am I the only person who thinks that CBS is kind of being disrespectful by airing NEW episodes of CSI up against the series finales of Frasier and Friends?

I remember when Cheers ended, the other 3 (at the time) networks aired movies and reruns the night of the Cheers series finale, because they knew it was NBC's night. For two weeks in a row, the two biggest sitcoms NBC's had for the past decade have ended, and CBS decides to air CSI against it, instead of just sucking it up and letting another network win for those 2 weeks, because you don't get shows on the level of Friends and Frasier ending every week. Both series were massive sitcoms and the other channels have been respectful knowing that most people will be watching NBC that night.

Let's hope that when CSI airs it's final episode, NBC pays them back by airing a fresh episode of whatever their hot series of the time will be up against it.

Unfortunatly, all's fair in love and Network programming.

;)

I think its completely disrespectful.
Especially seeing that they are heavily promoting the "Survivor: America's Tribal Council"

ohh well, not that it matters, as long as I get to see the finale of Frasier.

I don't think it's being disrespectful. It's sweeps months and the networks are all about ratings and money. CSI is CBS' biggest show, so I don't blame them for not bowing to what another network is doing. It's all about competition, make the other network earn it.

Originally posted by barwars88
I think its completely disrespectful.
Especially seeing that they are heavily promoting the "Survivor: America's Tribal Council"

ohh well, not that it matters, as long as I get to see the finale of Frasier.

oh well, if NBC has a hit series next season, let's hope they schedule it up against the Everybody Loves Raymond series finale, give CBS a dose of their own medicine, lol

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
oh well, if NBC has a hit series next season, let's hope they schedule it up against the Everybody Loves Raymond series finale, give CBS a dose of their own medicine, lol

Unlike Friends.... Everybody Loves Raymond is one show I will NOT be having a change of opinion on.

Originally posted by vashti1999
I don't think it's being disrespectful. It's sweeps months and the networks are all about ratings and money. CSI is CBS' biggest show, so I don't blame them for not bowing to what another network is doing. It's all about competition, make the other network earn it.

but why when shows like Seinfeld and Cheers ended, CBS was nice enough to show respect to them. They should move CSI to another night if they insist on airing a new episode this week. The end of Frasier and Friends are the biggest losses NBC's had since Seinfeld ended 6 years ago. ABC and Fox are smart enough to know that most people are NOT interested in what they have airing tonight, CBS should do the same. They will have their time next season when Raymond ends

I wouldn't go as far as say CBS is being disrespectful to NBC. CSI is, after all, the highest rated series, right? It is the powerhouse show for CBS. Airing a new episode up against these finales may have been short-sighted, considering the fact that it was a given that Friends would pull in tens of millions of viewers and the same can be said (on a somewhat lesser scale, sadly) for Frasier. CBS could potentially have recieved even better ratings had they aired their new episodes of CSI after the two NBC episodes bow out.

It would have been a nice gesture had ABC and CBS aired telefilms or repeats and it would have been very classy. Never going to happen, though.

I don't think it is being disrespectful at all. I think it is perfectly fine. It is a little thing called MAY SWEEPS right now where all the networks are getting ratings for future advertising dollars. AND not everyone was watching the Friends or the Frasier series finales. You cannot shut down TV for shows going off the air. It isn't like someone died. Everyone should just watch what they want to and leave everyone else alone.

Originally posted by FamilyTiesGOP
I don't think it is being disrespectful at all. I think it is perfectly fine. It is a little thing called MAY SWEEPS right now where all the networks are getting ratings for future advertising dollars. AND not everyone was watching the Friends or the Frasier series finales. You cannot shut down TV for shows going off the air. It isn't like someone died. Everyone should just watch what they want to and leave everyone else alone.

true, but CBS did air reruns and movies the nights that Cheers and Seinfeld's finales aired. Why change now?

