1998-2018

I need VODs. Now.

Bands that scored an 80 or higher roll all the way into the 40’s placements. That says something about depth

ROUND ROCK OH MY GOD THEY MUST BE SO HAPPY OMGI AM SO HAPPY FOR THEM (sorry for yelling)

Not only is that wrong, it's extremely disrespectful to Marcus and Flower Mound. Last year one of our Keller parents heard someone, from another program, say virtually the same thing about Flower Mound and immediately asked, "I don't think that's how it works, but if you know something I don't, can you tell me how much a string of State Marching Band Championships cost? Because I'm pretty sure we can get that funded."
 
The same goes for a string of BOA San Antonio Super Regional wins.
 
Trips to the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade or the Tournament of Roses Parade are a different situation, but competition wins are not for sale.
 
Do you think Vista Ridge spent significantly more to win the 6A Texas SMBC last year compared to the budget two years ago when they were the first band out of San Antonio Super Regional Finals?
 
I don't.

Not only is that wrong, it's extremely disrespectful to Marcus and Flower Mound. Last year one of our Keller parents heard someone, from another program, say virtually the same thing about Flower Mound and immediately asked, "I don't think that's how it works, but if you know something I don't, can you tell me how much a string of State Marching Band Championships cost? Because I'm pretty sure we can get that funded."
 
The same goes for a string of BOA San Antonio Super Regional wins.
 
Trips to the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade or the Tournament of Roses Parade are a different situation, but competition wins are not for sale.
 
Do you think Vista Ridge spent significantly more to win the 6A Texas SMBC last year compared to the budget two years ago when they were the first band out of San Antonio Super Regional Finals?
 
I don't.

Not only is that wrong, it's extremely disrespectful to Marcus and Flower Mound. Last year one of our Keller parents heard someone, from another program, say virtually the same thing about Flower Mound and immediately asked, "I don't think that's how it works, but if you know something I don't, can you tell me how much a string of State Marching Band Championships cost? Because I'm pretty sure we can get that funded."
 
The same goes for a string of BOA San Antonio Super Regional wins.
 
Trips to the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade or the Tournament of Roses Parade are a different situation, but competition wins are not for sale.
 
Do you think Vista Ridge spent significantly more to win the 6A Texas SMBC last year compared to the budget two years ago when they were the first band out of San Antonio Super Regional Finals?
 
I don't.

There have been questions about the unusually high number of falls. We noticed the turf was brighter, cleaner, maybe even greener. Then someone else pointed out the center field and end zone logos are all gone.
 
New turf?

All that I really have to say is that being there all day, I really feel like the judges judged the performances of the day.  Maybe two or three I personally would have moved up or down a little bit, but not a lot different.  
 
2019 as a whole has taken what we expect to see in results from a lot of bands and just completely turned that on its head.  There's usually a lot of complaining that it's the same old bands in the same placements just kinda shuffling around a bit.  But now that we have had some pretty surprising results, there's again some push back, but now that the judges don't know what they're doing, the results are crazy, etc.  And I get being a little upset if a band you're associated with doesn't do as well as you had hoped.  Three out of four years of my high school band experience we barely made finals and were constantly the first one out, etc.  Probably not even a month from now that will have all settled and you can remember the stuff that really matters.  

That's an interesting point and it's supported by the fact that BOA San Antonio and 6A SMBC both include the usual suspects in Finals. The placements may vary a bit but the players are practically identical.

It’ll actually probably be pretty solid depending on the weekend. It’s one of the best chances to get UIL quality feedback before the SMBC.

It's a unique and worthwhile experience and it's getting even better. This year I really noticed how they are changing their drill to capitalize on their size. The way they are moving blocks of the band has definitely changed and I'm glad to hear it's intentionally purposeful. At multiple points throughout the show I was thinking, "Hey, that's cool, when did they start doing that?"
 
It won't happen overnight but when they get to the point where they add movement within those large blocks, like the Keller closer or what the Madison Scouts did this summer, we can all be very afraid. Awesome potential.

It's a unique and worthwhile experience and it's getting even better. This year I really noticed how they are changing their drill to capitalize on their size. The way they are moving blocks of the band has definitely changed and I'm glad to hear it's intentionally purposeful. At multiple points throughout the show I was thinking, "Hey, that's cool, when did they start doing that?"
 
