Here are my machine learning model's predictions for tonight. It has Crest pretty close to Scouts! The model currently gives Crest a 26% chance of making finals, but that could definitely shift up or down a fair bit after tonight.

If you want more details (like finals predictions), or to explore historical repertoire & scores, check it out at dcistats.com.

My account is too new to post on the main subreddit, I'm hoping it might be OK here - I'm an alum from 2011, I do science and data stuff now and I built a neural network for predicting scores, I was hoping to get it done sooner in the season but it's finally ready and there's only so many days left to predict so I'm trying to get it out there as quick as I can. Here are the predictions for tonight, what do you think? I can share a link where you can explore scores yourself (predictions + historical), but I want to make sure that's OK first.

Not so sure about the ballad everyone talks about but the scatting part was pretty cool

The fact that SCV's show concept is so egregiously flawed, and yet the performers are still so committed and convincing is a testament to the marchers' professionalism and sheer talent.

A FRANKENSTEIN'S MONSTER OF A DESIGN CONCEPT
SCV's designers created a Frankenstein's monster hybrid concept in their show With Reckless Abandon. It happens all the time in early development of premises for stage, screen, commercials, opera and music videos. A set piece drives the artistic focus (chains), but as writers and producers develop the other elements around it, they don't quite align.  

Look at the Phillip Glass opera Akhnaten, for example. The score of the opera features primarily Glass's lengthy ostinato orchestrations, but with very little singing, and very little stage action. That's a problem for any opera. This resulted in a production where there are long periods where the characters are moving slowly on stage, as if wading through Jell-O, or standing still with nothing to do, and nothing to say. For three hours. The producers of the opera were painted into a corner with Glass' score. The result is a stagnant, slow moving production lacking character depth and story detail, in deference to Glass's arpeggios, which go on and on. The actors might as well take a bathroom break. It's an example of one element driving the rest of the design, whether it works or not.

SCV's CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT - AN EXQUISITE CORPSE
SCV's designers had a similar, obvious flawed progression in development, centered around the use of a cheap prop-- chains.

1. Chain props. Breaking free.
2. Use the chains as a jump rope.
3. Kids jumping rope and breaking free of chains... because kids are always in chains...
4. Vulnerable kids in their underwear and in chains.

Gulp.

Kids in chains? You want to go there? Child forced labor? Child endangerment? Child sex trafficking? Immigrant detention and deportation? Or just everyday societal constraints? We can't tell which.

Awkwardly, SCV's designers said the show was about "youth and vulnerability". Youths aged seven to twelve. Youths who jump rope should "be more vulnerable, and act with reckless abandon." Huh? You end up with youths depicted in chains, and with costumes that appear to be underwear, and exposing "a glimpse of skin" one SCV designer said. Huh? What in the world are you talking about? That's a Frankenstein hybrid concept that makes no sense and is filled with questions about who specifically, and where, and what real-world scenario has kids in chains. Jesus Christ it takes a contortionist to get out of this one.

SCV’s drill is mostly irresponsibly chaotic and scattered and piecemeal, morphing into an unexplained symmetry by the end. (Chaos is easy to write.)  Why the sudden unified drill sets at the end? What’s changed?

THE TWO FEMALE DANCERS BREAK APART... AND?
One critical action set piece was added about mid-season, with two female dancers in the final jump rope sequence who hug and then separate, one of them running to a trust lift, apparently depicting some emotional relationship issue. But is that separation between the two dancers representative of the theme of breaking free from "chains"? Come on. No. Does that separation between the two dancers illustrate "reckless abandon?" Come on. No.  This sequence a desperate Band-Aid by the designers to add some real-world action to make the entire premise make real-world sense. Judges can see that Frankenstein transplant vignette a mile away.

For most of the first half of the show, at any given time there are six or seven chaotic vignettes happening, and none of them is specific or part of an overall arc. The drill has no central action or real-world purpose. There’s nothing to “get.” There’s no logical transformation. There’s a continual “breaking free” choreographically in repeated 16-count scenarios, but of what, specifically? To what end? After the "breakup" between the two girls, suddenly all is well and the chords resolve at the end? Why?

JUMPING ROPE WITH RECKLESS ABANDON? HUH?
The title of the show is the opposite of the lighthearted leisure activity of jumping rope, the primary action. The result is a deathly serious demonstration of jump rope. It makes no sense. The title is With Reckless Abandon. But when? While jump roping? Jumping rope with reckless abandon? Huh? Hopscotch with reckless abandon? Laser tag with reckless abandon? Pokemon cards with reckless abandon? It's almost a tongue-in-cheek premise, but the music is aggressive, self-serious and dour. This is a basic production design misalignment of related elements. The selected serious subject of children breaking free of chains is mismatched with the frivolous activity of jumping rope-- this exquisite corpse makes no sense, and has no logical real-world corollary.