IMO, the ending of a major MAJOR tv series (ala Cheers, Mash, Seinfeld, Friends, Frasier) is comparable to the Super Bowl or the Academy Awards. Other channels do not air new programming, or at least anything that will receive high ratings, on the nights of the Super Bowl or the Oscars... you'd figure the networks would assume the last Frasier or Friends to be on the same level of importance as The Oscars, and show the same respects that the networks give to that.

Hell, if I recall, didn't NBC pre-empt a Friends episode earlier this season and postponed it for a week because it would've gone up against a World Series game? What's different here from the World Series in October?

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
true, but CBS did air reruns and movies the nights that Cheers and Seinfeld's finales aired. Why change now?

IMO, the ending of a major MAJOR tv series (ala Cheers, Mash, Seinfeld, Friends, Frasier) is comparable to the Super Bowl or the Academy Awards. Other channels do not air new programming, or at least anything that will receive high ratings, on the nights of the Super Bowl or the Oscars... you'd figure the networks would assume the last Frasier or Friends to be on the same level of importance as The Oscars, and show the same respects that the networks give to that.

Hell, if I recall, didn't NBC pre-empt a Friends episode earlier this season and postponed it for a week because it would've gone up against a World Series game? What's different here from the World Series in October?

The only explanation I can make is that television has changed a lot since Cheers and Seinfeld. CBS must feel that they had a chance against these shows of getting good ratings. That is all I can think of. Maybe NBC figured that Friends' ratings would suffer up against the World Series, I don't know. But television is a very competitive cut-throat business.

Just out of curiosity, how did the ratings of the new CSI fare against the last episode of Friends, does anybody know?

CSI pulled in 20,000,000 viewers (Friends got 50Mil)

Originally posted by FamilyTiesGOP
Just out of curiosity, how did the ratings of the new CSI fare against the last episode of Friends, does anybody know?

Via Zap2It.com:

NBC averaged a whopping 23.6 rating/36 share for the night. CBS managed a solid second at 11.4/17.

...

The "Friends" finale averaged 29.2/42, with about 51 million total viewers, at 9 p.m. (By comparison, about 76 million people watched the last "Seinfeld" in 1998). CBS' "CSI" was second at 12.8/19.

Going back a few weeks:


5/06 - 12.8/19
4/29 - 16.1/25
4/22 - 13.2/21 (repeat)
4/15 - 14.6/23
4/08 - 12.5/20 (repeat)

I don't think it's disrespectful

It's not like "CSI" airs Tuesdays at 10 and CBS MOVED it to Thursday nights specifically to go up against "Friends," It is the regular timeslot during May sweeps... of course they'll show a new episode. I think it woulda been disrespectful if they had gone out of their way to compete w/ Friends

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
but why when shows like Seinfeld and Cheers ended, CBS was nice enough to show respect to them. They should move CSI to another night if they insist on airing a new episode this week. The end of Frasier and Friends are the biggest losses NBC's had since Seinfeld ended 6 years ago. ABC and Fox are smart enough to know that most people are NOT interested in what they have airing tonight, CBS should do the same. They will have their time next season when Raymond ends


When Cheers and Seinfeld ended, CBS really had nothing to put up against those shows anyway. I'm sure if they had hits like Survivor and CSI back then, they would have put them up against the Cheers and Seinfeld finales.

Originally posted by Seth Thrasher
CSI pulled in 20,000,000 viewers (Friends got 50Mil)

Well see, there you go. It was worthwhile for CBS to air new CSI episodes than just air some frumpy rerun. 20 million is a lot of viewers.

It wasn't disrespectful. Are us CSI fans supposed to wait for 3 weeks until Friends and Frasier are done? Back when Seinfeld and Cheers ended CBS was nowhere near the #1 network and they really didn't have the shows to go up against them.

Originally posted by FamilyTiesGOP
Well see, there you go. It was worthwhile for CBS to air new CSI episodes than just air some frumpy rerun. 20 million is a lot of viewers.

yes, and the ratings for the Friends finale were roughly only about 2/3 the ratings that the finales of Cheers and Seinfeld got. 51.5 million is very respectable, but 71.5 million would've been a LOT better.