It won't happen overnight but when they get to the point where they add movement within those large blocks, like the Keller closer or what the Madison Scouts did this summer, we can all be very afraid. Awesome potential.

Hmmm, that seems perhaps a bit bold. It makes me wonder if you were at Waco or just looked at scores. (But if you have a question, by all means, ask it. That's why we're here. I'm just trying to understand context.

Wait...I didn't say that...
 
 
Oh, yep...
 
Ha! Been there...
 
No!!! Not that! Try scrolling down to the bottom of the page and hit the "Full Version" button. Then rotate your phone to landscape, drag the display to a readable size when you comment, quote, or edit, and everything should look pretty much like it does on a PC or tablet.

Hmmm, that seems perhaps a bit bold. It makes me wonder if you were at Waco or just looked at scores. (But if you have a question, by all means, ask it. That's why we're here. I'm just trying to understand context.

Hmmm, that seems perhaps a bit bold. It makes me wonder if you were at Waco or just looked at scores. (But if you have a question, by all means, ask it. That's why we're here. I'm just trying to understand context.

percussionmomma2022, I have a few questions to help clarify what you have said. I genuinely want to understand. I will also add some comments to try to ensure I was correctly understood. I would like to see others join the conversation too. What happened at Waco has been a common question.
 
I absolutely agree.
 
Change is incredibly hard and is the path that leads to growth and increased success.
 
Are you saying I did this?
 
Or did someone else?
 
It would be wrong to do this publicly. In my view I specifically and intentionally avoided this. No single individual is called out by name or title.
 
I do make reference to potential design issues. At the level of a high quality program like Hendrickson I would assume these decisions are made by an outside professional design team. Is that not the case?
 
In your opinion, where does my comment fall? Constructive, hurtful, wrong, or some combination of the three?
 
I think you overlooked a possibility. My intention was to be informative.
 
 
I am keenly aware of this. That's why I strive to be respectfully informative. I've been involved with our band program for over twenty years. I also coached baseball at a high level for twenty years. In all that time I never met a successful kid who didn't want to hear the honest truth told in a respectful way, with no whitewash. Kids are dying for the truth so they understand what is happening. Parents too. I offered an educated opinion. I don't expect everyone to agree, but I think that's what makes this place helpful.
 
Who said they are sub-par?
 
I certainly didn't. My comments regarding their history clearly put them well within the top 1% of bands in the entire country. That's not sub-par.
 
 
 
I didn't do this either.
 
Are you referring to information that came out in another comment by someone else?
 
What did you consider to be "private band family stuff?
 
I'm looking forward to San Antonio too! I would encourage you and the kids to persevere, the journey is worth it.

This is the kind of question that can get me in trouble but I'm willing to give it a try with a new sensitivity to the pain points. First let me say I think Hendrickson is a high quality program. The kids are talented and have been San Antonio Super Regional Finalist the last two years. If the kids have a role in this placement it is minor. They are not the issue and are not at fault. Clear? I'm just being careful after last season and don't want any misunderstanding.
 
Addition disclosure for additional clarity:
I first saw the show in the video from the Texas Music Classic and almost immediately thought it was headed for problems at BOA. By the end of the show I had mentality removed it from my list of potential San Antonio Finalist but decided to reserve final judgement until seeing it live at BOA Waco. That didn't help, instead it did more damage and I felt bad for the kids who have been put in this position. I definitely didn't have them in Finals at Waco.
 
But 17th seems harsh.
 
So the question is why?
 
This sounds like a summary, not a direct quote from the judges comments. I'd bet it's an accidental mischaracterization of the judges comments, or at least their intended message.
 
 
Wait, let's tap the brakes there. Hendrickson does tell us at the beginning of the show what they are trying to do. Their message is clear, so this is probably a big indication it's the judges intended message that has been misunderstood.
 
Early in the 2015 season a Judge actually audibly yawned while telling Keller Central their show "just isn't working". They made significant changes and ended the season with a performance in Grand National Championships Semi-Finals.
 
