1. John Ritter's death obviously played a factor because the entire show was built around him and his personality. TV shows were one of the main stars suddenly die during its run usually haven't had a good track record. We've had "The Royal Family" (Redd Foxx), "Chico & the Man" (Freddie Prinze, Sr.), "Dennis the Menace" (Joseph Kearns), "Gimmie a Break" (Dolph Sweet), "Newsradio" (Phil Hartman), "Suddenly Susan" (David Strickland), "Cover Up" (Jon-Erik Hexum), "Sealab 2020" (Henry Goz), "Cosby" (Madeline Kahn), and "Petticoat Junction" (Bea Benaderet). Maybe the results would've been much different if the show was about Katey Sagal, David Spade, and James Garner from the very beginning.

The ratings spiked in the subsequent episodes spiked in a large part because the curiosity and sympathy (but mostly curiosity) surrounding the publicity of Ritter's shocking death. I suspect that ABC put "8 Simple Rules" on the "Friday Night Death Slot" because they wanted they had little faith in the show without John Ritter involved. They didn't want to cancel it upright because they still had some I guess compassion for the surviving cast and crew. They didn't want to feel guilty by suddenly putting people out of of a job just because of what happened to John Ritter. So when the ratings weren't living up to standards on Friday nights, ABC could then give a justifiable excuse for cancelling it.

2. The most of the post-Ritter show lacked focus and direction I think. What exactly was "8 Simple Rules" post-Ritter about? Was it about David Spade entering the household and influence on the kids? Was it about the kids having to put up with their mother Katey Sagal working at their school? Or was it kind of a "Full House" type of program were James Garner & David Spade's characters come to help Sagal's character raise the kids after the death of John Ritter's character?

Personally, if they needed another adult/paternal character to fill John Ritter's place, they should've brought in Cybil Shephard, who if I remember correctly, placed Katey Sagal's sister in two episodes in the first season. There we a the very least, would have a family member for whom the audience have actually seen (as opposed to pretty much starting from stratch with Garner and Spade) prior to Ritter's death.

3. I'm willing to bet that some viewers who were fans of Katey Sagal on "Married With Children" couldn't bring themselves to accepting Peg Bundy on a more conventional, moralistic program like "8 Simple Rules." "Married With Children" was considered to be fairly edgy and counter-culture for its time. Remember that the show came on about the same time that more I guess self-righteous or cornball family sitcoms were around like "The Cosby Show", "Growing Pains", "Full House", and "Family Ties." I'm sure that when the Sagal suddenly became the main focus of "8 Simple Rules" after John Ritter died viewers who still recognize Sagal for her cartoonish, dsyfunctional mother character on "Married With Children" didn't want her to suddenly become virtually everything that Peg Bundy was against.

4. After John Ritter died, the show I think brought in too many new characters (once again going back to my arguement of the show lacking focus) all that once. Besides James Garner and David Spade, there was Adam Arkin as the school principal and potential love interest for Katey Sagal (for which I'm sure made some viewers uncomfortable given John Ritter's still present "aura"), there was Pamela Anderson, and Jonathan Taylor Thomas. Plus, episodes like paradying "Freaky Friday" seemed to scream cheap desperation or a lack of more original scripts.

1. John Ritter's death obviously played a factor because the entire show was built around him and his personality. TV shows were one of the main stars suddenly die during its run usually haven't had a good track record. We've had "The Royal Family" (Redd Foxx), "Chico & the Man" (Freddie Prinze, Sr.), "Dennis the Menace" (Joseph Kearns), "Gimmie a Break" (Dolph Sweet), "Newsradio" (Phil Hartman), "Suddenly Susan" (David Strickland), "Cover Up" (Jon-Erik Hexum), and "Petticoat Junction" (Bea Benaderet). Maybe the results would've been much different if the show was about Katey Sagal, David Spade, and James Garner from the very beginning.