By BuffySlayer79: 51.5 million is very respectable but 71.5 million would've have been a lot better
What makes you assume that the 20 million people who watched CSI would have watched Friends had there been a rerun. I didn't watch Friends because I didn't care about it. I doubt that anyone who watched CSI cared about watching Friends either. If they did they would have watched it. I mean a series finale trumps a regular episode even if it is a new one. Especially the with the way they hyped up Friends.

No, I think CSI can hold it's own, it is the #1 show after all.

I think they did Frasier a disservice by moving the finale to Thursday, IMO NBC treated Frasier like crap, they put the finale up against CSI the #1 show :rolleyes:

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
yes, and the ratings for the Friends finale were roughly only about 2/3 the ratings that the finales of Cheers and Seinfeld got. 51.5 million is very respectable, but 71.5 million would've been a LOT better.

Friends fails to compare to those ratings of Cheers especially when you consider that Cheers was 12 years ago. Friends would have actually had to have done better than Cheers to be comparable.

Originally posted by sara
What makes you assume that the 20 million people who watched CSI would have watched Friends had there been a rerun. I didn't watch Friends because I didn't care about it. I doubt that anyone who watched CSI cared about watching Friends either. If they did they would have watched it. I mean a series finale trumps a regular episode even if it is a new one. Especially the with the way they hyped up Friends.

maybe not every CSI person would've watched Friends, but I wouldn't have been surprised if a portion had.

For example, I only watched Tru Calling (which Fox had the decency to wrap the season up the week before the Friends/Frasier finales) when Friends was on rerun, but when Friends aired a new episode on Thursday, I would watch that instead. I am sure some CSI fans who like Friends, but not as much, would've had NBC on instead that night. Same with CSI fans who like Frasier, but not as much as CSI.

Originally posted by Topanga
No, I think CSI can hold it's own, it is the #1 show after all.

I think they did Frasier a disservice by moving the finale to Thursday, IMO NBC treated Frasier like crap, they put the finale up against CSI the #1 show :rolleyes:

actually, Frasier's highest ratings were when it aired on Thursday nights, every season it was on Thursday, it was a top 5 performer as part of the Must-See lineup. More people watch TV on Thursday nights. If anything, airing it in the timeslot where it had it's best ratings was smart for NBC, CBS is just cocky because they actually have a hit for once.

I cannot wait for Fox or ABC to schedule their top-rated series up against the Everybody Loves Raymond finale.... CBS deserves it because Frasier and Friends were just as important to millions of viewers as Raymond is.

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
I cannot wait for Fox or ABC to schedule their top-rated series up against the Everybody Loves Raymond finale.... CBS deserves it because Frasier and Friends were just as important to millions of viewers as Raymond is.

I support whatever airs opposite of the Everybody Loves Raymond finale.

Originally posted by barwars88
I support whatever airs opposite of the Everybody Loves Raymond finale.

Just curious, why do you hate ELR?

Originally posted by barwars88
I support whatever airs opposite of the Everybody Loves Raymond finale.

me too, that is the one hit sitcom I cannot see the appeal of. Even a bad episode of Yes Dear is generally better than a great episode of Raymond, and that's saying something because Yes Dear is rather mediocre IMO.

Originally posted by jpnoyes
Just curious, why do you hate ELR?

personally, I just don't think it's funny. I think the whole "dysfunctional family" thing has been done 200 times before and better. Brad Garrett also annoys me.

I do like Doris Roberts, but I have preferred her in other work I've seen of hers to ELR. I just don't see what ELR has that every other sitcom on CBS and ABC doesn't.

I suppose it's not the worst sitcom ever, but I don't understand exactly why it's such a blockbuster. My parents loved the show (tho they kinda stopped about 2 seasons ago) and I tried watching it with them, and while I found a few jokes funny, most of the time, I was "this is what everyone is raving about?"

I thought Becker was a MUCH better CBS sitcom, and CBS treated it like crap because it had one season where the ratings slipped

Originally posted by jpnoyes
Just curious, why do you hate ELR?