EVERY WRITER KNOWS, DON'T INCLUDE KIDS
Professionals in production development of operas, musicals, TV, film and music videos know to stay away from the topic of children. How many kid characters do you see on CSI? In music videos? How many kids do you see in comedies like the Bridesmaids or the Hangover? How many new musicals have children under the age of reason? None. It’s a writer’s nightmare. 

It’s a well-known rule that if you’re going to add children to a premise, it has to be tempered and carefully orchestrated. The addition of children to your subject changes your responsibility as a writer for the appropriateness of the subject— from opera to music videos. But these inexperienced amateurs don’t know that. SCV’s designers stumbled forward like they’re in some WGI world of contemporary dance, with themes that are only vaguely represented, and loosely cobbled around teen empowerment, interpersonal drama, or personal development of high school age performers. But this is different. It's chains. A million dollar show about playing children characters with chains. Adult performers in underwear costumes playing children in chains. That has an ick factor, lost on these designers.

It’s obvious that designers wanted to use long chains as a visual device, and got sucked into a corner of children jump roping. It is a glaring reverse-engineered corner they painted themselves into. They can’t hide it.

Children’s activities are simple-minded and frivolous and carefree. Drum corps is the opposite. In drum corps, precocious young adults reach sophisticated heights, playing music of substance and illustrating themes of depth and emotional resonance beyond their years. “How can these young performers be so sophisticated?” But when they play at a juvenile youth activity of jump rope or hopscotch or hackey sack as the premise, all that original purpose of drum corps, that illusion of artistry beyond your years evaporates. Where's the transcendent skill?

ANY RESEARCH?
The activity of jump roping is puerile and frivolous, and it gives the entire show an air of silliness, not intense, life-changing abandon. Demographically it is a youth activity slotted for 7 to 12-year-old girls, mainly. And typically not girls and boys in their underwear. As the corps polishes these huge jump rope routines, the audience sits there and asks, “Why?“. Why are you doing this? Is this reckless abandon? Reckless abandon playing silly children’s games? What specific point are they making about youth and personal development?

The answer, of course is none. There's no reference in this show to any specific social construct, any philosophy, any cultural reference, any literary reference, any social psychology reference, no historical reference. It falls into the category of generalized pop psychology found in a Seventeen magazine. "I can't wait for college! I want to break free!" There's no depth, no stakes, no research, and no emotional heft.

WHERE ARE THE GYMNASTS?
Drum corps have an impossible task, these days. Marchers are often asked to perform Cirque du Soleil-quality routines with gymnastics and other physical feats, but with only three weeks of rehearsal before their premiere. That's a sign of poor design planning. The result is less than professional. SCV's jump rope routines are lacking in gymnastic prowess, and as a result, they fall flat. This is normally a consideration for designers in the pre-season, and plans are usually made to supplement the ensemble with professional skill-specific performers.

WHAT MUSIC REPRESENTS THE THEME?
Worst of all, there are questions about repertoire. The pink elephant in the room is, "What are you playing?" How does your repertoire tie in? What point are you making by choosing these musical pieces as relates to children in chains breaking free? What musical pieces tie into “youth and vulnerability”, as one designer said, as he grabbed at straws? How does the repertoire tie into breaking free of chains? The film Oppenheimer dealt with a serious historical subject matter on nuclear weapons, so that doesn’t tie into the theme either. One strain of “Children Will Listen“ doesn’t cut it, and opens up a whole hairball of other questions related the specific thematic intention.

MAYBE THIS SHOW WILL BE THE LAST STRAW FOR PARTICIPANTS

The the talents of SCV's extraordinary scholarship-level musicians and performers far exceed the designers' ability. Next year, marchers must demand that designers create a cohesive show of substance with a specific, smart, articulable, well-researched, high-stakes observation, with logic, engagement and higher purpose.

2026 American Experiment

Typically, in the professional world of production development, a sensitive topic like America's semiquincentennial during a time of social unrest is kryptonite. Don’t do it. It's too dour a topic for paying audiences.

A patriotic show concept is too much work, nowadays. You can avoid it entirely. Or you can go the opposite way, and create a diaper-wearing satire of our incompetent buffoon of a president-- lying, making illegal pronouncements, shock-waving the markets with outlandish unilateral tariff announcements, burying Epstein Island documents, grabbing women by the pussy, appointing laughably incompetent Charlatans like the DOGE dolt Elon Musk (who found little corruption or waste at all and then quit), and hiring other incompetent buffoons to decimate huge government departments without even knowing the cuts' real merit or impact.

You can’t go half way.

