1998-2018

It was the same judge, who did the exact same thing to Round Rock this year as he did six years ago. It seems like a personal vendetta to me. (I had a kid in the Dragon Band in 2012, and my second kid is in Dragon Band now. It was devastating for them both times.)
 
In my opinion, the fastest and easiest "fix" for such circumstances would be to slightly revise the "bad judge rule" (the same one that saved Leander at Area this year) to protect bands in the future from one really, really, really off-base ranking like this. If the "bad judge rule" were extended or modified to address a huge discrepancy like a 20-place difference between two judges supposedly judging the same thing, 13 bands would have gone to finals this time. Yes, UIL judging needs far more reform than that; obviously there needs to be better clarification of judging criteria and improved training/calibration of judges. But anything at all to protect bands from such wild variations in ordinals would help. It would be a start, and a relatively quick and easy one at that.
 
Please know that in my opinion all 12 bands that went to finals this year absolutely deserved to be there, and Round Rock was not positioned to medal this year regardless, so this is not sour grapes or undue bias on my part. In fact, This was my last UIL year as a band parent, so I no longer have a horse in this race. But the statistician who posted earlier is absolutely right -- you other parents and directors and fans of the marching arts need to carry this torch, or it will indeed keep happening every year, and it will continue to delegitimize the competition in the public's minds.

Show design certainly plays a role but don't overlook variations in the quality of four different runs made by each band. That can make a huge difference too.

Probably the best idea, and easiest to implement, to come out of the 6A State conversation/thread is to use a 9 Judge panel split into 5 Music Judges and 4 Marching Judges. Then eliminate the high and low from both categories leaving the original 3/2 format and 60%/40% music emphasis.
 
The additional cost should be easy to cover with a small increase in spectator ticket price and/or entrance fee paid by competing bands. UIL ticket prices a much lower than other circuits.
 
At first glance this solution appears to require many more qualified Judges. However, some have said the large deviations in scores/rankings are only an issue in the large school classifications. If this is supported by emperical evidence, rather than anecdotal, then the additional Judges/cost may only be necessary in those classifications. It also seems unlikely to be needed at the region level as Division I versus Division II ratings don't seem to be generating meaningful controversy. If the 9 Judge panel was limited to 5A and 6A Area competitions and the entire SMBC, regardless of classification, the cost and demand for additional Judges should be manageable.
 
That would leave better instructions/guidelines regarding Judging criteria. Once again this does not need to descend into war over the differences between UIL and BOA or DCI. At this point UIL would be well served by at least clarifying what it means or wants under the current criteria even if it didn't make additional, and long overdue, changes to modernize the existing criteria. Start by clearly explaining them. No consensus in current Judging or meaningful debate regarding the future of Marching Arts in Texas can happen without universal understanding of where we are now.

Probably the best idea, and easiest to implement, to come out of the 6A State conversation/thread is to use a 9 Judge panel split into 5 Music Judges and 4 Marching Judges. Then eliminate the high and low from both categories leaving the original 3/2 format and 60%/40% music emphasis.
 
The additional cost should be easy to cover with a small increase in spectator ticket price and/or entrance fee paid by competing bands. UIL ticket prices a much lower than other circuits.
 
At first glance this solution appears to require many more qualified Judges. However, some have said the large deviations in scores/rankings are only an issue in the large school classifications. If this is supported by emperical evidence, rather than anecdotal, then the additional Judges/cost may only be necessary in those classifications. It also seems unlikely to be needed at the region level as Division I versus Division II ratings don't seem to be generating meaningful controversy. If the 9 Judge panel was limited to 5A and 6A Area competitions and the entire SMBC, regardless of classification, the cost and demand for additional Judges should be manageable.
 
That would leave better instructions/guidelines regarding Judging criteria. Once again this does not need to descend into war over the differences between UIL and BOA or DCI. At this point UIL would be well served by at least clarifying what it means or wants under the current criteria even if it didn't make additional, and long overdue, changes to modernize the existing criteria. Start by clearly explaining them. No consensus in current Judging or meaningful debate regarding the future of Marching Arts in Texas can happen without universal understanding of where we are now.