I dont hate it.
But its my least favorite popular show ever.
Well maybe I do hate it....
I just dont understand the appeal, I mean -- I can watch people argue with eachother at home, and most, if not all of the ELR episodes revolve around an arguement.
Not to mention that Ray Romano's voice just irks me the wrong way. (which is the same reason I dont like "The Nanny")

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
am I the only person who thinks that CBS is kind of being disrespectful by airing NEW episodes of CSI up against the series finales of Frasier and Friends?

I remember when Cheers ended, the other 3 (at the time) networks aired movies and reruns the night of the Cheers series finale, because they knew it was NBC's night. For two weeks in a row, the two biggest sitcoms NBC's had for the past decade have ended, and CBS decides to air CSI against it, instead of just sucking it up and letting another network win for those 2 weeks, because you don't get shows on the level of Friends and Frasier ending every week. Both series were massive sitcoms and the other channels have been respectful knowing that most people will be watching NBC that night.

Let's hope that when CSI airs it's final episode, NBC pays them back by airing a fresh episode of whatever their hot series of the time will be up against it.




CBS is NBC's COMPETiTION, So why would they help boost ratings for the Finales of Frasier and Friends? So i'm having a little trouble understanding what you mean by disrespectful.

Originally posted by TVShow Analyzer
CBS is NBC's COMPETiTION, So why would they help boost ratings for the Finales of Frasier and Friends? So i'm having a little trouble understanding what you mean by disrespectful.

well, this is what I meant by disrespectful (tho people have already pointed out about that there weren't big hits on CBS in the day)

the night the final Cheers aired, the other networks sucked it in and forfeited the night to NBC by airing telefilms and reruns, they knew that it was NBC's night to shine

the night the final Seinfeld aired, the other networks sucked it in and aired reruns and the sort, they knew it was NBC's night to shine

the night the final episode of Mash aired in 1983, the other networks sucked it in and aired movies instead, they knew it was CBS' night to shine, so they forfeited it to them

Whereas CBS aired new episodes of CSI up against the final episodes of Friends and Frasier, both of which were as big as shows as Seinfeld, Mash and Cheers.

But... as others said, CBS didn't have the competition back in the day like they have now.

I agree with Solomon.

I'm going to be perfectly frank when I say this, so be warned:

BuffySlayer79, what the HELL is your problem?

It's disrespectful for CBS to air a new episode of their highest rated show against the final episode of the competition's highest rated show? No, IT IS NOT DISRESPECTFUL! It's called TRYING TO GET RATINGS. RATINGS = MONEY! Not everyone in the whole world watched Friends, and I'm sure the other networks got a lot of viewers when it aired. I can see RIGHT THROUGH you! You wanted CBS and ABC and all the others to do the stupid act that TVLand did. You wanted all the other networks to pre-empt programming for Friends! NO! NO NO NO! CSI fans most likely DON'T like Friends, so why should they wait three weeks for a new episode due to something airing on ANOTHER channel, that is their favorite show's competition.

You make absolutely no sense at all. And I don't even care if you get mad. You are acting as if everyone in the country wanted to watch Friends. Well we DIDN'T.

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
well, this is what I meant by disrespectful (tho people have already pointed out about that there weren't big hits on CBS in the day)

the night the final Cheers aired, the other networks sucked it in and forfeited the night to NBC by airing telefilms and reruns, they knew that it was NBC's night to shine

the night the final Seinfeld aired, the other networks sucked it in and aired reruns and the sort, they knew it was NBC's night to shine

the night the final episode of Mash aired in 1983, the other networks sucked it in and aired movies instead, they knew it was CBS' night to shine, so they forfeited it to them

Whereas CBS aired new episodes of CSI up against the final episodes of Friends and Frasier, both of which were as big as shows as Seinfeld, Mash and Cheers.

But... as others said, CBS didn't have the competition back in the day like they have now.