This kind of feedback from Judges may be more common in WGI competition. I was at an early season clinic where Judges directly asked a group right after their performance, "What is your show about?". Nobody in the Guard knew. The Judges told them, "We can't tell either and that's going to be a big problem if it doesn't change." The director explained the show concept to the girls but didn't make design/choreography changes and other Judges comments and scores continued to reflect the design problem.
 
LeanderMomma, we both travel in the WGI world. Remember the CGT Dallas 2018 show "Dust and Ashes"? Early in the season a panel of judges told them they loved the show but couldn't tell what it was about? Something Russian...but they needed to know more for proper GE context and higher scores. So CGT added a hilarious, snarky pre-show that introduced the characters and the play the show was based on. The rest is unforgettable Finals history in Dayton.
 
But Hendrickson already has a clear introduction so that shouldn't be the problem.
 
It's been suggested that maybe the judges aren't familiar with the disco era, so let's examine what defined Studio 54?
 
First was extremely limited access.
The stories of the velvet rope are legendary. One night a newlywed couple showed up still in wedding dress and tuxedo. Just to see what would happen they were told at the rope the bride could come in but the groom couldn't. She reported had a great time inside while he waited outside furious with her and Security. No report on whether or not they are still married. Celebrities were regularly turned away. Ironically, CHIC's huge disco hit Le Freak was written by Niles Rodgers after members of the band were invited to Studio 54 and then denied access. "Freak out" was not the original lyric.
 
Once inside the experience was defined by:
Disco Music
Disco Dancing
Fashion
Drugs
Sex
Absolute Decadence
 
How many of these things also define the Hendrickson show?
 
Extremely limited access? Not really, it's not demonstrated on the field in a memorable way that defines the show.
 
Disco Music? Yes, the melodies are there but the relentlessly driving groove of a dance club is never the strength of any marching band. It's a problematic design choice.
 
Disco Dancing? Not at a level that defines the show.
 
Fashion? Sort of, but not really. The Guard fashion looks like 1967 to 1972. Studio 54 opened ten years later, in 1977, and fashion had changed considerably. It would probably be helpful if they looked less like flamboyant extras from The Mod Squad and more like the cast of Saturday Night Fever or even The Village People.
 
Drugs? Definitely not.
 
Sex? No, not even a little.
 
Decadence? It's in the name of the show but that's as far as it goes and for a high school marching band, that is as it should be.
 
As I'm writing this I realized this could be an awesome design concept for CGT. They could easily overcome many of the hurdles because of the different performance style expectations and environment. But that doesn't necessarily make it a good choice for Hendrickson.
 
With all this in mind I don't think the Judges were saying they didn't understand the concept. It seems more likely they think the show didn't well represent the stated concept. Two very different things.
 
And that's not on the kids.
 
It's a tough question that needs to be answered. It's worth noting that most of the excitement surrounding Hendrickson came after TMC and that's not a BOA event. Hendrickson didn't make Finals at BOA Austin either though it could be argued that was a deeper field and they placed 12th, not 17th. No easy answers for either BOA or Hendrickson.
 
A final thought. Proofreading through this I wonder if some may read it and think I'm on thin ice or wish this kind of analysis wasn't part of the forum. I am open to feedback. Please keep it polite and remember I have repeatedly excluded or defended the kids. Is what I have said any different than all the comments about how dirty the Keller closer was? Or is it just a more detailed analysis, similar to someone explaining what "dirty" means and where it happened in the sets?
 
Everything you want is on the other side of fear. Be fearless.
 
 
 
Edit: The Keller analysis was just any easy example of how not all productive feedback is positive. I have no problem with those comments. They are accurate, the closer is extremely dirty, especially by Keller standards. Don't expect it to stay that way.

Thank you for responding, I'm relieved to here this. I guess the timing of your comment coming so quickly after mine had me unnecessarily concerned. Your clarification will likely provide helpful context for others reading the thread.

Personally I am all for deeper discussions about what might be at issue. There are reasons shows score the way they do, and trying to understand those reasons is perfectly fine. These types of comments are not attacks against programs or performers, but are thoughtful and sometimes insightful comments about results and where we think those results came from. While most of us don't have access to the judges comments (I'm sure some of us do, at least for some programs), we then have to use our own eyes and ears, and general knowledge of the activity to try to make sense of the results, What drives GE? That one is hard for people to define and understand. It is probably the most subjective of the captions.
 
