Author Topic: Family Feud news for the new season (Read 57685 times)

Strikerz04 · « **Reply #90 on:** May 30, 2009, 04:36:37 PM »

[quote name=\'Craig Karlberg\' post=\'216940\' date=\'May 30 2009, 02:56 AM\']Ick! FF NEVER offered a car to 5-day champs before & it NEVER should. Unless the captain of the team gets the deeds & the keys, that idea won't fly with me.[/quote]

See Family Fortunes over in the UK. It can be done.

\I'd take the Steering Wheel just the sheer fact that the car won't be usable without it.
\\ and I have a 06 Focus, which runs like a charmer.

clemon79 · « **Reply #91 on:** May 30, 2009, 04:37:28 PM »

[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'216967\' date=\'May 30 2009, 01:22 PM\']They did. I was surprised as well; IIRC, Ipods and the like were just coming into play then. (I remember paying $299 for I believe, a 4 MB Ipod)[/quote]
That would surprise me. The 1st gen 4GB Nanos were $249, but since then never went for more than $200, and the regular iPods were never smaller than 20GB since 2004. (The first one I bought, a 5G Video in late 2005, was a 30GB model.)

(A 4 MB iPod would hold one song. Two if they were short and you compressed the hell out of them.

)

Jay Temple · « **Reply #92 on:** May 30, 2009, 07:23:55 PM »

Conversely, my wife describes Fords as kick-ass sound systems surrounded by crappy cars.

About the $1 a point: I was referring to the even quirkier winnings totals that resulted.

tvwxman · « **Reply #93 on:** June 01, 2009, 12:38:03 PM »

Another major update , also from Twitter :

Family_FeudSCOOP!!! The Bulls-Eye round is coming back to the Feud in 2009!!! Yep..fun, exciting and a bit retro! Win money right from the start!
2 minutes ago from web

Discuss....

chad1m · « **Reply #94 on:** June 01, 2009, 12:41:55 PM »

I think it's awesome. The suggestion of starting with $15,000 and doing $1k - $5k works just fine with me, and may work fine with the budget, too.

BillCullen1 · « **Reply #95 on:** June 01, 2009, 01:04:23 PM »

Well, the show's going into its 11th season, so the producers figure they have to do something to give the game a little spark. I have no problem with the Bullseye Round, but it'll force speedup of the regular game unless they reformat that also. I'm also in favor or the Fast Money going to $10 a point if they don't win. It makes it easy to figure out what a family wins. A family that gets 167 points gets $1.670. Simple.

Sodboy13 · « **Reply #96 on:** June 01, 2009, 01:13:23 PM »

[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'217066\' date=\'Jun 1 2009, 11:41 AM\']I think it's awesome. The suggestion of starting with $15,000 and doing $1k - $5k works just fine with me, and may work fine with the budget, too.[/quote]

Awesome in theory, but not in practice, probably. I hope this doesn't end up as 10 pounds of game in a 5 pound bag. Maybe it works if you cut the Bullseye down to three questions, start with a $10K base, and make the questions $5K, $5K, and $10K. Even then, still gonna be tight, and probably still going to result in the Single-Double-Triple format I don't particularly care for.

Maybe, possibly, perhaps:
Segment 1: Bullseye + Single
Segment 2: Single
Segment 3: Double + Triple
Segment 4: Fast Money
And, continuing the unqualified optimism, perhaps the cramped quarters would convince the producers to make a three-round, clean-sweep win mathematically possible again.

Also, even though the point is moot now, another idea on raising the stakes: Main game shutout = higher Fast Money jackpot.

chad1m · « **Reply #97 on:** June 01, 2009, 01:15:40 PM »

I still don't know why we can't do the current format, S-S-D-T, as long as everything moves briskly along.

Casey Buck · « **Reply #98 on:** June 01, 2009, 01:59:54 PM »

Well, this explains why Fast Money is worth "up to" $30,000.

But how are they going to cram in the main game with Bullseye? It was already rushed in 1992, and it will be even more rushed today.

clemon79 · « **Reply #99 on:** June 01, 2009, 02:16:00 PM »

[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'217065\' date=\'Jun 1 2009, 09:38 AM\']Win money right from the start![/quote]
If it plays like the old Bullseye round did, isn't this a little disingenuous?

Joe Mello · « **Reply #100 on:** June 01, 2009, 02:46:27 PM »

Bullseye is already integrated into the show, so I don't see why it needs to be added again.

My bet is either some weird Fast Money rules or Occam's Razor.

clemon79 · « **Reply #101 on:** June 01, 2009, 03:02:59 PM »

[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'217078\' date=\'Jun 1 2009, 11:46 AM\']My bet is either some weird Fast Money rules or Occam's Razor.[/quote]
Huh?

pacdude · « **Reply #102 on:** June 01, 2009, 03:06:27 PM »

[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'217078\' date=\'Jun 1 2009, 02:46 PM\']Bullseye is already integrated into the show, so I don't see why it needs to be added again.[/quote]

Color me confused, but hubbalawha? When was Bullseye already integrated?

WhammyPower · « **Reply #103 on:** June 01, 2009, 03:11:04 PM »

[quote name=\'pacdude\' post=\'217081\' date=\'Jun 1 2009, 02:06 PM\'][quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'217078\' date=\'Jun 1 2009, 02:46 PM\']Bullseye is already integrated into the show, so I don't see why it needs to be added again.[/quote]
Color me confused, but hubbalawha? When was Bullseye already integrated?[/quote]
I think he's referring to the sudden death tiebreaker played if no one reaches 300 after the triple round. That's the only thing I can think of that's remotely close.

Joe Mello · « **Reply #104 on:** June 01, 2009, 04:12:10 PM »

Yes Bullseye as sudden death.

Occam's Razor argument being that it's either $30K or $5/point in the endgame.