Family Feud news for the new season

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'216829\' date=\'May 28 2009, 06:59 PM\'](Especially when many a top answer ends up being only worth 25 or 30 points, unlike Dawson and Combs's versions where top answers were often worth 40 or 50 each time.)[/quote]
That's a writing issue, then, in my eyes. You should not have to go 1-2 in more than three of the five questions to win Fast Money. That was the goal I shot for when I would compile one one.
[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'216830\' date=\'May 28 2009, 06:59 PM\']Man, you seriously have a real problem with people disagreeing with you.[/quote]
I really don't, actually. I just know that over the years, people around here have been passionate-to-the-point-of-religious-fervor over jacking up the consolation money in Fast Money, and that every time I try to argue otherwise, the dogpile begins. Which I'm fine with; I can handle a dogpile just fine. It just seems like everybody's mind is made up on this one.

Besides, it's a bonus round. There's no real "losing".

Could not disagree more. If you did not win the top prize, you lost. Ask the folks who won two-four-fifty-five-six-seven hundred and fifty dollars if they felt like they won.

[J.R.]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'216832\' date=\'May 28 2009, 10:04 PM\']I really don't, actually. I just know that over the years, people around here have been passionate-to-the-point-of-religious-fervor over jacking up the consolation money in Fast Money, and that every time I try to argue otherwise, the dogpile begins. Which I'm fine with; I can handle a dogpile just fine. It just seems like everybody's mind is made up on this one.[/quote]
Well, when your argument is "Because it's dumb", can you blame them? I see the pro-"jacking up" people in this thread giving reasonable explanations why they'd like to see the consolation prize be updated to modern standards.

Don't get me wrong, if people were bouncing off their chairs going "OMG! MO'MONEH!!!" Bandit Bobby style, I'd be right there with you.

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'216832\' date=\'May 28 2009, 10:04 PM\']Could not disagree more. If you did not win the top prize, you lost. Ask the folks who won two-four-fifty-five-six-seven hundred and fifty dollars if they felt like they won.[/quote]
That is a fair point.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'216833\' date=\'May 28 2009, 08:14 PM\']Well, when your argument is "Because it's dumb", can you blame them? I see the pro-"jacking up" people giving reasonable explanations why they'd like to see the consolation prize be updated to modern standards.[/quote]I'll have a go. If my concern is to Not Spend Money I Don't Have To, I'm going to look at the prizes on offer. How many people watch an episode of Feud where the family wins $985 and Cletus T. Viewer says "Wow, what a gyp! I'm not watching this ever again! What channel is Extra on?"

Viewers are not going to do that. Whether a Fast Money failure is "deserving" of $10 or $15 a point doesn't matter. If the production company thought it was a worthwhile thing to do, they would have done it by now, wouldn't they? Since I'm not on the production staff, I can't say with anything approaching authority as to the reason why, but there it is.

[bwood]

I've been wondering why they haven't went to $10 a point for a while now. It would be so simple....

"Well, you only scored 180 points in Fast Money, so we'll give you $10 a point by simply adding a zero to your score, you have $1800 and you'll come back tomorrow"

$10 is a nice round number to work with, it doesn't sound as cheap as $5, it gives them a little pocket change and then they have another chance at the big money on the next show.

[PYLdude]

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'216834\' date=\'May 28 2009, 10:21 PM\']Viewers are not going to do that. Whether a Fast Money failure is "deserving" of $10 or $15 a point doesn't matter. If the production company thought it was a worthwhile thing to do, they would have done it by now, wouldn't they? Since I'm not on the production staff, I can't say with anything approaching authority as to the reason why, but there it is.[/quote]

With all due respect, Travis, considering that it took them...what, five years?...to reimplement the classic scoring format, it shouldn't surprise you that they've been dragging their feet on raising the Fast Money consolation stakes.

[CarShark]

[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'216830\' date=\'May 28 2009, 09:59 PM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'216823\' date=\'May 28 2009, 08:19 PM\']I think giving a team $4,000 for losing is simply ludicrous, but I suspect that opinion will be shouted down.[/quote]
Man, you seriously have a real problem with people disagreeing with you.
[/quote]
I love how he's worried that he'll get shouted down. Be a nice change of pace, actually.

$4000 isn't ridiculous compared to the $20K top prize. That's only 20% of the top prize, similar to what the show started with ($995 to $5000). What's ridiculous is that it hasn't changed even though the top prize has quadrupled. $995 for 5 people??? Hell, if a contestant does nothing right on Wheel of Fortune, that one person still gets $1000. To me, that does make Feud look cheap, and I wouldn't be surprised if the average viewer has drawn the same comparison. If Feud competes against Wheel in a time slot, that's one less reason to watch.