Another thing to understand about BOA, is that the scores are a general indication of mastery, on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best. Whenever you see a score of 18+ in a caption, that means the judge thought the program was at the highest level of achievement (aka "Box 5") in that caption, but perhaps others still did it better. Those are the general guidelines that the BOA judges have, which have been asked about on this site. Within those generalizations the judge will assign rankings and scores based upon their opinion of the show vs the other shows. So while the scores may not be directly comparable between contests, the general achievement level can be. So once programs start hitting 16+ in captions, they are putting on a pretty strong show. 18+ will be a strong end of season finalist contender, 19+ is a champion contender.

This is the kind of question that can get me in trouble but I'm willing to give it a try with a new sensitivity to the pain points. First let me say I think Hendrickson is a high quality program. The kids are talented and have been San Antonio Super Regional Finalist the last two years. If the kids have a role in this placement it is minor. They are not the issue and are not at fault. Clear? I'm just being careful after last season and don't want any misunderstanding.
 
Addition disclosure for additional clarity:
I first saw the show in the video from the Texas Music Classic and almost immediately thought it was headed for problems at BOA. By the end of the show I had mentality removed it from my list of potential San Antonio Finalist but decided to reserve final judgement until seeing it live at BOA Waco. That didn't help, instead it did more damage and I felt bad for the kids who have been put in this position. I definitely didn't have them in Finals at Waco.
 
But 17th seems harsh.
 
So the question is why?
 
This sounds like a summary, not a direct quote from the judges comments. I'd bet it's an accidental mischaracterization of the judges comments, or at least their intended message.
 
 
Wait, let's tap the brakes there. Hendrickson does tell us at the beginning of the show what they are trying to do. Their message is clear, so this is probably a big indication it's the judges intended message that has been misunderstood.
 
Early in the 2015 season a Judge actually audibly yawned while telling Keller Central their show "just isn't working". They made significant changes and ended the season with a performance in Grand National Championships Semi-Finals.
 
This kind of feedback from Judges may be more common in WGI competition. I was at an early season clinic where Judges directly asked a group right after their performance, "What is your show about?". Nobody in the Guard knew. The Judges told them, "We can't tell either and that's going to be a big problem if it doesn't change." The director explained the show concept to the girls but didn't make design/choreography changes and other Judges comments and scores continued to reflect the design problem.
 
LeanderMomma, we both travel in the WGI world. Remember the CGT Dallas 2018 show "Dust and Ashes"? Early in the season a panel of judges told them they loved the show but couldn't tell what it was about? Something Russian...but they needed to know more for proper GE context and higher scores. So CGT added a hilarious, snarky pre-show that introduced the characters and the play the show was based on. The rest is unforgettable Finals history in Dayton.
 
But Hendrickson already has a clear introduction so that shouldn't be the problem.
 
It's been suggested that maybe the judges aren't familiar with the disco era, so let's examine what defined Studio 54?
 
First was extremely limited access.
The stories of the velvet rope are legendary. One night a newlywed couple showed up still in wedding dress and tuxedo. Just to see what would happen they were told at the rope the bride could come in but the groom couldn't. She reported had a great time inside while he waited outside furious with her and Security. No report on whether or not they are still married. Celebrities were regularly turned away. Ironically, CHIC's huge disco hit Le Freak was written by Niles Rodgers after members of the band were invited to Studio 54 and then denied access. "Freak out" was not the original lyric.
 
Once inside the experience was defined by:
Disco Music
Disco Dancing
Fashion
Drugs
Sex
Absolute Decadence
 
How many of these things also define the Hendrickson show?
 
Extremely limited access? Not really, it's not demonstrated on the field in a memorable way that defines the show.
 
Disco Music? Yes, the melodies are there but the relentlessly driving groove of a dance club is never the strength of any marching band. It's a problematic design choice.
 
Disco Dancing? Not at a level that defines the show.
 
Fashion? Sort of, but not really. The Guard fashion looks like 1967 to 1972. Studio 54 opened ten years later, in 1977, and fashion had changed considerably. It would probably be helpful if they looked less like flamboyant extras from The Mod Squad and more like the cast of Saturday Night Fever or even The Village People.
 