The ratings spiked in the subsequent episodes spiked in a large part because the curiosity and sympathy (but mostly curiosity) surrounding the publicity of Ritter's shocking death. I suspect that ABC put "8 Simple Rules" on the "Friday Night Death Slot" because they wanted they had little faith in the show without John Ritter involved. They didn't want to cancel it upright because they still had some I guess compassion for the surviving cast and crew. They didn't want to feel guilty by suddenly putting people out of of a job just because of what happened to John Ritter. So when the ratings weren't living up to standards on Friday nights, ABC could then give a justifiable excuse for cancelling it.

2. The most of the post-Ritter show lacked focus and direction I think. What exactly was "8 Simple Rules" post-Ritter about? Was it about David Spade entering the household and influence on the kids? Was it about the kids having to put up with their mother Katey Sagal working at their school? Or was it kind of a "Full House" type of program were James Garner & David Spade's characters come to help Sagal's character raise the kids after the death of John Ritter's character?

Personally, if they needed another adult/paternal character to fill John Ritter's place, they should've brought in Cybil Shephard, who if I remember correctly, placed Katey Sagal's sister in two episodes in the first season. There we a the very least, would have a family member for whom the audience have actually seen (as opposed to pretty much starting from stratch with Garner and Spade) prior to Ritter's death.

3. I'm willing to bet that some viewers who were fans of Katey Sagal on "Married With Children" couldn't bring themselves to accepting Peg Bundy on a more conventional, moralistic program like "8 Simple Rules." "Married With Children" was considered to be fairly edgy and counter-culture for its time. Remember that the show came on about the same time that more I guess self-righteous or cornball family sitcoms were around like "The Cosby Show", "Growing Pains", "Full House", and "Family Ties." I'm sure that when the Sagal suddenly became the main focus of "8 Simple Rules" after John Ritter died viewers who still recognize Sagal for her cartoonish, dsyfunctional mother character on "Married With Children" didn't want her to suddenly become virtually everything that Peg Bundy was against.

4. After John Ritter died, the show I think brought in too many new characters (once again going back to my arguement of the show lacking focus) all that once. Besides James Garner and David Spade, there was Adam Arkin as the school principal and potential love interest for Katey Sagal (for which I'm sure made some viewers uncomfortable given John Ritter's still present "aura"), there was Pamela Anderson, and Jonathan Taylor Thomas. Plus, episodes like paradying "Freaky Friday" seemed to scream cheap desperation or a lack of more original scripts.
#3 I think isn't entirely true. I am a fan of Katey's and I think people who are fans of hers are willing to see Katey shine in a role completely opposite of Married...with Children.After all,most of us "big fans" have seen her in almost every role up to 8SR,every tv show,and own both of her cd's,and all her guest appearances. The only part of that I agree with,is that after John's death,most people were not accepting of Katey being a main role,after all,she was supporting character in most of her roles.

I just hope for a DVD Release in the future.... that would be great

I just hope for a DVD Release in the future.... that would be great

Same here. I'll get every season!

I know in the first few episodes she was barely in the show. It really changed after JR's death.

I'll definately be purchasing the DVDs if it's released...please release them!!! I'm begging you!

I think that ABC wasn't very confident that Sagal could carry a show all by herself. This is in large part, why the producers brought James Garner and David Spade in to take some of the focus off of Sagal. Also, having Ed O'Neill (Katey Sagal's "Married With Children" husband) guest star seemed to obviously scream desperation. I'm sure that some viewers automatically assumed that it was going to be a "Married With Children" episode (were there was some obvious animosity or conflict between O'Neill and Sagal) just to see some laid back, I guess ponderous sort of approach to the script.

The producers and writers (and ABC for that matter) in my estimation, made a big mistake by repeatedly making some sort of blunt reference to Ritter's death. To me, it just added to the stigma that the whole show was going to go downhill without its main star. When ABC was promoting the first post-Ritter episodes, it just screamed "very special episode." Personally, they were too quick to come out with a brand new episode (like a month after Ritter died) to explain what happened to Ritter.

I honestly think that ABC, who I think was struggling at the time anyway, felt that they needed to capitalize off of the publicity surrounding John Ritter's sudden death. If this wasn't the case, then why would they air the episode were John Ritter's character dies like a week after it premiered?