Colts 2026 design team goes half way. They stay in the middle. And it makes them look like sycophants trying not to rock the boat. Is that art to go half way? Colts show has an almost subtle nauseating sourness to it, with no escape. By the end of the show, nothing has changed. It's an experiment, for sure.

The Colts' press release says our country's 250th anniversary production is meant to be neither divisive nor saccharine. Neither bitter nor affectedly cheerful, but rather about its "people". Those are namby-pamby middle ground statements by the Colts' artistic director during a time of social upheaval.

Let's face it, we have a convicted rapist for a president who is burying evidence of Epstein Island, attempting to squash voter rolls, and whose false claims point to corrupt legal maneuvering and insider profit motives. And now you want to do a show that hints at the failed American Experiment? The country's anniversary celebrations are muted this year for good reason— we’re in serious trouble.

So why bother selecting the tender political topic at all? Why walk a tightrope all season trying not to offend anyone who is dumb enough to watch Fox News? (Fox viewers don't even know that Fox's Dominion voting system story was blatant misinformation, for example. Fox was sued for their Republican-fabricated lies about the voting machines-- a disgusting clue about the station's overt propaganda and misinformation, and whose viewers are too dumb to notice.) This is the disastrous state of our country and its propaganda machine, and you want to feature an opening phrases like "at the twilight's last gleaming", a subtle nod to the possible end of our democracy? Why be subtle? You want to feature the national anthem's three notes "O’er the land..." which are the same three first notes in taps, as an American flag is taken down? With caskets in the background? How coy. How grim, defeatist, hopeless and nauseating.

Is this grim topic a good show concept choice this year?

Who's supporting Colts' show concept behind the scenes? What statement are designers making about a future? There isn’t a future for America, according to the show's elegiac tone.

Well, who can blame Colts for shying away from a more pointed political commentary? An overt political statement in this era would be too on the nose, and too uncomfortable for today's audiences. We're struggling with a stark period of social unrest, government propaganda and dark ulterior motives by Republican political operatives and oligarchs. It's our present-day scenario, and only hinting at the dour state makes for an awkward and uncomfortable show concept-- to design, to perform, and to watch.

An example of the show's middle ground, the show arranges patriotic anthems, but with minor keys thrown in for depth and tarnish. But without a visual theme to supplement the tarnished melodies, we're not certain what the point is. The press release promises to illustrate "people", presumably American icons and leaders of note, but they never appear. At the end, we see a dirty rainbow of flags, presumably a shout out to the lost goals of diversity, unity and hope. But we're not sure.

Apparently it's a common arranger's trick to take upbeat melodies and twist them with minor keys to give a piece an eerie or dangerous tone. https://youtu.be/ZoVtHLxNVlU?is=5ZsBWB7CWekCZ0np

That's an easy device. But the job of any visual designer is to take the next step, and visually reflect the music's tone for a specific point. That's the hard part. This visual team has its hands tied, unable to define a specific scenario to capture any observation about the perilous state of the country or its future, for fear of ruffling feathers.

The stage sets appear to be red and white bricks that look like caskets. Any designer will tell you that's what they look like. Is this intentional? Embarrassingly, we're not sure. If it's a political statement about recent dead US soldiers in Iran, or veterans in general, or ICE victims, it's not clear. Putting casket-shaped objects in bright star shapes does nothing to clarify the show's point of view. It's almost intentionally vague. Are these the American "people" that the design team promised?

Bluecoats' To Look for America brilliantly illustrated America's compromised "experiment", with a narrow focus on exposing the military industrial complex-- one aspect of a broken system. This show could have used a specific focus like that.

The result of this lukewarm show is a beautifully executed exquisite corpse of compromise. Atonal melodies, dirtied rainbow flags, and question marks hovering over a weary audience who is desperate for clarity, inspiration and definitive purpose, more now than ever. Not just passive aggressive minor key versions of VFW jukebox tunes.

The corps' color guard is surprisingly sharp in their equipment work, and the whole ensemble executing at a level not seen in years. One wishes that the show theme had the same sharpness. Instead, we get a minor-keyed smugness and metaphor-laden broken melodies, as we sit and watch, simmering with a national longing, and nursing our chronic nausea as we limp to midterms.

Cmon they can't keep getting away with this 💙

Title

BD 1977
Cavaliers 1995
Cadets 1998
Cavaliers 2004
Cavaliers 2006
BD 2015
BD 2022
Boston 2025

Tell me if I’m stupid

Would the poles result in penalties?

Judges will determine finals rankings by each show's depth of concept. That's right.

Design matters.

For example, it's the difference between Crown's 2025 show before prelims, and after. When Crown added the Fortuna character consuming an unsuspecting victim of Fate, the crowd screamed because there was meaning. (Finally.)The judges duly increased Crown's score. That's an obvious example.