I've previously tried to discuss this politely with you and repeatedly asked you to stay on topic and to stop trying to undermine the discussion with logical fallacies and misdirection. We all understand your concerns about the small schools because we are actually paying attention to what is being said. Clearly you are not. You are symbolic of the fearful, misinformed, closed-minded Directors who are preventing progress and would have UIL disappear into irrelevant obscurity. I will give you credit that you often provide interesting information and personal stories but it's also often completely irrelevant to the topic of discussion and therefore meaningless and unhelpful. I'm going to try again and I'm going to be direct this time because you still aren't paying attention. (Sorry, Dan, I've tried very hard.)
 
STOP TALKING ABOUT BOA. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT UIL!
 
Got it? Okay, let's try again and keep in mind most of us like having some difference between UIL and BOA. Understanding that alone should help you better understand and participate meaningfully in this group discussion. Most of us don't want to turn UIL into BOA and most of the 5A and 6A Directors don't want too either. What would be the point of having two identical contests separated by a single day?
 
People are primarily upset about scoring deviation and therefore the credibility of UIL advancements from Area to the SMBC, by extension advancement to SMBC Finals, and ultimately Finals placements. They are not asking for UIL to immediately convert to BOA Judging Criteria. Please stop acting like they are. It seems most people aren't even upset about who made Finals at the SMBC. The issue for most is how someone was excluded, not that they were excluded. (Some Area competitions were more complicated.) In either case, we need consistency within UIL, not with BOA, in order to have credibility and that requires clarity.
 
Period.
 
This can not be delayed further if the UIL circuit is to remain vibrant and relevant. And...it can be done without addressing major changes that include more abstract concepts like General Effect. Clarity. That's the immediate priority.
 
You think I'm wrong about the urgency of the situation? Bands are already choosing to skip the SMBC. I've also witnessed more than one conversation before Area and the SMBC where the topic was whether it is more prestigious to win the UIL Texas State Championship or BOA San Antonio Super Regional. The answer is not clear yet but the trend in the conversation is. Credibility matters. So does difficulty and innovation.
 
Another day or in another thread we can debate how to modernize UIL Judging Criteria because the choice between relevance and obscurity is coming quickly. If the current trends continue, as you support them, in your lifetime the only bands left at UIL may be very small and marching basic military drill while playing Pop Goes The Weasel because they couldn't take the risk of playing a Sousa March as originally composed. That would leave them open to someone making a mistake when the Judging Criteria already has a strong bias toward flawless execution of the simple instead of excellent execution of the difficult. Good luck with that. Some have also said DCI is "exerting pressure" on other marching circuits to "convert" but that completely misreads the situation. Kids love DCI. That's called influence and if you want kids to stay involved, you better pay attention.
 
Instead let's stick with the current issue and your objections. You keep talking about how many small schools there are and how they outnumber the large schools. I'm going to ask you to be logically consistent and look at the other side of the coin. Have you ever considered how the total number of band kids at the large schools compare to the combined total of band kids at all the small schools? You claim to represent a majority but it's all in the way you choose to define it. In addition the underdog you want to protect isn't even participating under the system you claim protects them. The 2A SMBC had 17 bands. Not Finalist, 17 total competing bands. How many kids is that? How does it compare to the level of involvement, by either number of schools or students, in the 6A SMBC? That doesn't even count 4A. You want to include 4A among your small schools? Why? It seems disingenuous considering there are six classifications in Texas and I would divide them in half, but go ahead. It doesn't really dilute my point.
 
You also consistently argue that it's not fair for small schools to have to compete against the large schools. Are you kidding me?!? Are you still confusing BOA and UIL? We're talking about UIL and I didn't see a single 2A Marching Band among the 41 competitors at the 6A SMBC. Additionally, while I did see some other 6A parents at the 2A SMBC, none of the 6A Marching Bands took the field. So please stop spouting this fallacious nonsense. At best, your concern is based on misunderstanding, or perhaps delusion, but different school size classifications don't compete against each other under UIL Judging Criteria. Nobody is suggesting that should change.
 