I'm sure NBC would do the same if the situation was reversed. It's all about competition

Originally posted by JT
BuffySlayer79, what the HELL is your problem?

what the hell is yours? You're 14, you're much too young to be so uptight and nasty to people. Sad thing is, I actually liked you when you first posted, but then you started being nasty to me because I don't back down from my opinion. YOU DON'T REMEMBER WHEN THE LAST CHEERS AIRED. So you don't remember ABC and CBS airing reruns of unpopular series and telefilms of a movie that was 8 years old at the point (The Color Purple was on CBS that night)

Well, I am not gonna take crap from someone who is a decade younger than me and is probably in 8th grade. I don't mind someone like BarWars' age, because he is 9 years younger than me, but he actually acts older than he is, and doesn't snap at people the way you do. Hell, my niece and nephew are older than you, I remember when my nephew did nothing but crawl, and he's a year older than you. So why should I take you seriously?

I think the main problem is, why are you so bitter and rude to people?

>>You are acting as if everyone in the country wanted to watch Friends. Well we DIDN'T.<<


Notice, I also mentioned the final episode of Frasier. I remember watching Frasier Craine on Cheers BEFORE YOU WERE EVEN BORN!!

well, will somebody answer me this?

Why don't other networks air shows that could get ratings up against The Super Bowl and The Academy Awards? Surely, maybe there are people out there who don't wanna watch the last episodes of Friends OR FRASIER (see, I've said both of them each time). But you know, maybe there are people out there who don't care for football, and others who don't really care to see pretentious Hollywood types go up to air their political laundry either? But no channel will dare air anything that will attract more than 5 million viewers up against either Super Bowl or The Oscars... so why is the series finale of a major series considered any different?

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
well, will somebody answer me this?

Why don't other networks air shows that could get ratings up against The Super Bowl and The Academy Awards? Surely, maybe there are people out there who don't wanna watch the last episodes of Friends OR FRASIER (see, I've said both of them each time). But you know, maybe there are people out there who don't care for football, and others who don't really care to see pretentious Hollywood types go up to air their political laundry either? But no channel will dare air anything that will attract more than 5 million viewers up against either Super Bowl or The Oscars... so why is the series finale of a major series considered any different?


good question

My age has nothing to do with this, so you might as well stop using that to your advantage. Fact is, I don't get nasty and bitter to people in general. I get "nasty and bitter" to people who annoy the crap out of me, and fact is, when you started analyzing peoples' opinions ('you wouldn't be saying that if it was All in the Family or MASH!'), you annoyed the crap out of me, so I felt like telling you so, and pointing out that what you were saying was so selfish. I don't care if you are a decade older than me. If I disagree with you, and if I think you are selfish and self-absorbed, I will tell you so. Plain and simple.

And I really don't care if you used to like me, but now you don't. Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn. I never liked you from the first post of yours I read.

The networks are free to televise original shows against the Superbowl but it would get creamed in the ratings. The Superbowl is generally the highest rated show of the season. Friends does not appeal to everybody or they wouldn't care what aired opposite it. I watched the finals of Mash Cheers and Seinfeld and I was excited about them. I just don't care that much for Friends and Frasier. I don't think its right that another network has to go into repeats for the May Sweeps because of this and people who like CSI have to wait for 3 weeks to see an original show. As For Everybody Loves Raymond, I like that show better than Friends and Frasier but I don't watch it that much. I wouldn't care if other networks aired original shows opposite it. But ABC has no shows that could beat it, NBC will have no shows that can beat it next year, and unless FOX airs American Idol opposite it they have no other shows that can compete with it. I remember in 1989 when the finals of Family Ties and Moonlighting aired opposite each other. Family Ties was the #1 show of the week and Moonlighting was in the bottom 5. Thats just the way it is. BTW I liked both shows, I watched Family Ties and taped Moonlighting and watched it afterward.

I think people are getting a little too worked up about this. BuffySlayer79 asked a very legitimate question. In the past, when hit shows ended on one network, the other networks would air repeats or made-for-TV movies, but it was never out of respect. I can't say off the top of my head what the other networks aired when Cheers finished up but it was, at the time, fairly obvious that anything going up against Cheers would get slaughtered.