Drugs? Definitely not.
 
Sex? No, not even a little.
 
Decadence? It's in the name of the show but that's as far as it goes and for a high school marching band, that is as it should be.
 
As I'm writing this I realized this could be an awesome design concept for CGT. They could easily overcome many of the hurdles because of the different performance style expectations and environment. But that doesn't necessarily make it a good choice for Hendrickson.
 
With all this in mind I don't think the Judges were saying they didn't understand the concept. It seems more likely they think the show didn't well represent the stated concept. Two very different things.
 
And that's not on the kids.
 
It's a tough question that needs to be answered. It's worth noting that most of the excitement surrounding Hendrickson came after TMC and that's not a BOA event. Hendrickson didn't make Finals at BOA Austin either though it could be argued that was a deeper field and they placed 12th, not 17th. No easy answers for either BOA or Hendrickson.
 
A final thought. Proofreading through this I wonder if some may read it and think I'm on thin ice or wish this kind of analysis wasn't part of the forum. I am open to feedback. Please keep it polite and remember I have repeatedly excluded or defended the kids. Is what I have said any different than all the comments about how dirty the Keller closer was? Or is it just a more detailed analysis, similar to someone explaining what "dirty" means and where it happened in the sets?
 
Everything you want is on the other side of fear. Be fearless.
 
 
 
Edit: The Keller analysis was just any easy example of how not all productive feedback is positive. I have no problem with those comments. They are accurate, the closer is extremely dirty, especially by Keller standards. Don't expect it to stay that way.

This is the kind of question that can get me in trouble but I'm willing to give it a try with a new sensitivity to the pain points. First let me say I think Hendrickson is a high quality program. The kids are talented and have been San Antonio Super Regional Finalist the last two years. If the kids have a role in this placement it is minor. They are not the issue and are not at fault. Clear? I'm just being careful after last season and don't want any misunderstanding.
 
Addition disclosure for additional clarity:
I first saw the show in the video from the Texas Music Classic and almost immediately thought it was headed for problems at BOA. By the end of the show I had mentality removed it from my list of potential San Antonio Finalist but decided to reserve final judgement until seeing it live at BOA Waco. That didn't help, instead it did more damage and I felt bad for the kids who have been put in this position. I definitely didn't have them in Finals at Waco.
 
But 17th seems harsh.
 
So the question is why?
 
This sounds like a summary, not a direct quote from the judges comments. I'd bet it's an accidental mischaracterization of the judges comments, or at least their intended message.
 
 
Wait, let's tap the brakes there. Hendrickson does tell us at the beginning of the show what they are trying to do. Their message is clear, so this is probably a big indication it's the judges intended message that has been misunderstood.
 
Early in the 2015 season a Judge actually audibly yawned while telling Keller Central their show "just isn't working". They made significant changes and ended the season with a performance in Grand National Championships Semi-Finals.
 
This kind of feedback from Judges may be more common in WGI competition. I was at an early season clinic where Judges directly asked a group right after their performance, "What is your show about?". Nobody in the Guard knew. The Judges told them, "We can't tell either and that's going to be a big problem if it doesn't change." The director explained the show concept to the girls but didn't make design/choreography changes and other Judges comments and scores continued to reflect the design problem.
 
LeanderMomma, we both travel in the WGI world. Remember the CGT Dallas 2018 show "Dust and Ashes"? Early in the season a panel of judges told them they loved the show but couldn't tell what it was about? Something Russian...but they needed to know more for proper GE context and higher scores. So CGT added a hilarious, snarky pre-show that introduced the characters and the play the show was based on. The rest is unforgettable Finals history in Dayton.
 
But Hendrickson already has a clear introduction so that shouldn't be the problem.
 
It's been suggested that maybe the judges aren't familiar with the disco era, so let's examine what defined Studio 54?
 
First was extremely limited access.
The stories of the velvet rope are legendary. One night a newlywed couple showed up still in wedding dress and tuxedo. Just to see what would happen they were told at the rope the bride could come in but the groom couldn't. She reported had a great time inside while he waited outside furious with her and Security. No report on whether or not they are still married. Celebrities were regularly turned away. Ironically, CHIC's huge disco hit Le Freak was written by Niles Rodgers after members of the band were invited to Studio 54 and then denied access. "Freak out" was not the original lyric.
 