Next is money. You're always going on about money so let's address it again. I'll start with a big school first. Did Vista Ridge win some kind of Fine Arts lottery that accounts for their amazing improvement in one year? No. But they did go in a new direction with basically the same money and most of the same kids. (Hint: That's a dog whistle for new Director. The right Directors and staff, starting at the Intermediate School level are the first step in cracking the code to the eternal question, "Why is it always the same Bands?" We'll find out soon enough if this one knows the whole code but his actions this year indicate he may.) "But it's different at a 1A school", you keep insisting. It sure is. In fact, it's so different they really can't afford to spend a dime on a real marching program. Music education is important, so focus on your concert program and let them play in the stands at football games. Sounds extreme but I went to an isolated medium-sized California school that did that and it works well. Consider the financial reality at 1A. That's a school with about 100 students, probably less. If you want a class size of 20 students you can staff a big 1A school with 5 teachers. Now think of just the classes required for graduation in Texas. How do you competently cover that with just 5 teachers? Next consider everything else a kid should be learning to be prepared for life and higher education in the 21st century. A 6th teacher is looking like a better investment than a marching program. Hard choices are required at the 1A level. These kids are already sentenced to a 19th century education and you think keeping the whole Texas Marching Arts program there too is going to make a difference for them?!? No, thank you. It doesn't get much better at the 2A level. Your real issues are with the Texas school finance system, not UIL Marching Competition rules. Please stop being an obstructionist here. These schools should have higher priorities than the UIL Marching Competition rules too and if the rules change they will still be in the same boat, still competing with the other small schools with the same challenges, so nobody will be at a disadvantage.
 
Going to a small school is a mixed bag of advantages and disadvantages. Big schools are too. Don't begrudge the other schools advantages or force them to conform to the disadvantages of your school. It just makes a mess for everyone. Be fair. Figure out which one best fits the values of your family and then enjoy your choice. And remember, you can always change your mind and move if you're ready to shoulder the burden of the new disadvantages too. (Yes, this time I'm speaking to the larger audience still raising kids. Or even more importantly, any lurking Directors.)
 
Is anyone still with me? I'm sorry that this probably wasn't my finest hour and hopefully this is viewed as more informative, thought provoking, and persuasive, than angry rant. That was my intention.

I've previously tried to discuss this politely with you and repeatedly asked you to stay on topic and to stop trying to undermine the discussion with logical fallacies and misdirection. We all understand your concerns about the small schools because we are actually paying attention to what is being said. Clearly you are not. You are symbolic of the fearful, misinformed, closed-minded Directors who are preventing progress and would have UIL disappear into irrelevant obscurity. I will give you credit that you often provide interesting information and personal stories but it's also often completely irrelevant to the topic of discussion and therefore meaningless and unhelpful. I'm going to try again and I'm going to be direct this time because you still aren't paying attention. (Sorry, Dan, I've tried very hard.)
 
STOP TALKING ABOUT BOA. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT UIL!
 
Got it? Okay, let's try again and keep in mind most of us like having some difference between UIL and BOA. Understanding that alone should help you better understand and participate meaningfully in this group discussion. Most of us don't want to turn UIL into BOA and most of the 5A and 6A Directors don't want too either. What would be the point of having two identical contests separated by a single day?
 
People are primarily upset about scoring deviation and therefore the credibility of UIL advancements from Area to the SMBC, by extension advancement to SMBC Finals, and ultimately Finals placements. They are not asking for UIL to immediately convert to BOA Judging Criteria. Please stop acting like they are. It seems most people aren't even upset about who made Finals at the SMBC. The issue for most is how someone was excluded, not that they were excluded. (Some Area competitions were more complicated.) In either case, we need consistency within UIL, not with BOA, in order to have credibility and that requires clarity.
 
Period.
 
This can not be delayed further if the UIL circuit is to remain vibrant and relevant. And...it can be done without addressing major changes that include more abstract concepts like General Effect. Clarity. That's the immediate priority.
 
You think I'm wrong about the urgency of the situation? Bands are already choosing to skip the SMBC. I've also witnessed more than one conversation before Area and the SMBC where the topic was whether it is more prestigious to win the UIL Texas State Championship or BOA San Antonio Super Regional. The answer is not clear yet but the trend in the conversation is. Credibility matters. So does difficulty and innovation.
 