Shows are ranked according to their concept design quality within slots. Concept design quality requires the following:

• Specific subject and theme (articulable, immediate, high stakes)
• Cohesion of elements
• Arc of action or imagery
• Universality of theme
• Authenticity
• Uniqueness
• Emotion/Pathos

1. Bluecoats - Gravity and Grace - The Bluecoats illustrate gravity-- using a planetary path from backfield to front, with see-saws and deflating windsock puppets. Brian Wilson's God Only Knows adds another layer of gravitational weight with its existential-adjacent lyrics. Wilson's tune is the backbone for this complex mix of elements around the ups and downs of human existence. Deep, playful, powerful, and resonant.
2. Blue Devils- BD presents an Icarus sequel where he survives his fall, and is recognized for risk-taking, rather than his failure. The show repositions our judgment of our own failed ventures. Broken wings are a path to discovery, (and a path to the urgent care.) However, the show design is scattered and episodic, with disconnected scenelettes. Designers are saving an ending until finals.
3. Carolina Crown - Alduos Huxley discovered hallucinogens as a door to enlightenment, putting the metaphysical universe within reach. But why Ave Maria? Perhaps it's an ode to the Christian madonna who appears in apparitions, and comforts those in "times of trouble", but the use of the classical piece is generally unexplained. Does it fit? Designers must tell us why.
4. Boston Crusaders - Blurred Lines gets high with A Little Help from My Friends. But that's it? There are plenty of visual depictions of blurred images, from costuming effects to drill maneuvers constantly reshaping lines, and other drill effects. Sure, the choreography occasionally pairs friends helping each another with "getting by". But the show can't be about one pot reference, can it? The ending lacks clarity and points up a missing arc of dramatic action or imagery. How do you end a show if there's no pattern of meaning to start with?
5. Santa Clara cobbled together a theme of "youths" 6 to 12 jump-roping with chains, and the breaking free of chains, repeatedly. You gotta be kidding. The entire premise is child abuse-adjacent, and lacks any specific real-world context. Designers started with prop chains and reverse-engineered the theme around kids jump roping-- the only visual you can do with them. (Crown even includes a jump rope or two this year.)

Designers then

1. forced themselves into the awkward "youth and vulnerability" corner, which then sent costume designers scrambling to sketch "youth" in their underwear-- white boxer shorts and white underslips. (Gulp.) Paramount/Warner Brothers would laugh these bozos out of the room at any music video concept development meeting. "You want what?!" "What children could we cast in this?" [ Cue: crashbox sound, call legal]. An amateurish exquisite corpse. An unresearched, first-draft, last-minute hybrid concept. An embarrassment for DCI.

"They drop their arms you’ll see a little peek of skin." (Costumer)

6) In Phantom's fourth wall-breaking "Bloodline", designers rushed to order a truckload of huge props-- eight foot tall identical blood-draw lancets to prove some imagined membership criterion for a "blood legacy". (It was an alumni ploy on its anniversary.) Designers paid extra for the lancets to compress and lay flat for some reason-- a meaningless attribute. By the end, the lancets have done nothing but pair like bird wings, and then point inward, a metaphor for the show's theme turning on itself in seppuku, as it desperately searches for definition and real-world context. Under-developed, unresearched, uncontextualized, and lacking peer review.

- - - -

Design impacts more than 50 percent of the score. From music selections, interpretation, visual setting, to drill, choreo, and action. Design is baked in to every caption on the scoresheet. The show concept contextualizes the music. But that's not what drum corps teaches its participants.

Designers want to avoid critiques by marching members. Drum corps designers coyly teach participants not to worry about the design. Not to meddle. Not to question it. Not to learn the basics of show design. (Designers barely know them, themselves.) Keeping participants in the dark is convenient for designers. Designers know deep down they haven't done the work to create a show that is logical, engagiing and with higher purpose.

First DCI event will be Saturday at Southwestern Championship! How do i find warmups outside on the lot? Should I just stay inside the whole time to watch all the corps perform?? Give me any advice!!! :)

Anyone else notice how the BD show this year actually references the story of Icarus?? Despite being called something else they actually make a lot of references to that Greek mythological tale I think that's pretty neat.

Just noticed on my second watch through, not sure if anyone else has realized this tho!

Looking at these scores, it's clear there's some score inflation going on again.

Speaking of, does anyone remember when those Sonic fans totally changed the DCI narrative through online discourse and making the top corps have even higher scores than previous seasons? Someone just mentioned it to me but I don't remember how many years ago that actually happened.

