement would determine the amount of show money they would receive at following DCM shows, which show also bank-rolled a good chuck of DCM

One year, the top DCM and thus the top DCI corps, but only the chosen few corps (the ones will clout in DCI) decided to boycott the DCM show in favor of a DCI tour that would take them far, far away from their Midwest stomping grounds

Well, DCM lost its draw, many of its member corps and a ton of money…no more little regional shows and no more pay outs to little regional corps

But those big corps (DCI is made up of a few Corps, right) now could own the market and the ‘sport’ and bring all the spoils to themselves

Yes, monopolies are always good for us consumers

Revisionist history is your friend.

[ScribeToo]

I don't want this thread lost to another off-topic DCM bash-fest, but I won't stand by and let people characterize drum corps circuits as "unsuccessful" for no other reason than failing to outdraw DCI division I. This activity can be done on a smaller scale, you know....

I could agree with you but this just wasn't the case. There were strong influences from within DCM who believed they COULD still draw the numbers.. believed that the "DCM Fans" would be loyal to the circuit..and thus insisted on holding shows in venues too large for their marketability... INCLUDING DCM finals.

There were voices among the DCM leadership who had the right idea to re-vamp the market focus to support the product.. but they went largely unheard..

and DCM ultimately could not survive.

Stef

[MikeD]

Look at the 2005 DCM lineup. Notice what's different about it from any other year? Every DCM corps had another circuit they were participating in (either DCI or DCA). At that point, the DCM corps decided it was no longer necessary to run their own separate circuit. Same thing happened in the Garden State Circuit in 2002 - all the member corps were involved with DCI, so they decided it wasn't necessary to run their own circuit too.

So would you call that "failure"?

Then why do people 'blame' DCI for the non-existence of DCM and the GSC using negative terms?

[jafar]

hey theres almost as many states as there is drum corps, so from the looks of it DCI is doing a whole lot better then the USA is right now. i think america is in trouble if any more states fold.

[bluecoats88]

As far as quality of corps, there's a can of worms ready to open. Look at today's division II field. DCI's open-class champions of the 1970s would have a tough time catching any of the top nine division II units today. Now check the attendance numbers.

Let me make sure I actually understand your statement before I respond.

Are you actually saying that the 1972 Kingsmen, 1973, Vanguard, 1974 Vanguard, 1975 Scouts, 1976, Devils, 1977 Devils, 1978 Vanguard, and 1979 Devils would have a hard time beating todays top 9 division II corps?

I know the Div II corps have gotten good, but I find this statement a bit unrealistic.

[markdewine]

First, to all those who post claiming that DCI had absolutely no part in the demise of jr. corps throughout the years.....

At the very least, DCI was a part of the equation, as were the VFW, Legion, CYO, and all the corps who competed. All parties involved made choices. Thus, all parties need to be held responsible for the consequenses of those choices.

Second, while it's understood that it takes money to start and run a corps, there are other intangibles that are every bit as important as the $$$. People have written about 'corps-jumpers' who only want to march with the 'best.' Don't we, who have "been there and done that," have an obligation to teach those new to the activity, about loyalty and dedication? Shouldn't we instil the philosophy of "the rewards of building a championship calibre corps" as opposed to just taking the easy route of jumping aboard ship of an already established corps?

Is it possible to implement fair and equitable rules of membership eligibility that would help to facilitate the "loyalty factor"?

We can 'talk' about this issue until heck freezes over. We can continue to throw statistics around, but we all know it's not hard to make the numbers lie. We can whine and snivel, and long for days passed....or we can DO SOMETHING.

I believe the first step is to come to an ACCURATE consensus of just what the problem is. What mistakes were made, by whom, and for what reasons? Obviously, once we understand what mistakes have been made, we must look to not perpetuating those same mistakes. And then begin to explore solutions that have a realistic chance for success.

The solution is out there. It's up to those of us who love this activity, to find it. B)

[MikeD]

First, to all those who post claiming that DCI had absolutely no part in the demise of jr. corps throughout the years.....

At the very least, DCI was a part of the equation, as were the VFW, Legion, CYO, and all the corps who competed. All parties involved made choices. Thus, all parties need to be held responsible for the consequenses of those choices.

IMO w/o DCI there would be even less...or possibly NO...junior drum corps left, so no, I do not blame them for the demise in numbers.

Second, while it's understood that it takes money to start and run a corps, there are other intangibles that are every bit as important as the $$$. People have written about 'corps-jumpers' who only want to march with the 'best.' Don't we, who have "been there and done that," have an obligation to teach those new to the activity, about loyalty and dedication? Shouldn't we instil the philosophy of "the rewards of building a championship calibre corps" as opposed to just taking the easy route of jumping aboard ship of an already established corps?

People have moved from corps-to-corps as long as there has been corps. Nothing wrong with that if handled on the up-and-up.

Is it possible to implement fair and equitable rules of membership eligibility that would help to facilitate the "loyalty factor"?

Rules do not facilitate loyalty. That comes from within the individual.