Another day or in another thread we can debate how to modernize UIL Judging Criteria because the choice between relevance and obscurity is coming quickly. If the current trends continue, as you support them, in your lifetime the only bands left at UIL may be very small and marching basic military drill while playing Pop Goes The Weasel because they couldn't take the risk of playing a Sousa March as originally composed. That would leave them open to someone making a mistake when the Judging Criteria already has a strong bias toward flawless execution of the simple instead of excellent execution of the difficult. Good luck with that. Some have also said DCI is "exerting pressure" on other marching circuits to "convert" but that completely misreads the situation. Kids love DCI. That's called influence and if you want kids to stay involved, you better pay attention.
 
Instead let's stick with the current issue and your objections. You keep talking about how many small schools there are and how they outnumber the large schools. I'm going to ask you to be logically consistent and look at the other side of the coin. Have you ever considered how the total number of band kids at the large schools compare to the combined total of band kids at all the small schools? You claim to represent a majority but it's all in the way you choose to define it. In addition the underdog you want to protect isn't even participating under the system you claim protects them. The 2A SMBC had 17 bands. Not Finalist, 17 total competing bands. How many kids is that? How does it compare to the level of involvement, by either number of schools or students, in the 6A SMBC? That doesn't even count 4A. You want to include 4A among your small schools? Why? It seems disingenuous considering there are six classifications in Texas and I would divide them in half, but go ahead. It doesn't really dilute my point.
 
You also consistently argue that it's not fair for small schools to have to compete against the large schools. Are you kidding me?!? Are you still confusing BOA and UIL? We're talking about UIL and I didn't see a single 2A Marching Band among the 41 competitors at the 6A SMBC. Additionally, while I did see some other 6A parents at the 2A SMBC, none of the 6A Marching Bands took the field. So please stop spouting this fallacious nonsense. At best, your concern is based on misunderstanding, or perhaps delusion, but different school size classifications don't compete against each other under UIL Judging Criteria. Nobody is suggesting that should change.
 
Next is money. You're always going on about money so let's address it again. I'll start with a big school first. Did Vista Ridge win some kind of Fine Arts lottery that accounts for their amazing improvement in one year? No. But they did go in a new direction with basically the same money and most of the same kids. (Hint: That's a dog whistle for new Director. The right Directors and staff, starting at the Intermediate School level are the first step in cracking the code to the eternal question, "Why is it always the same Bands?" We'll find out soon enough if this one knows the whole code but his actions this year indicate he may.) "But it's different at a 1A school", you keep insisting. It sure is. In fact, it's so different they really can't afford to spend a dime on a real marching program. Music education is important, so focus on your concert program and let them play in the stands at football games. Sounds extreme but I went to an isolated medium-sized California school that did that and it works well. Consider the financial reality at 1A. That's a school with about 100 students, probably less. If you want a class size of 20 students you can staff a big 1A school with 5 teachers. Now think of just the classes required for graduation in Texas. How do you competently cover that with just 5 teachers? Next consider everything else a kid should be learning to be prepared for life and higher education in the 21st century. A 6th teacher is looking like a better investment than a marching program. Hard choices are required at the 1A level. These kids are already sentenced to a 19th century education and you think keeping the whole Texas Marching Arts program there too is going to make a difference for them?!? No, thank you. It doesn't get much better at the 2A level. Your real issues are with the Texas school finance system, not UIL Marching Competition rules. Please stop being an obstructionist here. These schools should have higher priorities than the UIL Marching Competition rules too and if the rules change they will still be in the same boat, still competing with the other small schools with the same challenges, so nobody will be at a disadvantage.
 
Going to a small school is a mixed bag of advantages and disadvantages. Big schools are too. Don't begrudge the other schools advantages or force them to conform to the disadvantages of your school. It just makes a mess for everyone. Be fair. Figure out which one best fits the values of your family and then enjoy your choice. And remember, you can always change your mind and move if you're ready to shoulder the burden of the new disadvantages too. (Yes, this time I'm speaking to the larger audience still raising kids. Or even more importantly, any lurking Directors.)
 
Is anyone still with me? I'm sorry that this probably wasn't my finest hour and hopefully this is viewed as more informative, thought provoking, and persuasive, than angry rant. That was my intention.