None of those reasons are why the show got canceled. The show performed like most of their other sitcoms, modestly, besides According to Jim and the According to Jim inflated Rodney. 8SR was higher rated than Less Than Perfect, and that will be back sometime next season.

The show was canceled because of one reason. How to air the show in syndication. I was told it would be hard to air an episode with John Ritter and then another with Spade/Garner. New people watching the show would be confused. As in local channel syndication, they usually air two "cycles" per market which air out of order. Like one run would start with episode 1 and the second run would be in the middle of the series. Certainly, the show would have made them a fortune in local syndication, but this was the main problem. They'll still make a fortune out of DVDs and cable syndication, and maybe even local syndication years from now, as some other shows with the same amount of episodes or less, have made it to local syndication. I guess they decided to go with Less Than Perfect for syndication in 2007.

The show was canceled because of one reason. How to air the show in syndication. I was told it would be hard to air an episode with John Ritter and then another with Spade/Garner. New people watching the show would be confused. As in local channel syndication, they usually air two "cycles" per market which air out of order. Like one run would start with episode 1 and the second run would be in the middle of the series. Certainly, the show would have made them a fortune in local syndication, but this was the main problem. They'll still make a fortune out of DVDs and cable syndication, and maybe even local syndication years from now, as some other shows with the same amount of episodes or less, have made it to local syndication. I guess they decided to go with Less Than Perfect for syndication in 2007.

Well, assuming that is true. That is a dumb reason. People would have to be from Mars or somewhere out of this world if they did not know what happend as far as John Ritter. Everyone who watches TV and almost everyone who are the type of people who watch shows in syndication know what happend. Newsradio ran in syndication after Phil Hartman's death. Also, Dennis the Menace airs in syndication with two Mr. Wilsons. Everyone who watches these shows always know what happend. I think this is a lame excuse, and a really a stupid reason for canceling the show. LTP will never have enough for local syndication anyway. I can't tell you how many people I have come across that have said they want to see the John Ritter episodes,and this show in general, in syndication.



Also, I would ask them then why in the world did they renew it after 2 seasons if they knew there would be such syndication problems ? The ratings were marginal after the goodbye episodes so you would think they would have canceled it after the second season and not even bother giving them a third season if they didn't have syndication plans. I think this is a really stupid decision by ABC.

1. John Ritter's death obviously played a factor because the entire show was built around him and his personality. TV shows were one of the main stars suddenly die during its run usually haven't had a good track record. We've had "The Royal Family" (Redd Foxx), "Chico & the Man" (Freddie Prinze, Sr.), "Dennis the Menace" (Joseph Kearns), "Gimmie a Break" (Dolph Sweet), "Newsradio" (Phil Hartman), "Suddenly Susan" (David Strickland), "Cover Up" (Jon-Erik Hexum), and "Petticoat Junction" (Bea Benaderet). Maybe the results would've been much different if the show was about Katey Sagal, David Spade, and James Garner from the very beginning.

The ratings spiked in the subsequent episodes spiked in a large part because the curiosity and sympathy (but mostly curiosity) surrounding the publicity of Ritter's shocking death. I suspect that ABC put "8 Simple Rules" on the "Friday Night Death Slot" because they wanted they had little faith in the show without John Ritter involved. They didn't want to cancel it upright because they still had some I guess compassion for the surviving cast and crew. They didn't want to feel guilty by suddenly putting people out of of a job just because of what happened to John Ritter. So when the ratings weren't living up to standards on Friday nights, ABC could then give a justifiable excuse for cancelling it.

2. The most of the post-Ritter show lacked focus and direction I think. What exactly was "8 Simple Rules" post-Ritter about? Was it about David Spade entering the household and influence on the kids? Was it about the kids having to put up with their mother Katey Sagal working at their school? Or was it kind of a "Full House" type of program were James Garner & David Spade's characters come to help Sagal's character raise the kids after the death of John Ritter's character?