The same can be said for when CBS aired the final episode of M*A*S*H in 1983. ABC aired the movie "American Gigolo" and NBC aired the telefilm The Night the Bridge Fell Down, as both networks expected (with good reason) that M*A*S*H would clobber the competition.

The reason CBS aired CSI at the same time as the final episodes of Friends and Frasier is because CBS knew that neither Friends or Frasier would pull in a large enough audience to totally outperform the competition. CSI is not only the biggest show on CBS, it is the biggest show on television at this time. So, CBS decided to pit their hit show against a Friends knowing that they would be able to get millions of viewers -- and guess what, it worked.

Earlier I said it was disrespectful.
But now I disagree with myself....

its not disrespectful, its just kind of dumb.
CSI wouldve probably gotten a lot more viewers if it aired on a different night this week.
Maybe somebody is a fan of both Frasier and CSI.... and they skipped out on CSI just to watch Frasier bid farwell.
Or vice-versa (although someone being a fan of a show and NOT watching the finale, in favor of something else, doesnt make much sense to me)

That, I can agree with. But saying that its disrespectful? That's just selfish.

I just think that the word "disrespectful" isn't correct for this. I mean television is a business simple as that. Asking a network not to compete for 2 consecutive Thursday nights during May Sweeps when all their advertising dollars are calculated just doesn't make sense. It isn't CBS's fault that NBC has been mismanaged so badly that they now will not have hardly any good sitcoms next year. It is a business and CBS made their decisions.

Not everybody was watching Friends or Frasier and should have the choice of watching something else other than a movie or some rerun. And it was NBC that intentionally moved Frasier to Thursday night. CBS doesn't have to modify its schedule just to accomodate NBC's changes.

It would be like asking Wal-Mart to close for one day to show respect to Target and its customers while telling the Wal-Mart people to just put up with it.

I think all the networks including CBS should air other programs besides there most popular shows versus series finales of shows. Because those fans of the shows ended really shouldn't have to choose between the ended of their shows and a new episode of their fav shows. CBS at this time is the number 1 network for the season and I beleive they are trying to take advantage of that.

Originally posted by FamilyTiesGOP
Not everybody was watching Friends or Frasier and should have the choice of watching something else other than a movie or some rerun. And it was NBC that intentionally moved Frasier to Thursday night. CBS doesn't have to modify its schedule just to accomodate NBC's changes.

Frasier moved to Thursday to end where it all began.
It shouldve stayed on Thursdays in the first place, but almost since the beginning, NBC has hated Frasier for some very odd reason.

Originally posted by FamilyTiesGOP
I just think that the word "disrespectful" isn't correct for this. I mean television is a business simple as that. Asking a network not to compete for 2 consecutive Thursday nights during May Sweeps when all their advertising dollars are calculated just doesn't make sense. It isn't CBS's fault that NBC has been mismanaged so badly that they now will not have hardly any good sitcoms next year. It is a business and CBS made their decisions.

Not everybody was watching Friends or Frasier and should have the choice of watching something else other than a movie or some rerun. And it was NBC that intentionally moved Frasier to Thursday night. CBS doesn't have to modify its schedule just to accomodate NBC's changes.

It would be like asking Wal-Mart to close for one day to show respect to Target and its customers while telling the Wal-Mart people to just put up with it.
Exactly and Friends moved to 9pm et. That's CSI's regular time slot.

Originally posted by barwars88
Frasier moved to Thursday to end where it all began.
It shouldve stayed on Thursdays in the first place, but almost since the beginning, NBC has hated Frasier for some very odd reason.

I agree with you. I have never understood why Frasier was on Tuesday night ever. Just look at NBC Tuesday nights this season. It should have always been on Thursday night. But that isn't CBS's problem. Like Mr. Roper said, 9pm Thursdays is CSI's regular time slot and NBC twice moved its shows to that slot for a one time event.

And by the way I like Frasier best out of the three shows this thread is fighting over. I just see CBS's side a little better.

