ISU Predictions/Breakdowns 2025

[Director42]

9 hours ago, marchinglover36 said:

 

Only if they actually saw this forum... there's been a lot of awesome ideas, which is why I hope some of them actually get out their so in the future we get to see something completely different yet very exciting!

There are a number of competition-hosting schools who are trying to get things more unified in our state. Many of us have a desire for a similar idea eventually (with the exception of IHSA involvement - that's less exciting for most of us), but the wheels of progress move slow. Especially when universities also have to work around athletics, and there's even more inter-school politics to consider. There's a lot of moving parts. 

[marchinglover36]

12 minutes ago, Director42 said:

There are a number of competition-hosting schools who are trying to get things more unified in our state. Many of us have a desire for a similar idea eventually (with the exception of IHSA involvement - that's less exciting for most of us), but the wheels of progress move slow. Especially when universities also have to work around athletics, and there's even more inter-school politics to consider. There's a lot of moving parts. 

Yeah it for sure takes a lot of time to implement a new idea for the whole state's marching program. Until that takes its time, I'm super excited to see the performances this weekend, I've never been more clueless about results before!

[Zdsmith]

My only ISU prediction is that I hope all my band director friends at the event make finals and that they all have great runs. 🙂

[drillwriter]

54 minutes ago, Director42 said:

There are a number of competition-hosting schools who are trying to get things more unified in our state. Many of us have a desire for a similar idea eventually (with the exception of IHSA involvement - that's less exciting for most of us), but the wheels of progress move slow. Especially when universities also have to work around athletics, and there's even more inter-school politics to consider. There's a lot of moving parts. 

Correct, the IHSA should not be involved in any way.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see things getting coordinated across the state. Between college football schedules, HS proms, bands only wanting to participate in so many competitions each year, travel budgets, etc. it seems daunting. Plus, HSs do want to host shows - these are fundraisers.

[Zdsmith]

7 minutes ago, drillwriter said:

Correct, the IHSA should not be involved in any way.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see things getting coordinated across the state. Between college football schedules, HS proms, bands only wanting to participate in so many competitions each year, travel budgets, etc. it seems daunting. Plus, HSs do want to host shows - these are fundraisers.

It's a tough ask for sure. There are some that want it, some that don't, some that would never work with IHSA, some that would never work with ILMEA, and then some more that have their own opinions.

Truthfully - I wish that we could just get a unified state sheet. Goes through a revision/check-in process every 2 or 3 years. A statewide judging body that trains judges on the boxes, the never/sometimes/occasionally/usually/always systems, understand the rule of tenths etc (many of whom are FABULOUS educators but maybe sometimes put some weird numbers out there). I am tired of explaining every different judging sheet and scoring system by show every week so that my kids don't feel defeated when they get a 62.5 and then a 93.5 (out of 140) and the 858 points. That's time I should be using to teach and helping them to get better.

[ctr477]

How about this?

It is run by IMEA. Schools receive classification notices for the year on say September 1. 

Everyone get to keep their existing competition. It can opt into being a qualifying event or not. Events that use the standard sheet, preferably a BOA sheet, serve as qualifying events for the final day of competition to be held at either U of I or ISU depending on availability.

A certain score threshold would qualify a group for the final day. That would rise over the course of the season with a final cut-off in mid-October.

At the final event, class championships are determined just as the ISU prelims setting works now. That evening, finals determine an overall state champion.

[Director42]

Getting to a unified sheet was a big goal of ours at the last meeting we had. Main issue is the huge variety in the design and competitive desire of different groups, and the ability to pay for enough judges to make BOA sheets doable. Schools hosting their own competitions was brought up too, and the general consensus was (as mentioned above) that we should keep them and allow for some to be state-qualifying "regional" type events and others to not be, and requiring attendance at a certain number of those smaller events plus one regional to qualify for state. Nobody is interested in taking away the main fundraiser for any program, but getting all those competitions on the same page is tough, even if all the legwork is done. Changing anything for such a critical part of a program is intimidating. All just brainstorming for the future at this point.