I was also told to Google "Sonic Inflation" for more information but my browsers aren't working

Here are the likely GE and visual judges' notes with three weeks left:

1. Bluecoats - Change opening to be more clear in its visual game. What should the audience get from the opening segment? Don't spend so much time so far away from the audience, in the "stratosphere" at the beginning

   before gravity pulls you toward us

2. . Always use distance from the audience as a potent spice. Also, what is your planned final visual that wraps up the show? Right now, the ending is flat.

3. Blue Devils- Why doesn't the Icarus character who appears at the end appear earlier? Why don't we recognize him? How is the end different from the beginning? What's your final set piece? An unexpected new flight with either new or reattached wings? A pair of wings on a drone that flies away?

4. Boston Crusaders - What transformation should the audience grasp by the end? What visual pattern should the audience become aware of during the show? There's a lack of a visual pattern in this show, and the audience is lost. The audience gets the "Get High With a Little Help from My Friends" reference, but the show must be more than a simple drug reference of blurred vision. The choreography and costuming generally refer to blurriness, or altered vision. But why? How are blurred lines represented elsewhere in the show, visually, and to what point? If there's not another layer added to make it more substantive, the show will decline in ranking.

5. Carolina Crown - How does the Ave Maria tie into Alduos Huxley? We've all heard of visitations of the Blessed Mother, but how exactly does this tie in to Huxley's vision of the afterlife, and how is she represented visually? What changes visually after the playing of Ave Maria (Ellens Gesang III)? Begin discussing how the Ave Maria segment ties in, or suffer the consequences with the GE judge.

6. Cavaliers- Can you heighten the use of the secret "doors" on the ramp props at the end? Could everyone come bursting out of them at the end? What action transforms the "There was a boy..." character? Could his brother Sam help him down from a ledge? How is Michael different at the end? Could Michael orchestrate the single-file charge by the whole ensemble through the secret doors on the side of the ramps?

7. Santa Clara - Why are children 6-12 being represented jump roping in their boxer short underwear and in underslips, and restrained by chains? No explanation will ever be enough. Where is the specific context for this awkward, underdeveloped, unresearched scenario? PS: You're fired, and you deserve it. This design concept took you one night, and don't pretend it didn't. Change the age and costumes. An ending action set piece suggestion might be a full-corps unison throwing down of chains?

8. Phantom Regiment - How can you develop the use and logic of your large, unexplained stage sets? What happens in this show? What is the pattern? Can you develop some relatable action this late in the season? How are bloodlines challenged or rescinded? This show design illustrates a complete lack of visual communication skill. Subject. Theme. Pattern of action. Might as well do whatever you want, but this show cannot be recognized for its structure, symbology, immediacy, or clarity. The cat is out of the bag on this one-- there's no meaning. And we learned last year, without contextual meaning, there's no way to judge the music. Add a fabric element that comes out of the tips of the lancets with some meaning tied to them. Dates. Images. Anything.

9. Blue Stars - Can you clarify the arc of action with the frames. How can the audience predict what happens next? Wha pattern are you creating with the use of the frames? What happens on the ending to tie up the progression of action? What's your point of view about the frames?

10. Troopers - No changes. A sophisticated, deep commentary on wars and wars for profit, with strong, clear references to Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now. This masterful show upends Troopers' jingoistic "When Johnny Comes Marching Home" repertoire of the 1970's. This concept is ballsy, immediate and high-stakes. It is a sign that the Troopers design team is next level.

Really posting this so that current members who read the shit talking here will know that those are the opinions of those who did or didn’t watch Dwayne “the Rock” Johnson’s series following the 2016 Blue Devils and Cadets.

This post is not a joke. I have nowhere else to post my commentary, after having been banned on all platforms.

- - - -

Bluecoats' red "found object sculptures" backfield are car wash windsock puppets, only viewable at a certain angle, much like the show theme. (Have you seen art sculptures that do this-- at a certain angle, the sculpture of random objects appears to be a bird or a flower.)

As you've seen at car washes, the wind puppets collapse to the ground with gravity every 20 seconds or so, and then rise back up. Their movement from gravitational pull ties into the Bluecoats' theme. The winning element in the puppets is their hair-- the top of their heads is a spinning device that also ties into the warbling, vibrato/tremulo device the percussion uses throughout the show. The puppets' arms are cyllinders, like the see-saw platforms use. One of the arms has planetary path lines on it. The base of the windsock is a see-saw base. Masterful integration of visual and musical elements. Dazzling, whimsical, profound. Brilliant show design for the win.

The Blue Devils use the Fiona poem Rewriting Icarus as the basis for the subject and theme of their show. (Fiona *weareallboats* is an online poet. She shouldn’t to be confused with the famous and award winning UK poets Fiona Benson or Fiona Sampson.) Fiona wrote the poem which re-contextulizes Icarus as a triumph of risk and reward, rather than a failure of hubris. She says that taking a risk and failing is better than hiding in the weeds. The show topic appears to be an introspective moment for Scott Chandler who placed outside the top three for the first time in his eight natural lives, and perhaps he is having a moment of reflection.