As for Wheel contestants not being excited, I've been watching since the 25th Anniversary hubbub, and as long they see a dollar sign and a number larger than zero they go nutsy cuckoo. Certainly better reactions than when they were giving away hot air balloon trips and gazebos.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'216833\' date=\'May 28 2009, 08:14 PM\']Well, when your argument is "Because it's dumb", can you blame them?[/quote]
Not really. So it's probably good that I didn't.

To my way of thinking, it's really simple: I don't care if there are two people on a team, three people, five people, twelve people, I don't care.  "Consolation" prize money should not see four figures.

I'd be willing to meet in the middle. $10 a point I could live with. Begrudgingly. I wouldn't like it, but I could live with it.

But $20 a point? No. That's ridiculous. That's damn near four grand for a team that just barely lost, but STILL LOST.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'CarShark\' post=\'216839\' date=\'May 28 2009, 09:14 PM\']I love how he's worried that he'll get shouted down. Be a nice change of pace, actually.[/quote]
Show me where I said I was "worried." Go on. You even quoted me verbatim, so you've got the text right there. I'll be right here waiting.

[CarShark]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'216840\' date=\'May 29 2009, 12:29 AM\'][quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'216833\' date=\'May 28 2009, 08:14 PM\']Well, when your argument is "Because it's dumb", can you blame them?[/quote]
Not really. So it's probably good that I didn't.

To my way of thinking, it's really simple: I don't care if there are two people on a team, three people, five people, twelve people, I don't care.  "Consolation" prize money should not see four figures.
[/quote]
1) So arbitrary. The whole post. Of course the number of people on a team matter.
2) $4000 is just $800 a head, still below what Wheel offers at minimum. Inflation's a bitch.
3) I'll amend 'worried' to 'predicting', even though I'm sick of the semantics shit you lot play. Talk about the points, not the words. Assuming you can.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'PYLdude\' post=\'216838\' date=\'May 28 2009, 09:13 PM\']With all due respect, Travis, considering that it took them...what, five years?...to reimplement the classic scoring format, it shouldn't surprise you that they've been dragging their feet on raising the Fast Money consolation stakes.[/quote]Oh come now, I'm not going to be flattered with the respect due me. You should know that by now.

You're right. It doesn't surprise me. It is rare to see something on television that surprises me anymore.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'CarShark\' post=\'216842\' date=\'May 28 2009, 09:48 PM\']Of course the number of people on a team matter.[/quote]
What part of "to my way of thinking" don't you understand?

3) I'll amend 'worried' to 'predicting', even though I'm sick of the semantics shit you lot play.

You go right ahead and be sick of it with my full blessing. We'll be back for Round 2 of Words Have Meanings right after this.

[chad1m]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'216840\' date=\'May 29 2009, 12:29 AM\']But $20 a point? No. That's ridiculous. That's damn near four grand for a team that just barely lost, but STILL LOST.[/quote]But as was brought up earlier, that's absolutely no different than $5/point for a 1976 $5,000 top prize. The cash value of the points were worth 1/10% of the top prize. What cost $5,000 in 1976 would cost almost $19,000 in 2008, so with the current $20,000 prize and, even moreso with a $30,000 top prize, the $20/point suggestion is perfectly acceptable using the 1976 logic.

If we're starting game shows, I'd like to start one called Points without Peevishness. If you can continue your side of the argument without being rude, confrontational or downright cross, you win.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'CarShark\' post=\'216842\' date=\'May 28 2009, 09:48 PM\']1) So arbitrary. The whole post. Of course the
number of people on a team matter.[/quote] Not to the budget, they don't.

2) $4000 is just $800 a head, still below what Wheel offers at minimum. Inflation's a bitch.

Wheel of Fortune is seen by millions of people every night. I'm guessing that Feud gets hundreds of thousands. If that. Just because Wheel of Fortune can afford to make $1,000 their house minimum or consolation prize doesn't mean that Feud can afford to. Wheel's big winner of the night can win more in the main game than a Feud family can win in the bonus.

3) I'll amend 'worried' to 'predicting', even though I'm sick of the semantics shit you lot play. Talk about the points, not the words. Assuming you can.

You were doing so poorly before, and then managed to dig even deeper. Well done.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'216845\' date=\'May 28 2009, 10:00 PM\']But as was brought up earlier, that's absolutely no different than $5/point for a 1976 $5,000 top prize.[/quote]
Yes, you said that before, and I disagreed then, too. All I can tell you is the gut feeling I get, and that gut feeling is that that is Too Much Money.

the $20/point suggestion is perfectly acceptable using the 1976 logic.

Then all I can say is that my brain must not use the 1976 logic.

[PYLdude]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'216844\' date=\'May 28 2009, 11:51 PM\']What part of "to my way of thinking" don't you understand?

3) I'll amend 'worried' to 'predicting', even though I'm sick of the semantics shit you lot play.

You go right ahead and be sick of it with my full blessing. We'll be back for Round 2 of Words Have Meanings right after this.
[/quote]

Boy, you just don't like it when people call you on things, do you?