Personally, if they needed another adult/paternal character to fill John Ritter's place, they should've brought in Cybil Shephard, who if I remember correctly, placed Katey Sagal's sister in two episodes in the first season. There we a the very least, would have a family member for whom the audience have actually seen (as opposed to pretty much starting from stratch with Garner and Spade) prior to Ritter's death.

3. I'm willing to bet that some viewers who were fans of Katey Sagal on "Married With Children" couldn't bring themselves to accepting Peg Bundy on a more conventional, moralistic program like "8 Simple Rules." "Married With Children" was considered to be fairly edgy and counter-culture for its time. Remember that the show came on about the same time that more I guess self-righteous or cornball family sitcoms were around like "The Cosby Show", "Growing Pains", "Full House", and "Family Ties." I'm sure that when the Sagal suddenly became the main focus of "8 Simple Rules" after John Ritter died viewers who still recognize Sagal for her cartoonish, dsyfunctional mother character on "Married With Children" didn't want her to suddenly become virtually everything that Peg Bundy was against.

4. After John Ritter died, the show I think brought in too many new characters (once again going back to my arguement of the show lacking focus) all that once. Besides James Garner and David Spade, there was Adam Arkin as the school principal and potential love interest for Katey Sagal (for which I'm sure made some viewers uncomfortable given John Ritter's still present "aura"), there was Pamela Anderson, and Jonathan Taylor Thomas. Plus, episodes like paradying "Freaky Friday" seemed to scream cheap desperation or a lack of more original scripts.

I wouldn't disagree with any of that except I liked Freaky Friday, even if it was derivative (this is tv, derivative is not only allowed, it is obligatory. lol. Bruce Cameron, who wrote the book on which the series is based gets kudos for execution if not for originality).

Kaley Couco's first intuition after John Ritter's death was that the show should be cancelled. And however grief stricken she may have been at the time, she may have been right in hindsight. Though I am grateful for the laughs and memories (and all scenes that Spade was not in. lol) in Seasons 2 and 3.

However, the above argument doesn't explain why 8SR was cancelled while Less Than Perfect, a lower rated show was picked up as a midseason replacementb(except if, as has been speculated, ABC offered that to 8SR and Pillot and Peaslee, in their arrogance and unrealism, declined). It is also my impression that Rodney, which was also picked up, was also lower rated.

None of those reasons are why the show got canceled. The show performed like most of their other sitcoms, modestly, besides According to Jim and the According to Jim inflated Rodney. 8SR was higher rated than Less Than Perfect, and that will be back sometime next season.

The show was canceled because of one reason. How to air the show in syndication. I was told it would be hard to air an episode with John Ritter and then another with Spade/Garner. New people watching the show would be confused. As in local channel syndication, they usually air two "cycles" per market which air out of order. Like one run would start with episode 1 and the second run would be in the middle of the series. Certainly, the show would have made them a fortune in local syndication, but this was the main problem. They'll still make a fortune out of DVDs and cable syndication, and maybe even local syndication years from now, as some other shows with the same amount of episodes or less, have made it to local syndication. I guess they decided to go with Less Than Perfect for syndication in 2007.

I think that another problem with airing the show in syndication is that there's going to likely be a certain aprehension factor. I would guess that there's going to be people who are going to be very unconfortable with a program in which they're aware of the main character's impending demise/fate.

I think that the difference between a show like "Newsradio" with Phil Hartman and "8 Simple Rules" with John Ritter was that unlike "8 Simple Rules" the bulk of the episodes (I believe "Newsradio" ran for four seasons with Phil Hartman) included Phil Hartman. I vaguely recall watching the episode of "Newsradio" were Phil Hartman's character dies. I don't remember "Newsradio" delivering this super melodramatic, surpy approach to explaining and coping with Hartman's death like John Ritter's was on "8 Simple Rules."

I could understand it being weird, for anybody, especially John Ritter fans who have never seen the show to maybe watch knowing whats coming. Goodbye is a very sad episode and to know in your mind as you're watching a series develop and its embracing you that it will be hard - There's no question in Season 1 that John Ritter was the show.