There has been a great deal of concern expressed about UIL scoring, accountability, and whether or not UIL leadership is also concerned or even interested. I know the head of UIL Judging and I can assure you they are extremely concerned. However, UIL is not a dictatorship. When it comes to changing rules, it's more like a democracy. In fact you could argue it even has similarities to an electoral college. In the spring a presentation will be made to all the Directors regarding proposed changes. The significant opposition to change is coming from Directors, not leadership. The presentation will not be everything UIL leadership wants. It will represent a compromise they hope will pass. A Director from a small school with a handful of kids in their band program that never achieves a Division I rating at the Region level will have the same vote as the Director of Allen High School, representing over 700 band kids, or the Directors of the SMBC Finalist. Maybe that's fair or maybe not. Either way that's how it works.
 
Blaming "UIL" for this is a bit too nonspecific. This issue is squarely in the hands of the Directors. They need to stop complaining and start influencing!
 
Do you know if your Director plans to vote for change? What have they done to persuade others, particularly at small schools, to also support change? Have they told Directors who are resistant to change the stories of bands negatively affected by judging deviations? Have they listened to the concerns of those small school Directors and helped them overcome misunderstandings regarding how change will affect them? Have they mentored those Directors through the changes that will affect them?
 
You want accountability? It start with Directors. I have a question for all of you. What is your Director doing about this?

There has been a great deal of concern expressed about UIL scoring, accountability, and whether or not UIL leadership is also concerned or even interested. I know the head of UIL Judging and I can assure you they are extremely concerned. However, UIL is not a dictatorship. When it comes to changing rules, it's more like a democracy. In fact you could argue it even has similarities to an electoral college. In the spring a presentation will be made to all the Directors regarding proposed changes. The significant opposition to change is coming from Directors, not leadership. The presentation will not be everything UIL leadership wants. It will represent a compromise they hope will pass. A Director from a small school with a handful of kids in their band program that never achieves a Division I rating at the Region level will have the same vote as the Director of Allen High School, representing over 700 band kids, or the Directors of the SMBC Finalist. Maybe that's fair or maybe not. Either way that's how it works.
 
Blaming "UIL" for this is a bit too nonspecific. This issue is squarely in the hands of the Directors. They need to stop complaining and start influencing!
 
Do you know if your Director plans to vote for change? What have they done to persuade others, particularly at small schools, to also support change? Have they told Directors who are resistant to change the stories of bands negatively affected by judging deviations? Have they listened to the concerns of those small school Directors and helped them overcome misunderstandings regarding how change will affect them? Have they mentored those Directors through the changes that will affect them?
 
You want accountability? It start with Directors. I have a question for all of you. What is your Director doing about this?

On a positive note regarding UIL Judging, I now have a new favorite judging comment.
 
During Keller's Prelim run one of the Judges said, "I was enjoying your Color Guard so much that for a minute there I actually forgot I was judging this contest!"
 
That's high praise if you ask me. When my daughter told me the Directors had shared it with them she was practically glowing and said, "That's pretty cool for a contest where Color Guard doesn't even count." It made her day.

On a positive note regarding UIL Judging, I now have a new favorite judging comment.
 
During Keller's Prelim run one of the Judges said, "I was enjoying your Color Guard so much that for a minute there I actually forgot I was judging this contest!"
 
That's high praise if you ask me. When my daughter told me the Directors had shared it with them she was practically glowing and said, "That's pretty cool for a contest where Color Guard doesn't even count." It made her day.

Probably the best idea, and easiest to implement, to come out of the 6A State conversation/thread is to use a 9 Judge panel split into 5 Music Judges and 4 Marching Judges. Then eliminate the high and low from both categories leaving the original 3/2 format and 60%/40% music emphasis.
 
The additional cost should be easy to cover with a small increase in spectator ticket price and/or entrance fee paid by competing bands. UIL ticket prices a much lower than other circuits.
 
At first glance this solution appears to require many more qualified Judges. However, some have said the large deviations in scores/rankings are only an issue in the large school classifications. If this is supported by emperical evidence, rather than anecdotal, then the additional Judges/cost may only be necessary in those classifications. It also seems unlikely to be needed at the region level as Division I versus Division II ratings don't seem to be generating meaningful controversy. If the 9 Judge panel was limited to 5A and 6A Area competitions and the entire SMBC, regardless of classification, the cost and demand for additional Judges should be manageable.
 