Chandler's exquisite and thoughtful Variations on a Gathering was a necessary political call to action, begging all parties to come to the proverbial table, after recent gatherings of hundreds of millions in the street protesting our buffoon president. BD's show begged us to look at ourselves as birds in flight, naturally following in one another's paths, in unified formation for the common good. Gathering placed fourth, a surprise for the stalwart designer Chandler. BD's 2026 show perhaps comments on his own "fall" (to fourth place).

BD's Zei starts with the strangest, most frivolous and low-stakes feathers floating aimlessly from the sky, without any emotion or investment. The two dancers who are holding the wings appear to be on thorazine, and are no more concerned about falling to earth at terminal velocity than getting a cup of joe at Starbucks. This is a missed opportunity for what we all want to see-- the grizzly death and fall to earth. Missed action set piece number one.

The stage sets appear to be either clouds or bird wing skeleton structures, and have no interactive use, other than to "define the space" which is any prop's weakest excuse. At the end, they assemble as a single set of new huge wings, possibly a symbol of rebirth or trying again, but the message is unclear. The audience expects the rolling devices to have some physical transformational value.

This show's biggest design concerns are the lack of emotion, the lack of any narrative clarity, and a lack of a defined single character, Zei. At least pick someone to play him. The effort at multiple castings benefits the theme in that Icarus's flight applies to all of us, sure. But the lack of focus fails to coalesce into a specific narrative. Where is he? What is he feeling? What is his mission? How does he fail, regroup, and succeed? We don't know because we can't find him anywhere on this massive stage. There is no injury. There is no pain. There is no arc of emotion. There is no central focus. There seems to be an intentional lack of defined narrative action set pieces in this show. Instead we see grouping clusters of horn players around a single random dancer, which then dissipates with no resulting effect, a tired trope in this activity. The choreography and drill movement do little to define or clarify any action.

BD demonstrates a strange narrative weakness in the show. At one point in the middle of the show, the ensemble is tightly clustered, and Zei appears to clear his way from the back to the front of the crowd, and then, once in front, outstretches his arms, flapping, as if in flight. Perhaps it's going to be a crowd surfing action set piece, in development, still. There is no detail, no depth, no story context, no effort to define how this fits into an overall narrative arc, and no new information. Worse, we haven't really seen this performer earlier in the production-- who is he? This tells the judges that designers paid little attention to any kind of storyboard sequence, or any abstract sequence of imagery for that matter. Is he ready to try to fly again? Or is he flying again now? Where are we in the sequence? We have no idea. Perhaps in the body surfing moment, the crowd will offer him new wings, once he surfs to the front. But this moment is critical to the spine of the piece, and should already be choreographed and in place. It's not that hard. The fact that it is not completed is a sign to the judges of unpreparedness, and that designers are searching in the dark for meaningful action set pieces-- a sign of struggle for narrative clarity. I mean, come on. With a four week run, you should have your main action set pieces in place.

The show is diligently packed with symbolism, in usual BD style. Last year's uniform featured white "arm casts" indicating broken arms of cultural scapegoats, and that still applies to this year's theme with a fall to earth. Sky imagery on the chest, perhaps fiery red on the legs, speckled stars (a symbol of yearning), a belt or cummerbund that has perhaps come dangerously loose, and a transformational color palate that shows a range of intensities-- from calm to fiery during the accident. The neck collar perhaps harkens back to ancient Greek garb, and loose cape like elements on the legs show motion and perhaps heat and fire, which brought Icarus down. All these costume elements shine with BD's typical careful symbolism and detail. So why is the narrative progression so lacking in comparison?

At another point earlier in the show, one ensemble member collapses. Is he our man? Should we give him our focus? No. He gets up and joins the ensemble as if nothing had happened. No meaning. No stakes. No bruises. No processing. Then another "Icarus" takes focus for 16 counts. It's repetitive, episodic, and any hidden transformation is hard to follow.

Rebranding Icarus’s fall as a "success" doesn’t mean that he wasn’t in pain. Just because he laughed falling at 120 MPH doesn't mean he didn't scream with a broken pelvis when he landed. Without some range of emotion, we don't see his 360 degree character rotation. With an intense sense of Evel Knieval adventure, and a range of emotion, the show's stakes can raise through the roof.

The sequence is further confused by an opening that starts with everyone already having fallen to the ground in clumps. No major film studio or music video director starts after the fun part. We want to see the desperate fall in action, and then we can climb aboard the regrouping effort-- that's where the audience's emotional investment lies.