Once inside the experience was defined by:
Disco Music
Disco Dancing
Fashion
Drugs
Sex
Absolute Decadence
 
How many of these things also define the Hendrickson show?
 
Extremely limited access? Not really, it's not demonstrated on the field in a memorable way that defines the show.
 
Disco Music? Yes, the melodies are there but the relentlessly driving groove of a dance club is never the strength of any marching band. It's a problematic design choice.
 
Disco Dancing? Not at a level that defines the show.
 
Fashion? Sort of, but not really. The Guard fashion looks like 1967 to 1972. Studio 54 opened ten years later, in 1977, and fashion had changed considerably. It would probably be helpful if they looked less like flamboyant extras from The Mod Squad and more like the cast of Saturday Night Fever or even The Village People.
 
Drugs? Definitely not.
 
Sex? No, not even a little.
 
Decadence? It's in the name of the show but that's as far as it goes and for a high school marching band, that is as it should be.
 
As I'm writing this I realized this could be an awesome design concept for CGT. They could easily overcome many of the hurdles because of the different performance style expectations and environment. But that doesn't necessarily make it a good choice for Hendrickson.
 
With all this in mind I don't think the Judges were saying they didn't understand the concept. It seems more likely they think the show didn't well represent the stated concept. Two very different things.
 
And that's not on the kids.
 
It's a tough question that needs to be answered. It's worth noting that most of the excitement surrounding Hendrickson came after TMC and that's not a BOA event. Hendrickson didn't make Finals at BOA Austin either though it could be argued that was a deeper field and they placed 12th, not 17th. No easy answers for either BOA or Hendrickson.
 
A final thought. Proofreading through this I wonder if some may read it and think I'm on thin ice or wish this kind of analysis wasn't part of the forum. I am open to feedback. Please keep it polite and remember I have repeatedly excluded or defended the kids. Is what I have said any different than all the comments about how dirty the Keller closer was? Or is it just a more detailed analysis, similar to someone explaining what "dirty" means and where it happened in the sets?
 
Everything you want is on the other side of fear. Be fearless.
 
 
 
Edit: The Keller analysis was just any easy example of how not all productive feedback is positive. I have no problem with those comments. They are accurate, the closer is extremely dirty, especially by Keller standards. Don't expect it to stay that way.

I knew this beforehand...but now, it really hit me how hard making finals will be. 

This is the kind of question that can get me in trouble but I'm willing to give it a try with a new sensitivity to the pain points. First let me say I think Hendrickson is a high quality program. The kids are talented and have been San Antonio Super Regional Finalist the last two years. If the kids have a role in this placement it is minor. They are not the issue and are not at fault. Clear? I'm just being careful after last season and don't want any misunderstanding.
 
Addition disclosure for additional clarity:
I first saw the show in the video from the Texas Music Classic and almost immediately thought it was headed for problems at BOA. By the end of the show I had mentality removed it from my list of potential San Antonio Finalist but decided to reserve final judgement until seeing it live at BOA Waco. That didn't help, instead it did more damage and I felt bad for the kids who have been put in this position. I definitely didn't have them in Finals at Waco.
 
But 17th seems harsh.
 
So the question is why?
 
This sounds like a summary, not a direct quote from the judges comments. I'd bet it's an accidental mischaracterization of the judges comments, or at least their intended message.
 
 
Wait, let's tap the brakes there. Hendrickson does tell us at the beginning of the show what they are trying to do. Their message is clear, so this is probably a big indication it's the judges intended message that has been misunderstood.
 
Early in the 2015 season a Judge actually audibly yawned while telling Keller Central their show "just isn't working". They made significant changes and ended the season with a performance in Grand National Championships Semi-Finals.
 
This kind of feedback from Judges may be more common in WGI competition. I was at an early season clinic where Judges directly asked a group right after their performance, "What is your show about?". Nobody in the Guard knew. The Judges told them, "We can't tell either and that's going to be a big problem if it doesn't change." The director explained the show concept to the girls but didn't make design/choreography changes and other Judges comments and scores continued to reflect the design problem.
 