I don't think it would be weird though with a station showing 2 runs and maybe seeing Season 1 then Season 2/3. That's happening around the world right now, I think it would be strange for a station to try advertise it though because it would be incredibly weird to see ads for "John Ritter ... 8 Simple Rules" and then suddenly "Katey Sagal, James Garner and David Spade ... 8 Simple Rules".

The show was canceled because of one reason. How to air the show in syndication. I was told it would be hard to air an episode with John Ritter and then another with Spade/Garner. New people watching the show would be confused. As in local channel syndication, they usually air two "cycles" per market which air out of order. Like one run would start with episode 1 and the second run would be in the middle of the series. Certainly, the show would have made them a fortune in local syndication, but this was the main problem. They'll still make a fortune out of DVDs and cable syndication, and maybe even local syndication years from now, as some other shows with the same amount of episodes or less, have made it to local syndication. I guess they decided to go with Less Than Perfect for syndication in 2007.

I did wonder who they'd promote when it came to syndication - John Ritter or James Garner/David Spade.

As for "NewsRadio", Phil Hartman was in the first 75 out of 97 episodes. He was one of the main characters, but Dave Foley was the actual star of the show. I'd say a closer example would be when Freddie Prinze died. They continued "Chico and the Man" without him. Prinze was in the first 62 out of 88 episodes. Of course, CATM wasn't aired in reruns for a long time. If I'm correct, TV Land, airing the show in 2001 was the first time since the 70's. Of course, Freddie Prinze is in the majority of the show, whereas John Ritter was only in one season out of three.

You'd think that "The Hogan Family" would then have the same fate. Since Valerie Harper was only in the first two seasons (I believe the first season was half-season).

The show was canceled because of one reason. How to air the show in syndication. I was told it would be hard to air an episode with John Ritter and then another with Spade/Garner. New people watching the show would be confused.
I for one am glad that abc is concerned about the effects on the lab rats - er, viewers minds :)

abc is stupid and they should get their minds out of the gutter. 8SR deserves syndication and their brains know it.

88. Hope & Faith ABC 6.9 2.4/8 (84) -17/-20
90. 8 Simple Rules ABC 6.8 2.1/7 (96) -32/-42
94. Less Than Perfect ABC 6.2 2.3/7 (88) -30/-38
96. Complete Savages ABC 6.1 2.1/7 (96) N/A

I would call that a big difference between 8 Simple Rules and Complete Savages. Heck, look at Less Than Perfect and it was renewed. This makes absolutely no sense to me at all! Hope and Faith was right up there with 8SR's so this makes no sense at all. All I can think is that they were trying to save money due to David Spade/grampa Jim or the network is aiming towards an older audience. All I can say though is that the Neilson ratings are the most assinine method of mesuring how many people watch a show. They really need to find a new way because it's laughable how few neilson households there really are. Screw you ABC!

I agree 100% about the Neilson ratings are the most assinine method of mesuring how many people watch a show. All we know more people could be watching the show than what the Neilson ratings indicate.... And another thing, if Rodney was brought back they could of given Complete Savages another shot.... because they are delaying Rodney fate to be canceled ... Complete Savages had potential to be a great ABC sitcom, it really did....

None of those reasons are why the show got canceled. The show performed like most of their other sitcoms, modestly, besides According to Jim and the According to Jim inflated Rodney. 8SR was higher rated than Less Than Perfect, and that will be back sometime next season.

The show was canceled because of one reason. How to air the show in syndication. I was told it would be hard to air an episode with John Ritter and then another with Spade/Garner. New people watching the show would be confused. As in local channel syndication, they usually air two "cycles" per market which air out of order. Like one run would start with episode 1 and the second run would be in the middle of the series. Certainly, the show would have made them a fortune in local syndication, but this was the main problem. They'll still make a fortune out of DVDs and cable syndication, and maybe even local syndication years from now, as some other shows with the same amount of episodes or less, have made it to local syndication. I guess they decided to go with Less Than Perfect for syndication in 2007.