The sheets is the biggest current goal but it also means getting all the numerous host schools on board. We discussed having a couple of versions of a BOA sheet that just uses calculation to reduce the number of judges to make things more affordable for smaller schools (and with that modification we avoid having to pay the fee for true BOA sheets). There's a good amount of schools that would like a sheet weighted more towards performance and less towards GE. This was at least part of the reasoning behind some hosts offering "Scholastic" classes. In some competitions that means scores and comments but an adjusted sheet. At our show (Effingham) the Scholastic offering is purely comments, no scores. Nobody has taken that opportunity in the last 2 years that we've offered it but I really hope some in the future do, especially those schools not too far from us with great and entertaining products that only perform for football games, so that their kids get the opportunity to see a competition and perform for a band-centric crowd. 

[ctr477]

23 minutes ago, Director42 said:

Getting to a unified sheet was a big goal of ours at the last meeting we had. Main issue is the huge variety in the design and competitive desire of different groups, and the ability to pay for enough judges to make BOA sheets doable. Schools hosting their own competitions was brought up too, and the general consensus was (as mentioned above) that we should keep them and allow for some to be state-qualifying "regional" type events and others to not be, and requiring attendance at a certain number of those smaller events plus one regional to qualify for state. Nobody is interested in taking away the main fundraiser for any program, but getting all those competitions on the same page is tough, even if all the legwork is done. Changing anything for such a critical part of a program is intimidating. All just brainstorming for the future at this point.

The sheets is the biggest current goal but it also means getting all the numerous host schools on board. We discussed having a couple of versions of a BOA sheet that just uses calculation to reduce the number of judges to make things more affordable for smaller schools (and with that modification we avoid having to pay the fee for true BOA sheets). There's a good amount of schools that would like a sheet weighted more towards performance and less towards GE. This was at least part of the reasoning behind some hosts offering "Scholastic" classes. In some competitions that means scores and comments but an adjusted sheet. At our show (Effingham) the Scholastic offering is purely comments, no scores. Nobody has taken that opportunity in the last 2 years that we've offered it but I really hope some in the future do, especially those schools not too far from us with great and entertaining products that only perform for football games, so that their kids get the opportunity to see a competition and perform for a band-centric crowd. 

No disagreement from me on any of this. And I am not aware of anyone here publicly defending the wide variety of scoring sheets. I love the modified BOA sheets idea. I would propose a sheet that has the same BOA categories and weighting use four judges. Music, Visual, Music GE, Visual GE. If you want added captions, have it, but they do not go toward the final score.

That should keep things affordable for smaller budgets who want to have an event that gets a group eligible for state. Qualifying competitions do not have 80 or 500 point systems, drum major scores applying to the final score, or whatever Mesozoic Era ideas that are still floating around. 

I really do not see the need for other event attendance to qualify for a regional. I think any sort of sufficient score at any qualifying event gives a group the opportunity to go to state. This allows groups to compete at whatever level works for their program. Non-scored evaluations at qualifying would be great for the groups who do not travel much. it allows the more ambitious groups to do out of state events like BOA early in the season and still qualify for state by only going to a single qualifying event.

I can imagine the pushback dressed up in niceties that ultimately argue change is bad or we have have always done it this way. A large lesson of my professional life is that forcing mechanisms are great at effecting change. Don't like the new system? Fine, your group does not get to call itself a state champion, finalist, etc. Don't want to change your completion's way of doing things? The free market will give you the answer. Competitive groups seeking to attend the state finals now have much less of an incentive to attend your competition. Let us know how much you fundraise at your event. And bands have their free choice as well. Want to take your group to go see a college with a non-qualifying event that might inspire them go there? Have at it.

Ultimately, Indiana, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Texas, Wisconsin, Colorado, Arizona, Louisiana, among others have all figured this out. Illinois can, too. I believe it will make the level of performance better at all levels and make for a better experience for the students.

 

[Dan Balash]

3 thoughts and I'll have more later:

1. Get every show on CompetitionSuite.
2. Shows should not include color guard/drum major/percussion in final scores.
3. If you want a show with less judges, fine.  Invoke the BOA missing judge rule where if a music judge is missing, MPI isn't judged; visual judge missing, VPI isn't judged.