LeanderMomma, we both travel in the WGI world. Remember the CGT Dallas 2018 show "Dust and Ashes"? Early in the season a panel of judges told them they loved the show but couldn't tell what it was about? Something Russian...but they needed to know more for proper GE context and higher scores. So CGT added a hilarious, snarky pre-show that introduced the characters and the play the show was based on. The rest is unforgettable Finals history in Dayton.
 
But Hendrickson already has a clear introduction so that shouldn't be the problem.
 
It's been suggested that maybe the judges aren't familiar with the disco era, so let's examine what defined Studio 54?
 
First was extremely limited access.
The stories of the velvet rope are legendary. One night a newlywed couple showed up still in wedding dress and tuxedo. Just to see what would happen they were told at the rope the bride could come in but the groom couldn't. She reported had a great time inside while he waited outside furious with her and Security. No report on whether or not they are still married. Celebrities were regularly turned away. Ironically, CHIC's huge disco hit Le Freak was written by Niles Rodgers after members of the band were invited to Studio 54 and then denied access. "Freak out" was not the original lyric.
 
Once inside the experience was defined by:
Disco Music
Disco Dancing
Fashion
Drugs
Sex
Absolute Decadence
 
How many of these things also define the Hendrickson show?
 
Extremely limited access? Not really, it's not demonstrated on the field in a memorable way that defines the show.
 
Disco Music? Yes, the melodies are there but the relentlessly driving groove of a dance club is never the strength of any marching band. It's a problematic design choice.
 
Disco Dancing? Not at a level that defines the show.
 
Fashion? Sort of, but not really. The Guard fashion looks like 1967 to 1972. Studio 54 opened ten years later, in 1977, and fashion had changed considerably. It would probably be helpful if they looked less like flamboyant extras from The Mod Squad and more like the cast of Saturday Night Fever or even The Village People.
 
Drugs? Definitely not.
 
Sex? No, not even a little.
 
Decadence? It's in the name of the show but that's as far as it goes and for a high school marching band, that is as it should be.
 
As I'm writing this I realized this could be an awesome design concept for CGT. They could easily overcome many of the hurdles because of the different performance style expectations and environment. But that doesn't necessarily make it a good choice for Hendrickson.
 
With all this in mind I don't think the Judges were saying they didn't understand the concept. It seems more likely they think the show didn't well represent the stated concept. Two very different things.
 
And that's not on the kids.
 
It's a tough question that needs to be answered. It's worth noting that most of the excitement surrounding Hendrickson came after TMC and that's not a BOA event. Hendrickson didn't make Finals at BOA Austin either though it could be argued that was a deeper field and they placed 12th, not 17th. No easy answers for either BOA or Hendrickson.
 
A final thought. Proofreading through this I wonder if some may read it and think I'm on thin ice or wish this kind of analysis wasn't part of the forum. I am open to feedback. Please keep it polite and remember I have repeatedly excluded or defended the kids. Is what I have said any different than all the comments about how dirty the Keller closer was? Or is it just a more detailed analysis, similar to someone explaining what "dirty" means and where it happened in the sets?
 
Everything you want is on the other side of fear. Be fearless.
 
 
 
Edit: The Keller analysis was just any easy example of how not all productive feedback is positive. I have no problem with those comments. They are accurate, the closer is extremely dirty, especially by Keller standards. Don't expect it to stay that way.

This is the kind of question that can get me in trouble but I'm willing to give it a try with a new sensitivity to the pain points. First let me say I think Hendrickson is a high quality program. The kids are talented and have been San Antonio Super Regional Finalist the last two years. If the kids have a role in this placement it is minor. They are not the issue and are not at fault. Clear? I'm just being careful after last season and don't want any misunderstanding.
 
Addition disclosure for additional clarity:
I first saw the show in the video from the Texas Music Classic and almost immediately thought it was headed for problems at BOA. By the end of the show I had mentality removed it from my list of potential San Antonio Finalist but decided to reserve final judgement until seeing it live at BOA Waco. That didn't help, instead it did more damage and I felt bad for the kids who have been put in this position. I definitely didn't have them in Finals at Waco.
 
But 17th seems harsh.
 
So the question is why?
 
