2004FIGHTINTXAG said:

---

It's easy to say that when reading a forum and not hearing it from the horse's mouth. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Given the significant amount of changes over the past few years I would take what they have to say seriously.

---

How can you take it seriously? This is no different than the argument that moving from tents into a dorm in 1905 was going to ruin the Corps.

I see an increase in meaningful leadership positions. It brings the major units back into relevance and will standardize the fish experience. Something that will bring a higher across the board performance level by the Corps than leaving training objectives up to individuals at the company level. Every other SMC, including the academies, in the country does it this way and they all manage to have very unique and individualized company level units with traditions and personality.

In the army as a company commander you are told to achieve specific training requirements and told what the standards are. Yet every company level organization I was involved with had an individual Esprit de Corps despite everyone having to accomplish the same tasks to the same standard.

FInally, and ultimately the only important statement. The Commandant was hired to bring his vision of a successful Corps of Cadets and to put his plan in place to accomplish that. As a good officer I expect he has evaluation processes in place and that success or failure of that plan will be evaluated and the plan will be adjusted accordingly.

CT'97 said:

---

Quote:

---

How can you take it seriously? This is no different than the argument that moving from tents into a dorm in 1905 was going to ruin the Corps.

---

---

So you don't see fish not being fish for the spring semester a big change?

From the attached "Freshmen promoted to PFC / Sophomores to Sergeant for the Spring semester if meet promotion criteria (in development)"


https://www.docdroid.net/Jtasqhu/cmdt-new-key-leader-brief-mar-2017.pdf.html#page=22

I honestly stopped caring about the Corps when GRam showed up, and am still rolling my eyes over the quad Starbucks. As such, I don't really care anymore about these changes; I expected my outfit, Old Army Cock Company, to be gone under GRam so I gave up. That said, I think a recent story shows the prestige of the Corps now:

My wife was off shopping in our tiny North Carolina town near base, so I went off to a bar. A young devil dog was in there, and he had a gold ring. Now I learned long ago not to ask if they're an Aggie because they usually aren't. But he saw my ring and struck up a conversation. I introduced myself and said I was '10, then asked his year and outfit. He responded '15 with embarrassment. I mean, a puppy dog face and a depressing voice. To be embarrassed about when you graduated says a lot, at least to me.

That's my two cents, now back to business.

USMC_JAGgie said:

---

I honestly stopped caring about the Corps when GRam showed up, and am still rolling my eyes over the quad Starbucks. As such, I don't really care anymore about these changes; I expected my outfit, Old Army Cock Company, to be gone under GRam so I gave up. That said, I think a recent story shows the prestige of the Corps now:

My wife was off shopping in our tiny North Carolina town near base, so I went off to a bar. A young devil dog was in there, and he had a gold ring. Now I learned long ago not to ask if they're an Aggie because they usually aren't. But he saw my ring and struck up a conversation. I introduced myself and said I was '10, then asked his year and outfit. He responded '15 with embarrassment. I mean, a puppy dog face and a depressing voice. To be embarrassed about when you graduated says a lot, at least to me.

That's my two cents, now back to business.

---

This is the dumbest anecdote yet in this multi-page thread of dumb anecdotes.

USMC_JAGgie said:

---

I honestly stopped caring about the Corps when GRam showed up, and am still rolling my eyes over the quad Starbucks. As such, I don't really care anymore about these changes; I expected my outfit, Old Army Cock Company, to be gone under GRam so I gave up. That said, I think a recent story shows the prestige of the Corps now:

My wife was off shopping in our tiny North Carolina town near base, so I went off to a bar. A young devil dog was in there, and he had a gold ring. Now I learned long ago not to ask if they're an Aggie because they usually aren't. But he saw my ring and struck up a conversation. I introduced myself and said I was '10, then asked his year and outfit. He responded '15 with embarrassment. I mean, a puppy dog face and a depressing voice. To be embarrassed about when you graduated says a lot, at least to me.

That's my two cents, now back to business.

---

Was he in the Corps? I've noticed when I strike similar conversations with folks and say my year and outfit the only ones who seem embarrassed are the ones who weren't in the Corps before joining th military. It's like: "Hey man, I see your ring. My name is __________ and I was B-Batt '04? What outfit were you in?"

" oh.... uh I wasn't I. The Corps"

Awkward silence ensues

Me "oh, well that's cool". Then I like to tie back to the Chicken, The Hall (if they're old enough) or something. Seriously it's like they regret commissioning or joking the military but not the Corps.

The last time I checked (2014), A&M's cadets were kicking ass in their rankings at OCS. Has this changed? Will it? As far as I'm concerned, that's the most important, measurable aspect of whether or not the Corps is still accomplishing its mission.

That being said, you'd have to be a fool to think micromanagement will benefit these young men and women. Leadership 101 is to set goals, let the cadet leadership determine how to reach them, tweak their proposal with their involvement, let them lead/implement the proposal, and supervise the process to keep them on track but participate only when necessary.

TG15 said:

---

Trident 88 said:

---

The last time I checked (2014), A&M's cadets were kicking ass in their rankings at OCS. Has this changed? Will it? As far as I'm concerned, that's the most important, measurable aspect of whether or not the Corps is still accomplishing its mission.

That being said, you'd have to be a fool to think micromanagement will benefit these young men and women. Leadership 101 is to set goals, let the cadet leadership determine how to reach them, tweak their proposal with their involvement, let them lead/implement the proposal, and supervise the process to keep them on track but participate only when necessary.

---

The 2014 OCS Candidate from Texas A&M that was the #1 graduate was the only one that wasn't in the Corps. So....

---

Because one anecdote makes the rule.

18-21 years should never be allowed to govern themselves, especially in a military type atmosphere.

2/7Marine0311 said:

---

18-21 years should never be allowed to govern themselves, especially in a military type atmosphere.

---

Were you in the corps of cadets at A&M? If so, when?

2/7Marine0311 said:

---

18-21 years should never be allowed to govern themselves, especially in a military type atmosphere.

---

Hellsbells - the Boy Scouts do

2/7Marine0311 said:

---

The scouts are more concerned with transgender 9 year olds.

---

If you have a serious response, I'd be happy to hear it. Otherwise, comments like that one are nothing but hot air.

Interesting blanket statement you make. I'm not going to get into a futile argument of every line item change with the policy.

But, I do think 18 - 21 year-olds are very capable of running the corps. Oversight has certainly fluctuated over the years but from my experience, not only in my outfit but observing others, and from watching my son go through very recently, I absolutely believe the corps is a great leadership laboratory and there are many 18 - 21 year olds more than capable of running things.

Except that's not what I said.