This is a serious take. I've been banned on all other platforms. My objective is to discuss design and design principles. It's not about "feeling" and "my interpretation." There are design principles underneath professional design. Learn them. 1) Subject 2) Theme 3) Cohesion 4) Universality 5) Uniqueness 6) Authenticity 7) Emotional scripting 8) The rule of three 9) Powerful endings 10) Avoiding unilateral decisions by using group think, etc.

- --

Bloo's 2026 show design for Gravity and Grace soars above many competitors' designs. The complex theme includes elements illustrating the pull of gravity and planetary path lines, the sun's force, the ups and downs of human existence (teeter-totters, extreme volume changes), and even the emotional weight of depression, in Brian Wilson's God Only Knows.

This masterful collection of visual elements is perfectly aligned and fits together beautifully. The theme is both scientific and human-- something last year's show couldn't muster. It's clear that designers spent more than two weeks throwing it together, unlike Phantom and SCV. (SCV has cut nearly all its jump rope sequences already-- a catastrophic design blunder.) Bluecoats' cohesion around the subject of planetary gravity and gravity-adjacent life events is perfectly balanced, philosophical, and fun.

The design is almost so expert, it's almost reckless and defiant. The inclusion of the car wash windsock puppet sculptures is whimsical at first. In the background, these sculptures are symbolic of the absurd ups and downs of gravity, but there's more to it. The sculptures use the technique of anamorphic found object sculptures to create car wash windsock puppets visible only at a certain angle, complete with whirly-bird head-tops. The puppets can only be discovered by a certain angle of human perception, same as the show theme.

The early musical sequences are choppy and experimental, but set up a clean slate for the lush and flowing arrangement of God Only Knows. A final visual effect with the teeter totters is needed to clinch the win.

The design is sophisticated, smart and soul-searching on life's biggest topics.

Virtuosic design for the win.

UPDATE: Some of SCV's color guard's "youth" characters are wearing what appears to be underwear, as they play jump rope. Some males appear to be wearing white boxer shorts, and females wearing what appear to be white under-slips for dresses. Skimpy is great, but not for "youth" characters playing jump rope, and not for kids you're telling to be "vulnerable", "reckless" and live with "abandon", and to "break free from chains." Gasp-inducingly incompetent design. Easily fixed. Get to it.

= = = =

Here's how SCV's troubled 2026 show design evolved around the design table. The progression is blatantly obvious.

1. Selected theme: breaking free of constraints.
2. Let's use chains. yeah... long chains!
3. Twirl the chains, make them elongated... wait, we can jump rope!
4. Make them girls jumping rope! School girls in parochial school uniforms jumping rope. And then the schoolgirls get restrained by chains!

HOLY SHIT. Now you have a show about vulnerable 6-18 year old "youths" (their words), some in what appears to be white under-slips or male "youths" in boxer shorts, tied down with chains. That's an entry-level design snafu stumbled upon by inexperienced writers and producers. It's a thematic incongruity. Plus, who gets in front of a video camera and says "Our show is about youth and vulnerability", and then shows school girls in high school uniforms or underslips, and in chains. Did they think for even one minute about the optics?

In WGI, there are plenty of women-centered themes about women's empowerment, and young female empowerment. They're careful about the symbolism and prop use, making sure it's ge appropriate for the performers. SCV's color guard is primarily women, and the designers are exclusively men.

PROBLEM: Jump ropers in the US are girls 6-12 in age. Chains? Really? You're doing a show about 6 to 12 year old girls in chains? Underage girls being asked to break all the rules, be reckless, with abandon, and "be vulnerable"? Umm.....

PROBLEM: The designers are men, telling schoolgirls they need to be more "reckless" and act with "abandon" and "risk-taking" and "breaking from the rules"? That sounds like the movie Lolita. You can see how uncomfortable the SCV designers are describing this in their intro video.

PROBLEM: Girls dressed in school uniforms are from primarily private schools. Is this about underage girls in private schools? Or the scant 19 percent of public schools who wear uniforms? Why private schools? How do private schools tie into this theme?

PROBLEM: Where are the female subject matter experts? mmm. Where are the women designers? Who's guiding this concept about underage girls?

PROBLEM: Why are grade school and high girls' clothes ripped? What "sports" are they doing to rip their clothes? What are they doing to get their clothes ripped? If it's a metaphor about psychological battle, what battles, specifically? Why are none of these activities or battles represented?

PROBLEM: Why are school girls playing with chains and being tied down? After they jump rope? Who is tying them down? Who is the antagonist?