That explanation doesn't seem very plausible to me for reasons others have given: basically, everyone in the country knows what happened to John Ritter. Also, this is an experiment that has already been tried in Europe and has not proven to be a problem and I don't see any insurmountable obstacle to airing the episodes in sequence.

They are going to change the name of the show to the David Spade Show (just a formality, really). Then they are going to replace the images and voices of John Ritter and other cast members with that of David Spade. The spots will say, Watch the David Spade Show, starring David Spade, David Spade and David Spade. Problem solved! lol.

I'm a bit curious about how "Three's Company" would've handled John Ritter's death. You can argue that "Three's Company" was really more of an essemble show where as "8 Simple Rules For Dating My Teenage Daughter" was in essence "The John Ritter Show." If anything, Joyce DeWitt and Suzanne Sommers/Priscilla Barnes shared with Ritter the distinction of being the main stars of the show.

With "8 Simple Rules..." I think you would be deaf, dumb, more blind if you didn't realize that John Ritter was the whole propose of the show. I can guarantee you that Katey Sagal wasn't a reason that anybody watched that particular program. And if anything, Kaley Cuoco, who like Christina Applegate on Katey Sagal's "Married With Children", was the token "hot blonde daughter."

I'm a bit curious about how "Three's Company" would've handled John Ritter's death. You can argue that "Three's Company" was really more of an essemble show where as "8 Simple Rules For Dating My Teenage Daughter" was in essence "The John Ritter Show." If anything, Joyce DeWitt and Suzanne Sommers/Priscilla Barnes shared with Ritter the distinction of being the main stars of the show.

With "8 Simple Rules..." I think you would be deaf, dumb, more blind if you didn't realize that John Ritter was the whole propose of the show. I can guarantee you that Katey Sagal wasn't a reason that anybody watched that particular program. And if anything, Kaley Cuoco, who like Christina Applegate on Katey Sagal's "Married With Children", was the token "hot blonde daughter."

I have noticed a bit of excessive hero worship here and a bit too much of the "great man" theory here. I have the utmost respect for John Ritter and his accomplishments but I don't think we have to demean other members of the cast to give him his proper respect. I originally tuned in to see both he and Katey Sagal, but after watching the pilot I discovered another reason to watch after that was Kaley Cuoco, who has worked as an actress since she was 5 (although I had never heard of her before this) and after this opportunity has proven she can do parts other than the good looking popular blonde girl, although she does play that role that better than anyone, that is not all she can do (See Crimes of Fashion, which was on ABC Family and beat Charmed. Bringing a network sized audience to a non-network channel is a pretty impressive feat). If you think Kaley Cuoco is a "dumb blonde", just hide and watch and be proven wrong. I think that attitude may have been part of the problem that led to the demise of 8SR. While she was basically being shut out of 8SR in favor of Spade, the leaks started coming from ABC that 8SR might be cancelled, leaks that eventually proved to be true. We'll never know if giving her a proper role in the show would have avoided its cancellation, but if I could run the tape back and do it over, that is the first thing I'd try. Other than James Garner, who has been in one hit in the past year, she is the only cast member who has been in any (she has been in 3-4) that I know anything about. Except for 8SR, in which the dumbest instance of counterprogramming in the history of TV, landed it in competition with Joan of Arcadia and What I Like About You, everything she was in runs 1st among teenage girls and 1st or 2nd among teenage boys. In a time of fragmented audiences and niche programming, that is nothing to sneeze at.

Personally, I think after John Ritter's death Kaley Cuoco was the star of the show. I know that Katy Sagal, James Garner, and David Spade had bigger names, but I always found Bridget (Kaley) the funniest and most interesting character. Yes, she is quite beautiful, but I also found her very funny and the true star of the show. Without her I probably would not have continued watching.

I can't say I agree with Pav's syndication theory. I mean, The Hogan Family is in syndication and there's no confusion - Valerie Harper was on the first season, the show was mostly around her and the sons and once she got canned it totally changed, but it doesn't confuse viewers.

Even more people are aware of John's death so to me, it's a moot point.