This sounds like a summary, not a direct quote from the judges comments. I'd bet it's an accidental mischaracterization of the judges comments, or at least their intended message.
 
 
Wait, let's tap the brakes there. Hendrickson does tell us at the beginning of the show what they are trying to do. Their message is clear, so this is probably a big indication it's the judges intended message that has been misunderstood.
 
Early in the 2015 season a Judge actually audibly yawned while telling Keller Central their show "just isn't working". They made significant changes and ended the season with a performance in Grand National Championships Semi-Finals.
 
This kind of feedback from Judges may be more common in WGI competition. I was at an early season clinic where Judges directly asked a group right after their performance, "What is your show about?". Nobody in the Guard knew. The Judges told them, "We can't tell either and that's going to be a big problem if it doesn't change." The director explained the show concept to the girls but didn't make design/choreography changes and other Judges comments and scores continued to reflect the design problem.
 
LeanderMomma, we both travel in the WGI world. Remember the CGT Dallas 2018 show "Dust and Ashes"? Early in the season a panel of judges told them they loved the show but couldn't tell what it was about? Something Russian...but they needed to know more for proper GE context and higher scores. So CGT added a hilarious, snarky pre-show that introduced the characters and the play the show was based on. The rest is unforgettable Finals history in Dayton.
 
But Hendrickson already has a clear introduction so that shouldn't be the problem.
 
It's been suggested that maybe the judges aren't familiar with the disco era, so let's examine what defined Studio 54?
 
First was extremely limited access.
The stories of the velvet rope are legendary. One night a newlywed couple showed up still in wedding dress and tuxedo. Just to see what would happen they were told at the rope the bride could come in but the groom couldn't. She reported had a great time inside while he waited outside furious with her and Security. No report on whether or not they are still married. Celebrities were regularly turned away. Ironically, CHIC's huge disco hit Le Freak was written by Niles Rodgers after members of the band were invited to Studio 54 and then denied access. "Freak out" was not the original lyric.
 
Once inside the experience was defined by:
Disco Music
Disco Dancing
Fashion
Drugs
Sex
Absolute Decadence
 
How many of these things also define the Hendrickson show?
 
Extremely limited access? Not really, it's not demonstrated on the field in a memorable way that defines the show.
 
Disco Music? Yes, the melodies are there but the relentlessly driving groove of a dance club is never the strength of any marching band. It's a problematic design choice.
 
Disco Dancing? Not at a level that defines the show.
 
Fashion? Sort of, but not really. The Guard fashion looks like 1967 to 1972. Studio 54 opened ten years later, in 1977, and fashion had changed considerably. It would probably be helpful if they looked less like flamboyant extras from The Mod Squad and more like the cast of Saturday Night Fever or even The Village People.
 
Drugs? Definitely not.
 
Sex? No, not even a little.
 
Decadence? It's in the name of the show but that's as far as it goes and for a high school marching band, that is as it should be.
 
As I'm writing this I realized this could be an awesome design concept for CGT. They could easily overcome many of the hurdles because of the different performance style expectations and environment. But that doesn't necessarily make it a good choice for Hendrickson.
 
With all this in mind I don't think the Judges were saying they didn't understand the concept. It seems more likely they think the show didn't well represent the stated concept. Two very different things.
 
And that's not on the kids.
 
It's a tough question that needs to be answered. It's worth noting that most of the excitement surrounding Hendrickson came after TMC and that's not a BOA event. Hendrickson didn't make Finals at BOA Austin either though it could be argued that was a deeper field and they placed 12th, not 17th. No easy answers for either BOA or Hendrickson.
 
A final thought. Proofreading through this I wonder if some may read it and think I'm on thin ice or wish this kind of analysis wasn't part of the forum. I am open to feedback. Please keep it polite and remember I have repeatedly excluded or defended the kids. Is what I have said any different than all the comments about how dirty the Keller closer was? Or is it just a more detailed analysis, similar to someone explaining what "dirty" means and where it happened in the sets?
 
Everything you want is on the other side of fear. Be fearless.
 
 
 
Edit: The Keller analysis was just any easy example of how not all productive feedback is positive. I have no problem with those comments. They are accurate, the closer is extremely dirty, especially by Keller standards. Don't expect it to stay that way.