Jay Pharoah to host "The Quiz with Balls" for Fox, summer 2024

[Nick]

My point:  Until we actually SEE someone do a job, any expectation, good or bad, is indefensible.  If Jay sucks, you're right, he'll be in the majority of those that have failed.  But at least wait until the show premieres to see if the Batsignal should go out for Pat Finn.

You are correct.  We cannot pass a complete judgement until we see the work, but it is reasonable to have the opinion that it likely won't be to my interest (and perhaps the interest of many others on this board, but I speak only for myself); therefore, I as a potential viewer am not enticed to tune in knowing that yet another so-called comedian, washed up or not, is tapped to host a game show.  I know I am far from the representation of the average viewer, so my opinion carries little weight against those more likely to be targeted by this program (and anywhere the ratings and dollars actually matter).  Am I potentially missing out on something good?  Perhaps, but if the show becomes all the rage, well, I'm sure there'll be an opportunity to catch up.

PS:  I saw the Mark L. tape.  Under the strict rules of the then-outgoing Price regime, he was relatively stiff.   Personally, I thought Dave Price was the best of that crop.  But since none of us have the surname Moonves, that really doesn't matter, does it?

Lucky you for getting to see the tape.  I'd be interested to know more on your Dave Price take because, as I recall from the little that was mentioned about it, his performance was horrible and cringeworthy; and it made no sense at all that there was a point where he was a strong contender for the job.  Steve Gavazzi would be the one who'd have the better memory about these things (at least as far as what made it into the Golden-Road.net world back in the day), so if he's willing to chime in on the subject...

[RMF]

As Chris mentioned, the track record for comedians being "truly good" game show hosts isn't very good, whereas those who've had a career in broadcasting have proven much better at having the skills that make for a good game show host.

And, with this line, there's a major elephant in the room:

Where does one develop the career in broadcasting in the present time to prepare for this job?

A rather high percentage of the first generation of American television game show hosts came from OTR- and that, needless to say, has not been producing hosts for a long while.

A good number of the hosts of the next generation came out of the personality DJing of the 1960s (with quite a few of those working for the same MOR station in Los Angeles- and, interestingly, at one point or another picking up paychecks from the same producer)- but, for a range of reasons (including ones of both an economic and a cultural nature), the radio industry of the last few decades has not exactly been conducive to this sort of talent-production.

Under this circumstance, there's an obvious issue- indeed, actors and comedians have long had a mediocre-at-best track record (and, in both cases, have been demonstrating this since the 1950s), but I'm also not convinced that an approach that just runs out everyone left around who's hosted a game show before is really viable (for reasons that range on a host-by-host level), and a lot of the traditional avenues are gone- one can't use experience as a staff announcer when there's essentially no such thing as a staff announcer anymore.

I admit that this is one of those observations without an obvious solution (there are aspects of contemporary sportscasting that makes me skeptical about that being the answer), but it is something that matters quite a bit when thinking about this on a systemic level.

[steveleb]

You sound much like every one I’ve heard tell glory stories of the AM rock and roll 50000 watt behemoths of yore.  I’m ancient enough where I recall the WMCA Good Guys and am related distantly to KHJ’s Beaver Cleaver.  There were a lot of very talented hosts who spun records.  A small percentage of them became game show talent, and ultimately they had to win over producers in an audition.  Those skills are either innate or honed through life experiences.

Go to any club with a deejay.  You’d be shocked at the diversity and breadth of talent.  Were I on the look for 2024’s Bob Barker, I’d start there.  See how they interact with the crowd.  The creativity they use to introduce songs.  Yes, their looks too.  I’d at least find a decent list of possibilities to put to the test.  Kinds like how comedy development finds new cast members—at least until AI gets more capable.

There’s also quite a number of talented voices going podcasts.  One could easily identify at least decent announcers from those, not to mention determine who’s a good interviewer.

My point:  life goes on and things change.  The percentage of people under 50 who regularly listen to terrestrial radio is minimal, just like those who regularly read a physical newspaper. 

Adapt or be extinct.  Worthy advice I’ve been implored to heed.  We all should.

[Loogaroo]

I'm totally fine with whoever they tag in to host one of these shows, and credit to Fox for taking chances on these unusual game formats - yes, even We Are Family - because they seem to be the only one willing to do it.

All I ask is that Jay does what seemingly no modern-day host not named Elizabeth Banks is capable of doing: looking their contestants in the eyes and telling them, not the teleprompter, that they've just won a bunch of money. I started noticing it with Alec Baldwin back when Match Game was being rebooted and it seems endemic now. The impersonability of modern hosts is off-putting AF. It's like they can't disguise their apathy for the contestants playing the game.

[Nick]

All I ask is that Jay does what seemingly no modern-day host not named Elizabeth Banks is capable of doing: looking their contestants in the eyes and telling them, not the teleprompter, that they've just won a bunch of money. I started noticing it with Alec Baldwin back when Match Game was being rebooted and it seems endemic now. The impersonability of modern hosts is off-putting AF. It's like they can't disguise their apathy for the contestants playing the game.