[Dan Balash]

IHSA formed a committee around 2012ish to discuss marching band.  I'm not sure if anything ever came of that.

[Magnichu]

17 minutes ago, Dan Balash said:

IHSA formed a committee around 2012ish to discuss marching band.  I'm not sure if anything ever came of that.

Last I checked there were 4 schools that reported marching band to IHSA as an activity they have. I doubt that means much, though. 

[Dan Balash]

1 minute ago, Magnichu said:

Last I checked there were 4 schools that reported marching band to IHSA as an activity they have. I doubt that means much, though. 

Up to 5 now!

Minooka, Oak Park/River Forest, Kewanee, Lyons (doesn't compete) and Naperville North (just now returning to competition).

[marchinglover36]

2 hours ago, Dan Balash said:

Up to 5 now!

Minooka, Oak Park/River Forest, Kewanee, Lyons (doesn't compete) and Naperville North (just now returning to competition).

What's the pros and cons of reporting marching band to IHSA?

[Director42]

3 hours ago, ctr477 said:

I really do not see the need for other event attendance to qualify for a regional. I think any sort of sufficient score at any qualifying event gives a group the opportunity to go to state. 

The thought process here was to still have an incentive for more competitive groups to still come to "smaller" in state competitions, not just travel for regionals to maximize qualification chances and drive our smaller shows to extinction. Not completely sure about the methods but I like the spirit of the idea.

 

Largely agree with you on everything else, and what Dan said about comp suite. A devil's advocate argument could be made for the cost but it's really not that high, if a school has the resources to host a show they could certainly swing the 5-10 per band cost, and it's so much nicer for both host and competitor. Right now getting sheets unified is definitely the top priority though. 

[RightFootCONTRAian]

17 hours ago, ScoreMaster_185 said:

For a state that has some of the most marching bands in general, and an amazing culture around them, it's a shame our State championships are all separate and the biggest one usually leaves out the two best bands in the state. I like this idea.

"Usually leaves out" is a weird way of saying "O'Fallon and Lincoln Way typically elect not to come to ISU." Look, I'm all for programs doing what they feel is best for them, and OTHS and LW clearly prioritize BOA events over in state events. I think it's great OTHS will be at ISU this weekend, and, as I've said ad nauseum, really wish LW would come back to the event, (and genuinely can't wrap my head around why they've been absent since 2021.) But to imply that their absence delegitimizes this contest as a defacto "State Championship," and take a sideways swap at bands like Morton, Marian, and Prospect who have done incredibly well at ISU and BOA events historically feels a little narrow in view.

 

[RightFootCONTRAian]

5 hours ago, ctr477 said:

How about this?

It is run by IMEA.

I've heard from enough directors that they wouldn't trust IMEA to run a lemonade stand, let alone a brand new marching band circuit.

[IL Marching.Fan]

Hear me out.

IHSA Competitive Cheerleading type of format.

[Dan Balash]

16 minutes ago, IL Marching.Fan said:

Hear me out.

IHSA Competitive Cheerleading type of format.

Gonna have to elaborate on that one a little more.

[TheAngryBavarian]

4 hours ago, IL Marching.Fan said:

Hear me out.

IHSA Competitive Cheerleading type of format.

I don't hate that idea...would need a little adjusting to fit band, but that sort of system could definitely work.

Edited October 9, 2025 by TheAngryBavarian

[ScoreMaster_185]

7 hours ago, RightFootCONTRAian said:

"Usually leaves out" is a weird way of saying "O'Fallon and Lincoln Way typically elect not to come to ISU." Look, I'm all for programs doing what they feel is best for them, and OTHS and LW clearly prioritize BOA events over in state events. I think it's great OTHS will be at ISU this weekend, and, as I've said ad nauseum, really wish LW would come back to the event, (and genuinely can't wrap my head around why they've been absent since 2021.) But to imply that their absence delegitimizes this contest as a defacto "State Championship," and take a sideways swap at bands like Morton, Marian, and Prospect who have done incredibly well at ISU and BOA events historically feels a little narrow in view.