That would leave better instructions/guidelines regarding Judging criteria. Once again this does not need to descend into war over the differences between UIL and BOA or DCI. At this point UIL would be well served by at least clarifying what it means or wants under the current criteria even if it didn't make additional, and long overdue, changes to modernize the existing criteria. Start by clearly explaining them. No consensus in current Judging or meaningful debate regarding the future of Marching Arts in Texas can happen without universal understanding of where we are now.

On a positive note regarding UIL Judging, I now have a new favorite judging comment.
 
During Keller's Prelim run one of the Judges said, "I was enjoying your Color Guard so much that for a minute there I actually forgot I was judging this contest!"
 
That's high praise if you ask me. When my daughter told me the Directors had shared it with them she was practically glowing and said, "That's pretty cool for a contest where Color Guard doesn't even count." It made her day.

There has been a great deal of concern expressed about UIL scoring, accountability, and whether or not UIL leadership is also concerned or even interested. I know the head of UIL Judging and I can assure you they are extremely concerned. However, UIL is not a dictatorship. When it comes to changing rules, it's more like a democracy. In fact you could argue it even has similarities to an electoral college. In the spring a presentation will be made to all the Directors regarding proposed changes. The significant opposition to change is coming from Directors, not leadership. The presentation will not be everything UIL leadership wants. It will represent a compromise they hope will pass. A Director from a small school with a handful of kids in their band program that never achieves a Division I rating at the Region level will have the same vote as the Director of Allen High School, representing over 700 band kids, or the Directors of the SMBC Finalist. Maybe that's fair or maybe not. Either way that's how it works.
 
Blaming "UIL" for this is a bit too nonspecific. This issue is squarely in the hands of the Directors. They need to stop complaining and start influencing!
 
Do you know if your Director plans to vote for change? What have they done to persuade others, particularly at small schools, to also support change? Have they told Directors who are resistant to change the stories of bands negatively affected by judging deviations? Have they listened to the concerns of those small school Directors and helped them overcome misunderstandings regarding how change will affect them? Have they mentored those Directors through the changes that will affect them?
 
You want accountability? It start with Directors. I have a question for all of you. What is your Director doing about this?

On a positive note regarding UIL Judging, I now have a new favorite judging comment.
 
During Keller's Prelim run one of the Judges said, "I was enjoying your Color Guard so much that for a minute there I actually forgot I was judging this contest!"
 
That's high praise if you ask me. When my daughter told me the Directors had shared it with them she was practically glowing and said, "That's pretty cool for a contest where Color Guard doesn't even count." It made her day.

On a positive note regarding UIL Judging, I now have a new favorite judging comment.
 
During Keller's Prelim run one of the Judges said, "I was enjoying your Color Guard so much that for a minute there I actually forgot I was judging this contest!"
 
That's high praise if you ask me. When my daughter told me the Directors had shared it with them she was practically glowing and said, "That's pretty cool for a contest where Color Guard doesn't even count." It made her day.

On a positive note regarding UIL Judging, I now have a new favorite judging comment.
 
During Keller's Prelim run one of the Judges said, "I was enjoying your Color Guard so much that for a minute there I actually forgot I was judging this contest!"
 
That's high praise if you ask me. When my daughter told me the Directors had shared it with them she was practically glowing and said, "That's pretty cool for a contest where Color Guard doesn't even count." It made her day.

On a positive note regarding UIL Judging, I now have a new favorite judging comment.
 
During Keller's Prelim run one of the Judges said, "I was enjoying your Color Guard so much that for a minute there I actually forgot I was judging this contest!"
 
That's high praise if you ask me. When my daughter told me the Directors had shared it with them she was practically glowing and said, "That's pretty cool for a contest where Color Guard doesn't even count." It made her day.

Since we were the 12th place band in prelims, I've been reluctant to comment. I also have my biases, and I will clearly state that in my opinion Round Rock should not have been in finals over us this year. We were fully expecting that going first with such a deep field in 6A (and I recognize that Cedar Park won 5A last year going first, but 5A lacks the depth of 6A) would be almost problematic. So what's the answer? Take 11th, 12th, 13th, and 14th and have a march off on an even playing field? Top 2 advance? That gets rid of the timeslot issue (and it is an issue - going first will always push a score down in a strongly competitive contest), and allows direct comparison to get the right bands in finals. Congratulations to Round Rock for a very strong push at the end of the season. I've been a fan since I started paying attention to marching band again in 2015. It was especially great to see your program make finals at GN last year - the excitement from your kids was a sight to see. I was excited that our kids put a strong enough performance out there from the 1st slot to stick in the top 12 throughout prelims, and back that up by jumping to 9th in finals (interesting that we were 12th after both prelims this weekend, and jumped to 8th at BOA and 9th at UIL after finals). Everyone did a great job, and it was a pleasure watching the programs put out their best efforts.

