Family Feud

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Nov 5 2005, 01:18 PM\']If I were to bring a show on the air, straddling would be the way to go.[/quote]
I think that would depend on the show.  I mean hey, Jeopardy! could theoretically straddle if making sure every clue got played every game was more important to them, but I think we'd all agree that wouldn't work as well.

Certain formats lend themselves to straddling more than others.  What irks me are the shows that clearly OUGHT to straddle but don't.  I was delighted to see HS make the change back to straddling.  And as I've said many, MANY times, even blue-haired old ladies know that you don't play bingo against a clock.  As good a GSN original as it is, Lingo is flawed by focussing on the score when time runs out rather than the business of getting five in a row.

[Don Howard]

[quote name=\'PaulD\' date=\'Nov 5 2005, 11:54 AM\']Does anyone have an opinion of how 'H2' was straddled in its last season? I liked it.

[snapback]101453[/snapback]

[/quote]
As did I. It was five years overdue. Just like Whoopi leaving was four years overdue. Too bad so many stations were committed to Dreamboat O'Brien's celebrity gawkfest. H2 might still be on.

[Clay Zambo]

[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Nov 5 2005, 12:18 PM\']If I were to bring a show on the air, straddling would be the way to go.
[/quote]

I'd go exactly the opposite route, for the reason of keeping a viewer hooked for the entire half-hour.  Gotta see how it turns out!

[TV Favorites]

[quote name=\'Clay Zambo\' date=\'Nov 5 2005, 04:15 PM\'][quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Nov 5 2005, 12:18 PM\']If I were to bring a show on the air, straddling would be the way to go.
[/quote]

I'd go exactly the opposite route, for the reason of keeping a viewer hooked for the entire half-hour.  Gotta see how it turns out!

[snapback]101467[/snapback]

[/quote]

Well, if you straddle the game, then the viewer has to turn in tomorrow to see how it turns out.  Then they might as well stay and see the rest of the show as well.

[Clay Zambo]

[quote name=\'TV Favorites\' date=\'Nov 5 2005, 03:33 PM\']Well, if you straddle the game, then the viewer has to turn in tomorrow to see how it turns out.  Then they might as well stay and see the rest of the show as well.

[snapback]101469[/snapback]

[/quote]

True enough--if you get to that point where there's critical mass of interest.  Think of Millionaire--you've had a big win halfway show: now, somebody's gotta start at the bottom of the stack.  Interested?  Maybe not...

[Unrealtor]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Nov 5 2005, 12:42 PM\'][quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Nov 5 2005, 01:18 PM\']If I were to bring a show on the air, straddling would be the way to go.[/quote]
I think that would depend on the show.  I mean hey, Jeopardy! could theoretically straddle if making sure every clue got played every game was more important to them, but I think we'd all agree that wouldn't work as well.

Certain formats lend themselves to straddling more than others.  What irks me are the shows that clearly OUGHT to straddle but don't.  I was delighted to see HS make the change back to straddling.  And as I've said many, MANY times, even blue-haired old ladies know that you don't play bingo against a clock.  As good a GSN original as it is, Lingo is flawed by focussing on the score when time runs out rather than the business of getting five in a row.

[snapback]101463[/snapback]

[/quote]

This may sound odd, but, to me, the length of a match is almost too variable for Lingo to straddle well. Best two out of three could reasonably be over in 5 words if one team is both good and lucky, or feel interminable with two boneheaded teams with bad luck. I'll concede that a lot of shows, on a purely theoretical basis, had the same issue with game length -- With Hollywood Squares' straddling format, a full match could run as few as six questions and three five-square wins would be at least 27, but Lingo seems to have more variability in practice with how long the game takes.

Also, Bonus Lingo is one of the longer endgames out there. When you add together rules explanations, a prize plug, two minutes of guessing, and the drawing round, I figure it's got to be timed at at least three minutes, if not four. If a team wins a match with a little more than two minutes of actual show remaining, there's either a lot of slack time to fill, or a lot of editing to do. There is a third option, splitting the words from the drawing, but I don't think even GSN is that cruel.

[JasonA1]

I figure it's got to be timed at at least three minutes

For what it's worth, Chris Clementson or SplitSecond or somebody said the average endgame comes out around 3 minutes between all the pagentry and the actual game play therein.

-Jason

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'Unrealtor\' date=\'Nov 6 2005, 03:41 AM\']This may sound odd, but, to me, the length of a match is almost too variable for Lingo to straddle well.