Although I would never watch CSI over Frasier.... its good that it aired opposite of it.
If shows didnt have competition.... all we would have on TV is stuff that does "alright" whether its with critics or ratings -- but with competition, the networks (well, used to at least) tried to put the best shows on air, not settling for shows that are just "alright".


Has a show ever lasted more than 2 or 3 seasons that wasnt liked by the critics, and didnt have many viewers?

Originally posted by JT
That, I can agree with. But saying that its disrespectful? That's just selfish.

how is it "selfish" to say one network is being disrespectful? I mean, selfish is when you don't share something with somebody else. Anyways, I kinda agree with BarWars' assessment, so there!

All CBS had back in 1993 when Cheers ended was Murphy Brown and Evening Shade.

Originally posted by tvobscurities
The reason CBS aired CSI at the same time as the final episodes of Friends and Frasier is because CBS knew that neither Friends or Frasier would pull in a large enough audience to totally outperform the competition. CSI is not only the biggest show on CBS, it is the biggest show on television at this time. So, CBS decided to pit their hit show against a Friends knowing that they would be able to get millions of viewers -- and guess what, it worked.

I don't see where you say that Friends wasn't big enough, but Cheers, MASH and Seinfeld were? Seinfeld was #1 in it's last season, but Friends' standings this season were comparable (about fourth place) to where Cheers and Mash were ranked in their final seasons. It's hardly like the show had fallen into the 70's and NBC was mercykilling it.

Frasier, while the ratings had fallen dramatically since it's heyday, was still pulling in the 20's and 30's on average. The last episode of Family Ties rocketed back to #1 with GREAT ratings, and yet it only finished off in the 50's that final season. Why would you say Friends and Frasier aren't popular?

Originally posted by Miss Golden
All CBS had back in 1993 when Cheers ended was Murphy Brown and Evening Shade.

yep, and in the 92-93 season, Murphy Brown was getting higher ratings than Cheers was getting, but CBS didn't decide to sabotage the final Cheers with a new Murphy Brown episode.

Originally posted by barwars88
Although I would never watch CSI over Frasier.... its good that it aired opposite of it.
If shows didnt have competition.... all we would have on TV is stuff that does "alright" whether its with critics or ratings -- but with competition, the networks (well, used to at least) tried to put the best shows on air, not settling for shows that are just "alright".

but why don't networks dare air anything against the Super Bowl or Oscars? Just like how not everybody is a fan of a certain series, not everybody cares about football, and many people certainly don't really care to see stuck-up Hollywood types using their time to win an award as their excuse to get on a podium. If everything was "fair", then the networks would also air shows that could bring in ratings up against the Super Bowl and Oscars instead of forfeiting the nights to whoever is showing those this year.

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
but why don't networks dare air anything against the Super Bowl or Oscars? Just like how not everybody is a fan of a certain series, not everybody cares about football, and many people certainly don't really care to see stuck-up Hollywood types using their time to win an award as their excuse to get on a podium. If everything was "fair", then the networks would also air shows that could bring in ratings up against the Super Bowl and Oscars instead of forfeiting the nights to whoever is showing those this year.


Because no Program can compete with the Superbowl. That's a known fact. Even individuals who don;'t watch sports watch the Superbowl.

Originally posted by TVShow Analyzer
Because no Program can compete with the Superbowl. That's a known fact. Even individuals who don;'t watch sports watch the Superbowl.

yes, but if I recall, didn't Mash beat Super Bowl as the most watched program of 1983, and I think the final episodes of Cheers and Seinfeld gave the Super Bowls a run for their money in 1993 and 1998.

I think this arguement is over.
CSI aired opposite of both Friends and Frasier -- and lost both weeks.
NBC gets the win -- they're happy.

If it were the early 80s, or even the early 90s, or even the late 90s -- both final episodes of Friends and Frasier wouldve pulled in just as big numbers as MASH, Cheers or Seinfeld.

But time has changed since then, TV is a lot different.
I think I read somewhere that collectively, more people watch cable than the big 4 networks combined.
There as twice as many channels today than there was when Seinfeld ended, and 100x the amount of channels when MASH ended.

