Corps having an off year

[GMichael1230]

I'd agree with that. In a normal year, even with Bluecoats at the talent level they had, Cadets would have beaten them.

That said, Bluecoats '06 is one of my favorites and was one of the best shows that year.

Thats an assumption, and a shallow one at that. Who said Cadets had an "Off year" ??Their "Die-hards" would beg to differ.

Its not about underachieving, its about who maxed out, who performed better, who had a better designed show and in 2006. No other year need apply.

~G~

[GMichael1230]

it is "coincidence" that The Cadets were consistent in each year's score for the past 23 years. That consistency DOES indicate a level at which the AVERAGE Cadets corps will place but it is not a GUARANTEE of placement.

That says it all right there. No need for you to exploit any other non-fact.

~G~

[Hrothgar15]

I'd like to ask all the geniuses of DCP what constitutes as an off year.

I'd say when a corps gets their lowest score in 24 years. My Mom hadn't met my Dad the last time the Cadets scored below a 93.075.

[skd7781]

So basically...what people are saying is the only way we will ever get a "new" top four is because one of these corps has an "off year"

[PurpleKnights]

So basically...what people are saying is the only way we will ever get a "new" top four is because one of these corps has an "off year"

It's not entirely unfair when you look at DCI history. A new top 4 is rare, a new top 6 is rare, a new Champion is rare. You could argue that the only reason new corps break top 12 is that they take the spots of other corps that fold.

[BOBSMYTH]

Time to bring up that PARITY word again.

There have been discussions at the highest levels of DCI starting a couple years ago about the need for more parity.

You could argue that in the NFL, for example, parity is achieved by giving the have nots some extra perks (draft picks, money, etc.) and the haves need to be handicapped in some way so that both ends of the bell curve keep getting drawn back to the middle.

From what I heard - in the DCI context, I think they wanted to try to bring the lesser achieving corps up without hurting the excellence, achievement and member experiences of the traditionally higher scoring corps. Not easy to do. May not even be possible to do - but IMO, it certainly seems worth the effort to move in that direction.

Here's the rub - these guys can be all for it in theory but these are very competitive people in a competitive activity. Wherever you draw the line, the people above that line don't want to get knocked below it. They will do everything they can to avoid it. But - you can only have 4 in the Top 4, 6 in the Top 6, 12 in the Top 12. If somebody moves up, somebody has to move down to make room.

Your missing the point here, if the Cavaliers come in 5th in 07 won't it be fair to say they had an off year?

If the Cavaliers come in 5th in 07 because the Cavaliers are just as good or better than their recent years but there are 4 other corps who have even better shows and performances on that one night in August, their score will probably go down (you have to leave room for the other 4 above them - there is still a theoretical maximum of 100.0) and there will definitely be a thread on DCP about how the Cavaliers had an off year.

And yet, I gotta say that not only didn't they have an off year, the drum corps activity may have just actually gotten stronger.

[shaners]

i like what your point bobsmythso simply said, yet i couldnt find a way to say it myself.

for all we know, cadets 06 could have been a cadets 05!?!?! just the rest of dci was really strong.

ive come to realize that we are all arguing different points. yet at the same time, due to the essence of these forums, we all think we are talking bout the same thing, and in any case, this argument is really ########.. whether you think cadets had an off year or not, what does it matter......

[raphael18]

for all we know, cadets 06 could have been a cadets 05!?!?! just the rest of dci was really strong.

No, it wasn't - the design and performance levels were down considerably, though I will give you that the rest of the top 3 did improve from 05

[Piper]

The Cadets got spanked by Bloooo - Period. And if the Coats didn't have the misfortune of running into the Guard judge who had taken an irrational dislike to them every time he was on the panel, they would have beaten them by even more at finals.

[dbc03]

So basically...what people are saying is the only way we will ever get a "new" top four is because one of these corps has an "off year"

Or they can reach the same level as the "usual" top 4.

The people saying that the Cadets having an off year paved the way for the Bluecoats to hit the top 4 are not saying anything absolute about what is a factor of getting into the top 4 any year other than 2006.

If the Cadets had performed at the same level in 2006 as they did in 2005 the Bluecoats would have been in 5th place because there would have been 4 other corps that were better than them.

If the 2006 Bluecoats had performed in 2005 it's possible that they would have been in 4th place because they might have beaten BD. They might have beaten the 04 Cadets too, it's hard to tell.

I don't think anyone is trying to discredit what the Bluecoats did last season. They were definitely a 4th place corps.

The entire argument is kinda silly because it's basically saying "If another corps had performed better than the Bluecoats would they have placed higher than the Bluecoats" it just puts a name on the other corps because historically The Cadets reach a higher level of performance and design than the Bluecoats did last year.

If there was a corps that had a better designed show and performed it better than the Bluecoats last year they would have placed higher. Whether or not that corps was The Cadets or The Magic is insignificant.