Also, Bonus Lingo is one of the longer endgames out there. [/quote]
I'm not entirely sure I get your first point.  The very fact that a match length could be variable is precisely why I believe Lingo should straddle and not just stop when a buzzer sounds.  You also test to make sure your contestants can play, you don't just pick 'em because they're cute and demographically friendly.

And believe me, if I'm changing the game, that ridiculous and anti-climactic Bonus Lingo thing is the first piece to go.

I thought the original Lingo with Michael Reagan was a hidden gem of the eighties.  The five-letter-word game is so engaging that it's almost impossible to screw up, which in my opinion is why the game remains successful on GSN despite being seriously screwed up.

[zachhoran]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Nov 6 2005, 10:42 AM\']

I thought the original Lingo with Michael Reagan was a hidden gem of the eighties.  The five-letter-word game is so engaging that it's almost impossible to screw up, which in my opinion is why the game remains successful on GSN despite being seriously screwed up.

[snapback]101501[/snapback]

[/quote]

Except of course, the producers screwed up by offering cash prizes they eventually could not pay.

[CarShark]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Nov 6 2005, 10:42 AM\']I'm not entirely sure I get your first point.  The very fact that a match length could be variable is precisely why I believe Lingo should straddle and not just stop when a buzzer sounds.  You also test to make sure your contestants can play, you don't just pick 'em because they're cute and demographically friendly.[/quote]Why would that stop them from picking "demographically friendly" contestants? Wouldn't they still just rather have cute contestants that take a long time to win? The matches would take as long as they do now, but they'd be free to talk whilst the stupidity commences. It'd be like Martindale High Rollers or Eubanks Card Sharks, where you aren't even assured that you'll see a complete front game/end game cycle any given day.

And believe me, if I'm changing the game, that ridiculous and anti-climactic Bonus Lingo thing is the first piece to go.

Sooooo, would you reinstate the No Lingo Bonus Round, since every ball counts the same as the other?

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Nov 6 2005, 09:14 PM\']Why would that stop them from picking "demographically friendly" contestants? Wouldn't they still just rather have cute contestants that take a long time to win? The matches would take as long as they do now, but they'd be free to talk whilst the stupidity commences. It'd be like Martindale High Rollers or Eubanks Card Sharks, where you aren't even assured that you'll see a complete front game/end game cycle any given day.[/quote]

You pick people who are attractive and can play your game.  If your contestant coordinator can't find those people, you get another contestant coordinator.  If you're a decent producer you find ways to control the pace of your game, ways that don't involve blowing a horn and stopping everything at the 22 minute mark.

[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Nov 6 2005, 09:14 PM\']

And believe me, if I'm changing the game, that ridiculous and anti-climactic Bonus Lingo thing is the first piece to go.

Sooooo, would you reinstate the No Lingo Bonus Round, since every ball counts the same as the other?[/quote]
I had no problem with the No Lingo round.  It was a decent twist on the main game, you still had to be able to play, and every draw was a tense moment.

Zach's right about the money thing, though. A shame about that, especially when that single $64000 win is just about my favorite bonus round of all time.

[WhammyPower]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Nov 6 2005, 10:37 PM\']You pick people who are attractive and can play your game.

[snapback]101544[/snapback]

[/quote]
That second part seems to not be in the mind(s) of the current Feud CC(s).

[sshuffield70]

But didn't most NLRs take about as long as the match itself?  That's what I seem to recall.  They even pulled a trick out of the Bullseye book by splitting the bonus round on some occasions

[zachhoran]

[quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Nov 7 2005, 09:23 AM\']But didn't most NLRs take about as long as the match itself?  That's what I seem to recall.  They even pulled a trick out of the Bullseye book by splitting the bonus round on some occasions

[snapback]101583[/snapback]

[/quote]

Lingo and Bullseye are not the only offenders of splitting a bonus round between shows. TTD(a few times circa 1981-82), Hot Potato(only once IIRC), Play the Percentages(during the couples format), Bumper Stumpers(the 30 second solve-the-plates portion on one show, and the "avoid the stop sign" or whatever bonus format they were using at the time on the next), MG7x/daily Syndie(playing Audience Match on one show and the head to head on the next), and Card Sharks(Eubanks/Rafferty, where they'd play the MOney Cards on one show and the Car game on the next) also did this.

[megamanj1986]

Someone once mentioned what would happen if Blockbusters were to be revived in this time frame. If you were to revive BB, would you have kept the straddling? Or would you have made so that each match was timed?

And for the longest time, I would of never though that someone would make a post about Feud having a straddling format. I dunno about that.