Well, how many of them would say they really want to be there? Hosting a game show has long been recognized as a gig with good money for the work schedule and great at keeping you remembered in show business, but who has had it on their bucket list?

Now, I suppose Uncle Bill didn't want to be at the helm of some of the doozies he hosted, but he at least hit his contempt for a lousy show most of the time the cameras were rolling.

The problem, as I see it, is the age-old issue of the networks and other powers-that-be casting hosts largely on name recognition, the fallacy that people won't watch someone they don't know. Clearly name recognition is no issue if you have the power over your show of Mike Richards, and if you really want to be the host of the biggest quiz show in syndication, you give yourself the job. That broke all the "rules" that mandated such statements as, "Oh, you could never give Todd Newton The Price Is Right. People don't know who he is." (not that I actually think he should have gotten the job, but he'd be better than Drew Carey in the role).

The skillet gap is huge too, and I agree that podcasters, DJs and others could be the ones with the skillset in this day and age, but now convince a network exec that casting one of these is better than some comedian people may have heard of (I had never heard of Jay Pharaoh until this thread) who is only going to lean on the teleprompter the whole show.

[MSTieScott]

Where does one develop the career in broadcasting in the present time to prepare for this job?

[...]

I admit that this is one of those observations without an obvious solution (there are aspects of contemporary sportscasting that makes me skeptical about that being the answer), but it is something that matters quite a bit when thinking about this on a systemic level.

I too was recently thinking about how the best training grounds for game show hosts no longer exist. It occurred to me that recently, the world of daytime talk shows/light news shows has been fertile ground for new game show hosts.

Maybe it's just because all three hosts of Strahan, Sara & Keke got their own game shows and Jerry O'Connell started Pictionary around the same time he became a regular on The Talk. But the ability to talk directly into the camera and then pivot to interview people does overlap with the abilities needed to be a good game show host.

[BrandonFG]

Go to any club with a deejay.  You’d be shocked at the diversity and breadth of talent.  Were I on the look for 2024’s Bob Barker, I’d start there.  See how they interact with the crowd.  The creativity they use to introduce songs.  Yes, their looks too.  I’d at least find a decent list of possibilities to put to the test.  Kinds like how comedy development finds new cast members—at least until AI gets more capable.

I do bar trivia every once in a while. The last bar I frequented, I became a bit of a regular and managed to build a rapport with the patrons. It’s a fun experience that brings me out of my shell and allows me to think on my feet. As I mentioned earlier, I’m surprised more comics aren’t more polished on these shows given how many of them oftentimes rag on audience members during their shows. I second the idea of getting a podcast host, but I realize the suits want a “name”.

The most recent YBYL reboot annoyed me in that Jay went out of his way to get contestants to say the Secret Word, but he was good at interacting with everyday people thanks to the format being wafer thin. To Tim’s point, other than YBYL the only modern shows that really lets the host (organically) have fun with a bad answer is Feud or People Puzzler. JMH tried on America Says but it always felt like someone fed him a joke to force in after every round. GSN makes great originals but they could really dial back the extensive contestant banter and let the game breathe a little.

[steveleb]

Strahan is a perfect example of a modern success.  Don’t forget the hosting and interviewing he does for FOX football.  He has lived in live TV for decades.  But—and I say this having been blessed with a few personal conversations with the man—he also WANTED the Pyramid gig and when presented with the opportunity took the time to watch a LOT of the 80s episodes and specifically watch how Dick acted as a traffic cop.  My one complaint on Michael is that he rarely veers from the “what will you do with the money” shtick leading up to the end game, but at least he actually cares about the answer—at least the first time.  Assuming Jay actually takes the time to study the foreign version and learn the rules and mechanics, he’ll at least have a fighting chance.

And wow..after the mediocrity of Richards in a format he claimed to want to emcee as a kid, it was wonderful to actually see a Michael with talent eclipse his success

[BrandonFG]

Strahan is a perfect example of a modern success.  Don’t forget the hosting and interviewing he does for FOX football.
(snip)
My one complaint on Michael is that he rarely veers from the “what will you do with the money” shtick leading up to the end game, but at least he actually cares about the answer—at least the first time.

This is a crutch a lotta modern shows - especially GSN - lean on way too much and it starts feeling cliche after a while. How many times do people need to hear that someone is gonna take a trip or buy a car with the money, and it’s the drawn out conversation I referred to that could go towards more gameplay.

In the case of GSN, taking :20 from that question or getting rid of it altogether could go towards letting the contestant soak in the big win instead of saying “$10,000! That’sourshowseeyounexttimebobwehadababyit’saboy!” Somewhere in the last 15 years the contestants have become an afterthought.

[Jimmy Owen]

You have to be a comic or a comic actor to get a game show now.