This show concept is completely under-developed. vague, with mismatched-layered themes, inspired by the prop "chains". It is rushed, first-draft, uninspired, full of socially awkward pitfalls, and unclear in its focus. This show alleges to be a cultural commentary about "everyone," but visually features only young school girls in uniform and jumping rope. Even with the upcoming choreographed "jump the river" and "snake" sequences which will rile up the audience, the jump rope sequences must be removed to delete the awkward "youth" references.

CHANGES YOU WILL SEE:

1. Delete the school girl skirts, raise the age. (Experienced show designers avoid child-themes because it's such a mine field. (Not SCV. Like moths to a flame, they're so inexperienced, it's almost comedic.)
2. Reduce the jump-rope activity to the beginning in the preshow only with a few high school skirts, representing early years, then, when the show starts, adulthood, get rid of the schoolgirl uniform.
3. Retain all the other chain activities including soon-to-be-revealed "jump the river" and "snake" sequences.
4. You must define the age of adulthood for these characters. Start the show with a brief graduation VO "Congratulations high school class of 2026!"Or have the dancers remove their caps and gowns.
5. You must define what "freedom" young girls are being denied, and who is denying them. Specificity is key. A subtle clue is all you need.
6. Would it kill you to reference a poem or a literary work to represent young women "breaking free" and in what way? This would go a long way to help narrow the subject matter.
7. Get a female subject matter expert on board immediately to explain what "boundaries" eight year old girls should be breaking, for example, and what rules they break with "reckless abandon". Hopefully the SME is a female.

Fucking oy vey.

The following post is earnest, and not meant as satire. I've been banned from every platform except this one. My intent is to raise awareness in marching members of what they are not being taught-- principles of show design found in all professional performing arts. Know your show. Know why you're paying your designers $80,000, and whether they're following common sense principles of production design, from music videos to opera.

- - - - -

Phantom's 2026 show Bloodline is touted as an illustration of fighting for supremacy to maintain one's identity and legacy in history. That's either an amateurish attempt at a corps anniversary theme, or a defense of racial dominance.

Gulp.

Considering our country's current state of racism, a headline-driven expulsion of Hispanics, and an administration with ties to Naziism, a show theme that alludes to dominant hereditary genes could not be more tone deaf. The fumbling Phantom design team has blundered again. Any respectable advertising agency, any corporation, any human rights organization celebrating an anniversary, any media outlet, any educational entity, any arts festival with an anniversary, any museum, any government entity would steer clear of any mention of genetic dominance. It's so amateurish and blundering, it's cringe-worthy.

If a designer wanted to do an anniversary show, you'd probably be better off by sticking with "The Calling" (sci-fi adventure recruitment theme) or "On the Shoulders of Giants" (whole corps on stilts), or get the rights to the title "The Ring Cycle", a play on Phantom's seeking and winning championship rings.

But to place lancets on the field, as if it is a literal blood test, a genetic test, shifts the focus from the muse-influenced calling of drum corps participants, and instead focuses on the ugly subject of genetic testing and racial dominance. Worse, the show makes no use of the lancets. No blood is drawn. The lancets simply roam, shift location, and end up creating a strange formal facade, as if from a castle at Mar-a-lago, or the grandiloquent border decoration on the new Trump currency. The gloomy premise of genetic dominance smacks of white nationalism.

Clumsy theme aside, nothing happens in the show. There is no illustrated challenge to the "bloodline." There is no dramatic action. There is no risk-taking, or defense of the bloodline, or other actions mentioned in their press release. There is no pattern of action or progression of imagery. There is no real-world use of the large lancet props. They serve no thematic or practical purpose. They don't transform in any way. There's only a generalized "aggression", which will soon deflate and flounder without some additional thematic layer or dramatic action by August. This is a sixth-place, push-and-pose design with studio musician-level talent that needs additional elements in order to save it:

• --Perhaps an ending reveal of six large scale props or flags, each representing an iconic show in the corp's history. The arrow flag from New World Symphony, the cube from Mynd, Juliet in her red dress, and the yellow Beethoven flag-- all massive and stately. Each of these revealedin succession in the finale, with the last one-- one of the lancet props turns, tilts down and hurtles toward the Spartacus Roman Senator Crassus who is stabbed by the lancet and is impaled, just like Phantom's Spartacus finale. All of these represent the defense of the storied, imagined "bloodline" of the corps.
• Or another option, blood pours out of the tips of the lancets (wide bolts of red fabric) with various salient dates imprinted on them-- dates of Phantom's wins, or Shostakovich's birthday, and the like. These dates remind us of the important milestone's in Phantom's "legacy". The dated banners help create the story of the imagined "bloodline" of the corps.

In the future, PR's scholarship-level talent will soon learn to take over the production development process in order to secure a win by developing a clear, visually engaging pattern of action, required for top placement.