Congrats to Vista Ridge on taking home the win - they certainly had an incredible show. I didn't see yesterday's run but their performance at BOA SA finals was totally off the charts so it's not surprising. Their rise has been amazing for sure.
 
As for Flower Mound, the senior class this year can lay claim to the following:
 
3 BOA Regional Championships (2015, 2016, 2018)
1 BOA Regional Silver Medal (2017)
3 BOA Super Regional Championships (2015, 2016, 2018)
1 BOA Super Regional top-half-of-finals finish - 6th (2017)
1 BOA Grand Nationals top-half-of-finals finish – 5th (2017)
1 Texas UIL Class 6A Championship (2016)
1 Texas UIL Class 6A Silver Medal (2018)
2 TMEA Class 6A Honor Band 2nd place finishes (2016, 2018)
1 Sudler Shield (2017)
1 upcoming trip to Pasadena, California to participate in the 2019 Rose Bowl Parade and festivities
 
And I’m not even counting things like Birdville, Plano Marching, UIL Region and Area contests.
 
They’ve had one heck of a run.

How did this descend into the endless BOA versus UIL debate once again? The question was about UIL judging.
 
To rephrase it a bit more politely, "Can, and should, UIL Judging be improved?"
 
This is not a complicated question. The answer is painfully obvious to even the casual observer. YES!
 
What needs to improve isn't all that difficult to identify either. Begin with the end in mind and then start addressing the basic root causes. The current judging guidelines are far to vague and the selection of who can be a judge, and at what level, is not nearly strict enough. BOA and DCI have nothing to do with this.
 
(It shouldn't be a surprise that someone with an engineering background understands and identified this earlier in the thread.)
 
Everyone is unhappy about inconsistent scores/rankings. Fix it!
 
Marching styles, school sizes, budgets, et cetera, are all distant secondary issues. It's true they are much more complicated and contentious issues but the biggest reason for that is people are continuing to defend preferences and turf with arguments fueled by confirmation bias. Correlation is not causation. The head of UIL Judging is trying to address these issues too by having a healthy, honest, and compassionate discussion dealing in reality and empirical evidence. Not emotion. We should do the same.
 
But put first things first. Improve consistency (consensus) and reduce deviation. Do that and even Freshman parents who know they don't have a clue about how judging works will feel confident that at least the judges do.

We made it home a couple hours ago. Now it's after one o'clock in the morning and we're with a large group of parents waiting for the kids buses to arrive.
 
Of course it's raining. A perfect ending for this crazy season. Could anything make it better?
 
Yep, Timber Creek Band kids and parents are here too!

We made it home a couple hours ago. Now it's after one o'clock in the morning and we're with a large group of parents waiting for the kids buses to arrive.
 
Of course it's raining. A perfect ending for this crazy season. Could anything make it better?
 
Yep, Timber Creek Band kids and parents are here too!

We made it home a couple hours ago. Now it's after one o'clock in the morning and we're with a large group of parents waiting for the kids buses to arrive.
 
Of course it's raining. A perfect ending for this crazy season. Could anything make it better?
 
Yep, Timber Creek Band kids and parents are here too!

I think other people noted why a 7 judge panel won't really work if you drop high and low. I instead like a 9 judge panel, so 5 and 4, and drop the high and low within each category. Then you end up with 3/2 again.
 
Or a 7 judge panel in which nobody is dropped, but the captions are more specific. That was, one judge only has a 14% influence rather than 20%, and they are looking for something a little more targeted.

A report via FB from the Keller Band.
 
Heard in the final trumpet section meeting just now from one of the Seniors to the Junior trumpets:
 
"Be the Seniors that you wanted to have as Freshman."
 
The changing of the guard is underway.