As much as I completely agree with the track 3A and down being a key part to the solution, there are some 3As out there that are coming in with 4A staff numbers. In the top 14 marching bands at our Area Marching Contest for 3A this year, 9 of them came down into our conference in the past 10 years. Nearly all of them are staffed at or above your average 4A level with 3-6 directors teaching in their programs.

If a 2A director (which they are) is on their own, what chance do they have against that in some regions? I get where they're coming from on that side. There's the 'be a better teacher argument' that yes, has some validity, but at the end of the day you only have so many hours in a day to do that teaching. Not to mention the smaller the school, the more activities that kid is probably involved in.

If a 2A band is going against 4A schools, plus the 3A schools, with a one-person show, I can see their frustration.

Remember when ATSSB was formed, the top number for old 3A (the largest of ATSSB) was 689. That number is now 1314 for the top and 544 for the top of 3A. 2A runs 105-253.

The frustration of directors in those original ATSSB schools led to the formation of ATSSB because TMEA didn't listen to the frustrations of directors like these. I think the OP probably has some valid concerns depending on how their region is set up. Long term I feel the best answer for ALL of our kids in the state would be to have a 1A/2A band, a 3A Band, 4A Band, plus the existing 5A/6A Bands that are in place. That's a serious issue of logistics with hotel space right now though that is a roadblock.