[jjman920]

My point:  Until we actually SEE someone do a job, any expectation, good or bad, is indefensible.  If Jay sucks, you're right, he'll be in the majority of those that have failed.  But at least wait until the show premieres to see if the Batsignal should go out for Pat Finn.

So, I should wait until I'm soaking wet to grab a raincoat?

I certainly think many in the game show community, from here to YouTube, can be too dismissive based on nothing but an announcement, but it seems weird to tell people "you're not allowed to have an opinion without seeing something" because it's something we do as humans all the time. In entertainment, just as we have people here not confident in Jay's hosting ability, you'll equally have people planning to watch the show sight unseen just because they like Jay. Will this or that star be good playing this or that real life person in a biopic? Will this cover of a song sound as good as previous covers of a song (not just the original)? You're invited to an event by someone that doesn't have a good reputation for hosting great parties. Do you go to it hoping that it will be good or do you skip it assuming it will be more of the same? Because there are people who do both.

We should be allowed to base our opinions on the things we've seen previously. Perhaps some should inject more hope that it will prove us wrong, but FOX and Jay aren't really owed that either. They're the ones trying to sell us on watching it, not the other way around. While the judgements shouldn't be so concrete, I think indefensible is a little harsh. Why is this somehow different from making predictions about anything?

[Otm Shank]

“$10,000! That’sourshowseeyounexttimebobwehadababyit’saboy!” Somewhere in the last 15 years the contestants have become an afterthought.

First, just to say, I got that reference. (I used it just two days ago in a conversation and it fell flat.)

The preface to this is, every host has their style and shouldn't carbon copy the hosts of the golden era. But there is one example that I think encapsulates the point of contestants being the afterthought. Drew will announce "Double Showcase Winner! Double Showcase Winner!" and of course he's happy for the contestant. Bob, on the other hand, would say "YOU win BOTH showcases!" It's subtle, but to me it says everything.

[Flerbert419]

I agree that the lack of training ground for new hosts is a concern. Sure the radio days are over, but the reason I think Barker was so successful on Price was that he spent 20 years doing Truth or Consequences beforehand. Where are you supposed to strengthen audience participation chops before landing a big show? Using DJs is an interesting idea I had not thought about before.

How many times do people need to hear that someone is gonna take a trip or buy a car with the money, and it’s the drawn out conversation I referred to that could go towards more gameplay.

Especially when the actual answer to this question (whether it be pay off bills, put it into savings, or invest it) is told to contestants to be unacceptable because it's not exciting enough. They are asked to come up with a lie to support consumerism and there's only so many fake things to buy.

[Fedya]

Just once, I'd like to see a contestant respond "Hookers and blow".

[Nick]

every host has their style and shouldn't carbon copy the hosts of the golden era.

Why not?  OK, being a "carbon copy" would be a bit much, but outside of our group, who would actually know if some host did a straight-up imitation of Uncle Bill's style?  Nobody is ever going to host a game show better than he did, and nobody is going to host a show better than the hosts of the "golden era".  Follow the masters, says I.

But there is one example that I think encapsulates the point of contestants being the afterthought. Drew will announce "Double Showcase Winner! Double Showcase Winner!" and of course he's happy for the contestant. Bob, on the other hand, would say "YOU win BOTH showcases!" It's subtle, but to me it says everything.

Agreed, but I would go further to say that Barker understood the contestants are the true stars.  Drew and other comedians use them as vehicles to carry themselves, but it's actually his role to carry the show and let the contestants do most of the work but keep the proceedings in check (which means your show does not rely on a bunch of post-production editing because the MC didn't hurry them along, etc.).

How many times do people need to hear that someone is gonna take a trip or buy a car with the money, and it’s the drawn out conversation I referred to that could go towards more gameplay.

Especially when the actual answer to this question (whether it be pay off bills, put it into savings, or invest it) is told to contestants to be unacceptable because it's not exciting enough. They are asked to come up with a lie to support consumerism and there's only so many fake things to buy.

And that's the other major problem in game shows today: Directing the contestants on how to behave and react to non-gameplay elements.  Honesty is the best policy, right?  So why would save the money be a bad answer (Actually, when you see the old shows where contestants who win a bundle of money say they're going to use it to buy a house, the answer today I would give is, "I'm going to invest the money at 5% for 20 years so I can scrape together the money to make a down payment on a house someday".  Too bad winning forty grand is nothing for getting you a house now.)?  I can't stand the fake and coached answers and reactions.  At a Price taping I attended years ago, they did a pickup of a contestant's reaction to a home gym revealed in the Showcase because, as she was told, "You gave me a ten (in terms of excitement).  I need a six".  If Drew Carey ever told me to "go see your car" that I just won, I'd say to him, "I can see it from here!".

And another thing: Outside of Price, Wheel, J! and Feud, what is with the aversion to revealing contestants' last names these days?  It's an important part of one's identity.  There's just this feeling of authenticity when you let contestants be more than just a first name.  Is it supposed to be some kind of security thing against identity theft or what?  Because showing yourself on broadcast television is not doing much to hide your identity in the first place.