 

I didn't mean anything by it, Morton is right down the road from me and Marion Catholic is far and away my favorite band, it would just be nice to see how these great programs compare to "the best".

[IL Marching.Fan]

15 hours ago, Dan Balash said:

Gonna have to elaborate on that one a little more.

So basically schools would a sectional competition and there are small, medium, large, division they could use. 

Example:

Prospect Sectional

Small: Top 5 advance to state 

Medium: Top 5 advance to state 

Large: Top 5 advance to state 

After this they go to the state tournament (prelims)

ISU or U of I State tournament 

And for here it can fluctuate on how many advance to finals for day 2.

 

Basically this type of format, i’m really bad at explaining..

 

[drillwriter]

54 minutes ago, IL Marching.Fan said:

So basically schools would a sectional competition and there are small, medium, large, division they could use. 

Example:

Prospect Sectional

Small: Top 5 advance to state 

Medium: Top 5 advance to state 

Large: Top 5 advance to state 

After this they go to the state tournament (prelims)

ISU or U of I State tournament 

And for here it can fluctuate on how many advance to finals for day 2.

 

Basically this type of format, i’m really bad at explaining..

 

This highlights an elephant in the room: how to group bands. ISU and U of I use enrollment numbers similarly to get 6 classes; BOA uses enrollment numbers to get 4 classes; and pretty much every other IL competition uses band size to divide into 3 to 8 classes. Shall we start a separate thread on which way is most "fair"?  🙂

[Marchguy]

18 minutes ago, drillwriter said:

This highlights an elephant in the room: how to group bands. ISU and U of I use enrollment numbers similarly to get 6 classes; BOA uses enrollment numbers to get 4 classes; and pretty much every other IL competition uses band size to divide into 3 to 8 classes. Shall we start a separate thread on which way is most "fair"?  🙂

As a director, I can honestly say that consistency matters more to me than the method.  Band size, school size, "hybrid" model - if we could just use the same system across the state, I believe a lot of directors would breathe a sigh of relief.  Same for the judges sheets.

We don't ask our football or volleyball teams to play by different rules each week.  Why should marching bands be classified and evaluated by different standards based on where they are performing?

I would be extremely happy if contest hosts could come to some sort of agreement that provides consitency in classification, judging sheets and scoring.  Competition Suite seems to gaining more traction with local competitions - that's good.  Ease of access and consitency means more usable data for directors and students.

Maybe if we can get consistent classification and judging FIRST - a true statewide system/championship could be more easily adopted.

[Dan Balash]

I'd be all for a system similar to Indiana.  4 weeks of regular shows, with a regionals/semi state/state finals system over three weeks thereafter.  Have an Open Class and a Scholastic class competition, which would be a class for developing bands and bands that have experienced a director change in recent years.

4 classes, based on enrollment.  

Split whoever signs up in each class into a northern and southern regional.  2 locations north, 2 locations south.  1 location each would be a Class A/C, one would be B/D.  Top 10 scores of each class advance on to semi-state, to be held somewhere in the middle of the state.  4 locations, 20 bands each.  Top 10 bands at each location advance on to state finals, to be held at EIU/NIU/U of I/ISU, wherever.  Maybe the new stadium in Arlington Heights?  Straight class competition, 4 state champions named. Scholastic would be along the same lines, two class system based on enrollment as well as participants - Indiana Scholastic B is up to 55 kids with an enrollment of up to 899.  Scholastic A is up to 110 kids with an enrollment of 900+.  They have a 2 round system, with their state finals occurring during semi-state, and the A and B Scholastic champions get to perform in exhibition at State Finals.

 

 

[Dan Balash]

In addition, congratulations to the ISU Hall of Fame Inductees this year!

 

• Todd Stalter, retired Director of Bands from Eureka
• Terry Roderick, retired Director of Bands from Rochelle Township
• Gil & Linda Papp, retired Director of Bands/Color Guard Director from Monticello
• Randolph Kummer, retired Director of Bands from Lincoln-Way
• Mike Domico, retired Director of Bands from Metamora Township.