oagcplayer

Let me start by saying I have "no dog in the hunt".The judge who rated Wakeland at #10 should be suspended or entirely removed from UIL judging in the future. As someone else stated, you cannot have 1,2,10. If there was talk about any "bad feelings" and something like this happens, it only fuels the fire for the future. If a judge cannot put aside some personal grudge against someone, and most importantly, not negatively affect 250+ students because of that grudge, they have no business being allowed to judge. And if you look at the actual score, that judge had Wakeland rated WAY lower than anyone else in music. Makes you wonder if this judge has done in the past to any other schools or directors. Maybe UIL should look into this a little bit?

I respect your rebuttal, but again, this is not a specific Wakeland thing. It is a UIL thing simply based on the disparity in scores. Area scores had differentials of 10 in a few cases, with one judge scoring a school first in marching and another judge scoring the same school eleventh. In this case I highlight Wakeland because they had the greatest differentials in both music and marching. The disparity and differentials in scoring is my issue.

If the following comments sounds bitter, please note that I do not have a "dog in this hunt". I simply call it like I see it. I congratulate all the finalists, especially the Top 3! UIL judging again proves to be a joke, just like in some of the area contests. Major scoring differences for Wakeland cost them a medal. Glad my kids have graduated, as it is impossible to explain how the scores can be so inconsistent from judge to judge. It's getting to be like the Olympics. It may be time to add judges and throw out high and low scores before tabulating results or come up with another system completely. The disparities in scoring are unfair to the students and directors.

How do they determine how to break the tie and have 2 advance and 1 not?

Just looked at the 3A and 5A Prelims results. Rankings are all over the board between judges. Unless UIL figures out a consistent scoring method for judges to follow, I'm afraid there will always be questions of what a good performance is. I understand that the winners ranked consistently high, but those middle of the pack schools that would consider it a great accomplishment and honor to make finals are really in the dark when it comes to how they stack up versus the competition. And once again, "name" schools with slower shows that have members playing while they are standing still are the winners.

Is there a reason that the degree of difficulty of a show is not factored into scoring? In 7 years of watching marching competitions, I am amazed and befuddled that schools and shows consistently place higher when members play when stationery or barely moving versus schools that have members play while moving at a quicker pace. This reward simply seems to penalize a more challenging and entertaining show. I've seen a few "big name" schools do this, and while they sound really good, they are not entertaining and sometimes even boring. A reward needs to be included for those schools that challenge their members to do something more difficult than do boring really well.

I agree with BOAfanatic regarding Marcus, but it ties in with my viewpoint of UIL in general. UIL seems to reward well played music while standing still more than marching and playing at the same time, and definitely does not factor in the entertainment value or difficulty of the show. This was evident at the 4A finals last year. Older judging panels definitely would much rather see technically perfect shows that are easy to do versus harder, faster shows that are more entertaining and I think this is hurting marching band in general. The band directors are now stuck with having to focus on technical perfection versus entertainment, and then hoping they get the judging panel that fits what they have done in hoping for success. It's still high school, and I personally would rather be entertained rather than watch the pursuit of technical perfection.

Cedar Park and Dripping Springs were the class of the event and definitely deserved their final spots. It did seem like bands that moved up in finals were more "play loud and stand still" instead of playing and marching a lot at the same time. Why does UIL not institute some type of "difficulty of show" factor into scoring? It seems like the current system (at least tonight) rewards you doing an easier show really well versus a hard show to play and march well. Kind of like Texas having the issue right now with AP classses - colleges want a non-weighted GPA, and having that harder class possibly hurt your GPA becomes a negative because you want to challenge yourself.

Not having GE incorporated into scoring really stinks. Everyone seems to forget that marching bands perform at high school football games as well, and their job during halftime is to ENTERTAIN the crowd. I've seen schools do really well at UIL scored competitions that had shows that were BORING. If you'd like to have the crowds all go to the concession stand at halftime, do your boring show technically well, and no one at the stadium well give a turkey. If you'd like to get the future musicians of America interested in music early, give them a reason to stick around at halftime by entertaining them.

Ragneo - that simply justifies the statement that the smaller bands have no chance to compete, especially if schools are getting bonus points for their exceptional history. Hopefully, I'm wrong, but if BOA suddenly starts to see a decrease in entries from these types of schools, just remember you read it here first.

mellopwn1 - I understand what you're saying, but 8 out of 10!?!?!?!? Sorry, that is just an extreme ratio. I still can't believe the 8th place band in AAAA "outperformed" other bands in smaller classifications. Wakeland won AA and they weren't better? Neither was Pflugerville? Yeah, right. Danpod - I believe classes are set by number of performers that are 10th - 12th graders within the band. And you said it best - they performed in exhibition. They may have gotten the crowd to love them, but have no chance in the actual competition (although I would consider 15 to be an extreme amount). And BTW, UIL criteria can be a joke for someone who simply wants to be entertained, versus someone who looks for a technically precise show that is as boring as can be. Call it general effect or simply entertainment value, but UIL needs to figure out how to weigh that in the scoring. Otherwise, as band directors develop shows for UIL competition and not for entertainment value, more people will leave for the concession stand at halftime of the football game, and fine arts as we know it will fall further down the list of importance to school districts that are cutting budgets.

I believe that it is a travesty that the 8th Place AAAA band scored higher overall than the 3rd Place AAA Band or even the top 2 AA bands. BOA should be embarrassed of a result that simply says "you need to be a big school or you have no chance at competing on an even level". I realize and accept the fact that larger bands may be more impressive due to volume of sound and will automatically have a slight advantage, but this is extreme. Hate to say it, but if I'm the director of one of the smaller bands, I tell BOA to go take a flying leap and fill my spot (and entry $) with someone else. Best of class awards are nice, but it's obvious that this year's smaller schools have no chance to be competetive in the overall grand scheme of things.