Family Feud popularity

[cmjb13]

I recall watching the tail end of Dawson's run when I was a kid.

Do you think that Feud is more popular now than it was during Dawson's run?

[Vahan_Nisanian]

Yes it is. The current Syndicated version of the show began in September 1999, and is now in its 16th year. It has even surpassed the Syndicated edition with Richard Dawson (1977-1985), and the 1969-1978 version of To Tell the Truth.

Who knows? Maybe it will even surpass the Syndicated Wheel of Fortune (1983-Present) and Jeopardy (1984-Present), too!

[TLEberle]

Longevity does not equate to popularity.

It is inexpensive to produce and therefore doesn't have to rate highly to be profitable for those who desire black ink on the ledger.

Thanks for the dates, though. I wasn't aware that Wheel's syndicated version began in 1983 and Jeopardy's in 1984.
/Oh wait, I was aware of those things already.

[PYLdude]

Popularity does not necessarily equate with length. Most of those 15 years saw Feud drawing some of the lowest ratings in syndication.

Even with the recent spike in popularity, which is due more to the choice of host and not the material, it isn't enough. Dawson lasted nine years as host. None of the hosts of the current series have made more than five and they're on their fourth host.

To me, it isn't even close. Dawson's run was the high point and everything else after that, including the first eleven years of the current series, is trailing by a significant margin.

[Toheckwiththis]

Why would the show's rise in popularity only be because of the host?

[PYLdude]

Why would the show's rise in popularity only be because of the host?

Simple.

He's one of the most famous stand up comedians in the world, he has wide name recognition, he has proven himself a capable emcee, and he brings a certain flair to the job that his predecessors, with perhaps the exception of John O' Hurley, didn't.

The material would've turned off most casual viewers long ago if it was the main reason.

[TLEberle]

and he brings a certain flair to the job that his predecessors, with perhaps the exception of John O' Hurley, didn't.

I'll note for the jury that the predecessors included Louie Anderson and Richard Karn, who could not ad lib their way out of a wet bag.

[PYLdude]

and he brings a certain flair to the job that his predecessors, with perhaps the exception of John O' Hurley, didn't.

I'll note for the jury that the predecessors included Louie Anderson and Richard Karn, who could not ad lib their way out of a wet bag.

And thus did much more to hinder the series than help it.

I remember on a certain other forum I used to post on, criticizing Karn's hosting style was akin to sacrilege.

[BrandonFG]

I vaguely remember that era where you couldn't mock Karn, but I also think it was because he was a step or two above Louie. By his third or fourth season, folks were tired of his shtick as well, esp. the audience's reaction to him doubling/tripling the points. The production of Louie's version wasn't that bad, he was just an abysmal host. Same for Karn, except replace "abysmal" with "perfectly mediocre"

Piggybacking on Chris P.'s earlier point, I believe the show was nearly canceled at one point. I def. remember the sub 2.0 ratings in the early-2000s. I sometimes forget this version has aired continuously for 15 years now...almost seems like it was canceled and then came back.

I was still in diapers when Dawson's version was canceled, but from what I've read about the show, here and elsewhere, I dunno if I'd say Steve's version is more popular. I think it only seems that way because it's airing all over the place.

Yes it is. The current Syndicated version of the show began in September 1999, and is now in its 16th year.

Steve's only in his fifth season...technically, his tenure has been where the show's gained steam.

[jage]

If Harvey makes it 9-10 seasons, then we can talk. Ratings are great so far and there's no signs of them letting up or him going anywhere, but who knows what happens 3 years from now. I know anecdotally, I see many more non game show fans watching feud since at least Ray's era. Before Harvey, most people still associated Dawson or sometimes Combs as the host of Feud.

[Jeremy Nelson]

I vaguely remember that era where you couldn't mock Karn, but I also think it was because he was a step or two above Louie. By his third or fourth season, folks were tired of his shtick as well, esp. the audience's reaction to him doubling/tripling the points. The production of Louie's version wasn't that bad, he was just an abysmal host. Same for Karn, except replace "abysmal" with "perfectly mediocre".

This was true. Karn was a breath of fresh air compared to Louie, and I think at that point, people were cautiously optimistic that he could be pretty good. But Karn never grew or really seemed to make the show his own.

[Matt Ottinger]

If you measure popularity by the total number of viewers, I think it would be just about impossible for the current version to be anywhere close to the number of viewers Dawson was getting, due to the continued splintering of the viewing audience for television in general. 

[BrandonFG]

If you measure popularity by the total number of viewers, I think it would be just about impossible for the current version to be anywhere close to the number of viewers Dawson was getting, due to the continued splintering of the viewing audience for television in general.

This is also a good point. I remember finding syndication ratings from the early-80s, and Feud was pulling a 12 or 13 rating at its peak (if not higher). The #1 show in syndication pulled a little more than half that last week.

For the record, that 12 or 13 rating would also put it near the top of the primetime ratings in 2014. It prolly wouldn't have cracked the Top 30 back then, for the reasons Matt described.