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
I don't see where you say that Friends wasn't big enough, but Cheers, MASH and Seinfeld were? Seinfeld was #1 in it's last season, but Friends' standings this season were comparable (about fourth place) to where Cheers and Mash were ranked in their final seasons. It's hardly like the show had fallen into the 70's and NBC was mercykilling it.

To be fair Cheers and Seinfeld peaked late in their runs. Both became top ten and #1 rated shows very late in their runs. Whereas Friends was a hit from the start and towards the latter seasons it had already peaked in popularity though it still had stellar numbers.

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
but why don't networks dare air anything against the Super Bowl or Oscars? Just like how not everybody is a fan of a certain series, not everybody cares about football, and many people certainly don't really care to see stuck-up Hollywood types using their time to win an award as their excuse to get on a podium. If everything was "fair", then the networks would also air shows that could bring in ratings up against the Super Bowl and Oscars instead of forfeiting the nights to whoever is showing those this year.

Probabaly becuase both the Super Bowl AND the Oscars air on Sundays. No network baring HBO airs anything on Sunday nights. I remember a few years back when I lived in the states the low Oscar numbers were blamed on HBO, since an episode of the Sopranos was aired during the Oscars. IMO it all comes down to ratings and every network has the right to air its highest rated show next to a finale on another network. CSI is currently the #1 show in the US and it usually airs on Thursday nights beating Friends on a weekly basis except the fianle. CBS has every right to air the #1 show on televison the night is was intended to air and espically since it's the #1 show on television. I'm sure NBC would have done the same if CBS had a big finale. No network is respectful anymore. It comes down to ratings plain and simple.

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
yep, and in the 92-93 season, Murphy Brown was getting higher ratings than Cheers was getting, but CBS didn't decide to sabotage the final Cheers with a new Murphy Brown episode.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Murphy Brown air on Mondays? If CBS would have put a new episode of Murphy on against the final episode of Cheers, Murphy would have gotten clobbered.

No, I don't see it as disrespectful. I would have done the same thing if it was my network. it's all about money and the other two networks can't afford to lose the advertisers dollars. plus, they must show that they're competitve against these shows. Cheers is a different story, Friends didn't hold the same type of fanbase as Cheers so no one really cared if something else aired then.

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
I don't see where you say that Friends wasn't big enough, but Cheers, MASH and Seinfeld were?

I think the fact that despite the fact that Friends pulled in 50+ million viewers for its series finale CSI managed 20 million speaks for itself.

Seinfeld went out in the 1997/1998 season with a 22.0 rating. Friends, despite reaching the #1 spot for the 2001/2002 season, has never pulled in more than an 18.7 season average, and that was in its second season when it was ranked third. The number one show for a season hasn't broken into the 20.0 range since the 1997/1998 season, when Seinfeld ended. During the 2001/2002 season when Friends claimed the top spot it had a 15.0 rating. For the 2002/2003 season CSI was in the top spot with a 16.3 rating. So far for the 2003/2004 season the highest rated show, again CSI, has a 15.9 rating. That's a difference of 6 ratings points between the top-rated show for the 1997/1998 season and the current 2003/2004 season. That's huge.

Cable is everywhere and it is taking a toll on network television. The fact of the matter is, no matter how popular a show is, no matter how long it has been on the air, there is little chance of there being another M*A*S*H or Cheers. There are simply too many other places for people to watch. When M*A*S*H ended you could be watching one of three things, or, if you had cable back then, a few more. Network television was still the place to be. FOX was gaining strength in 1993 when Cheers ended, but still, only a handful of places to watch. Seinfeld may well be the last of the great finales.

And, if you really want to break it down even more, Friends and CSI are targeted at vastly different audiences. CBS knew full well that the majority of people who watch CSI, an hour-long crime drama, wouldn't be interested in the final episode of a usually half-hour-long sitcom.

I don't mean any of this as a slight against Friends or Frasier, I'm crazy about the former and the latter has become a favorite of mine lately. I'm just trying to explain how I see things in regards to television, ratings and finales.