The Bluemoon Song Cup 2023

FogBlueInSanFran said:
I don’t care for the non-NA/UK thing. It narrows down the selection set for one pick drastically for no good reason. It’s not like a Peruvian flute band is going to win, or Midnight Oil will (which is what @RobMCFC is secretly hoping . . . )
Click to expand...
I won't be nominating Midnight Oil - they are about as far from Manchester as you can get and therefore will have no chance.

I do think forcing people to pick at least one from outside the NA/UK will be a good category as it would help broaden the selections, although they would almost certainly all fall in the first round.

Last year we had to have one year 2000+ pick - was the reason for this any better than a geographical category?
 
RobMCFC said:
I won't be nominating Midnight Oil - they are about as far from Manchester as you can get and therefore will have no chance.

I do think forcing people to pick at least one from outside the NA/UK will be a good category as it would help broaden the selections, although they would almost certainly all fall in the first round.

Last year we had to have one year 2000+ pick - was the reason for this any better than a geographical category?
Click to expand...
Yeah, because there have been about a quadrillion songs made since 2000, but since the beginning of time, I (and am guessing most everyone else here) can name far fewer than a quadrillion made in any nation outside of those that speak English.

So, sure, we'll get Aussie-NZ, Irish, ABBA, Bob Marley, maybe some German bands who sung in English . . . then what? Seven people pick "Take On Me"?

It should be restrictive breadth we're after, not constrictive breadth.
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
Yeah, because there have been about a quadrillion songs made since 2000, but since the beginning of time, I (and am guessing most everyone else here) can name far fewer than a quadrillion made in any nation outside of those that speak English.

So, sure, we'll get Aussie-NZ, Irish, ABBA, maybe some German bands who sung in English . . . then what? Seven people pick "Take On Me"?

It should be restrictive breadth we're after, not constrictive breadth.
Click to expand...
Not sure I see where you are coming from. Any category is a restriction of a kind and I’d argue if you picked 100 songs from the year 2000+ they’d be just as good/bad as a geographic category.
 
RobMCFC said:
Not sure I see where you are coming from. Any category is a restriction of a kind and I’d argue if you picked 100 songs from the year 2000+ they’d be just as good/bad as a geographic category.
Click to expand...
It's just about selection set, not quality.

"Post-2000 songs" is a much, much wider category in terms of possible choices for regular English-speaking music fans than "no songs from North America or the UK" for obvious reasons.
 
Just a couple of random ideas
Instrumentals
One hit wonders
A specific record label, say motown or other?
 
@BlueHammer85 - My additional suggestion would be to not have an unbalanced draw where you get down to 5 entries and then one is eliminated on a technicality.

If you aim to have 160 entries again, the first round should feature 32 matches with all other songs getting a bye:-

R1 - 160 songs, 32 matches, 96 songs get a byte to R2
R2 - 128 songs, 64 matches
R3 - 64 songs, 32 matches
R4 - 32 songs, 16 matches
R5 - 16 songs, 8 matches
QF - 8 songs, 4 matches
SF - 4 songs, 2 matches
F - 2 songs, 1 match
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top