Bottom line - the show sucked in its last season. I can't stand David Spade at any time. Any show he's been on it seems like he takes right over. I don't know why producers and writers seem to think he's so popular and give him the most air time. I like James Garner, but couldn't even get used to him.

If they don't syndicate it, then its ABC's loss because John has a lot of loyal fans out there and they could still make money off of his popularity.

The show was canceled because of one reason. How to air the show in syndication. I was told it would be hard to air an episode with John Ritter and then another with Spade/Garner. New people watching the show would be confused.




There's been a lot of shows where actors die that are shown in syndication. As long as syndication airs the episode explaining what happen to the character played by the actor who died, it shouldn't be confusing for anyone.

I thought for sure this show would be renewed since Hope & Faith was picked up. Anyone who watched both shows this past season will agree that 8SR was much better than H&F. I hope if 8SR is released on DVD, they will release the last two seasons also since John Ritter's death was a factor in the shows' cancellation.

Some high class people I have asked have all said that is the reason the show was canceled. It would have been hard promoting the show in syndication.

Really? Wow, could that be a factor why the Hogan Family has barely been in syndication? It would be confusing cause of Valerie Harper's character having been killed off?

I'm a bit curious about how "Three's Company" would've handled John Ritter's death. You can argue that "Three's Company" was really more of an essemble show where as "8 Simple Rules For Dating My Teenage Daughter" was in essence "The John Ritter Show." If anything, Joyce DeWitt and Suzanne Sommers/Priscilla Barnes shared with Ritter the distinction of being the main stars of the show.

With "8 Simple Rules..." I think you would be deaf, dumb, more blind if you didn't realize that John Ritter was the whole propose of the show. I can guarantee you that Katey Sagal wasn't a reason that anybody watched that particular program. And if anything, Kaley Cuoco, who like Christina Applegate on Katey Sagal's "Married With Children", was the token "hot blonde daughter."

I don't know how they would but, Its different "Three's Company" would probably have just ended because the show was John's but the show never dealt with anything real - really, We saw where Jack and Janet thought Chrissy was dying but that was just farse comedy in the shows nature. 8 Simple Rules could handle it real because it was a real family show and while John was a huge part of the show Paul was a huge part of the Family, everything was handled realisticly, Three's Company couldn't pull that off.

You can't diminish the attraction to the show, It may have been John for some people - but what if you had never seen John Ritter - you may have seen Katey Sagal.

Really? Wow, could that be a factor why the Hogan Family has barely been in syndication? It would be confusing cause of Valerie Harper's character having been killed off?


Actually, I've seen it in syndication a LOT over the years. Both here in Canada on Canadian stations and the U.S.. There's never been a problem with it. They just explained that Valerie was "killed" and they brought in Sandy Duncan to take over the household.

To me, its MORE confusing when an actor/actress leaves a show and they replace them with another actor/actress - like in Bewitched and Rosanne.

Shelly Long was one of the two main stars in Cheers, yet when she left they replaced her with Rebecca and they show ran just fine - (actually improved imo) and ran longer (6 yrs more) than the 5 years Shelly had been on the show.

I don't know who these "high class people" are, but they either don't really know what they're talking about or its an excuse. I think Spade is mainly responsible for the show's demise. I was still watching it after John's death when they brought in James Garner, but once Spade was on I wouldn't watch another episode all the way through. I think they made the mistake in casting him and for whatever reason, don't want to publicize that they messed up. They may also feel that the subsequent shows after John's death just weren't good enough to sustain syndication.

Some high class people I have asked have all said that is the reason the show was canceled. It would have been hard promoting the show in syndication.




No offense then but these high class people are stupid idiots. Suddenly Susan, Gimme A Break, and Chico & The Man all are shows where an actor has passed away during the run and they managed to be okay in syndication. TV Land has shown Chico & The Man a lot of times and even showed a 48 hour marathon once of the show I believe. 8SR would have been ok in syndication.

Yeah, I think they're using that as an excuse to justify cancelling it. Typical ABC :mad: :rolleyes:

I think it is a poor reason, 8SR is airing in dual runs around the world - where people are less likely to know that John Ritter died, so it would not be a huge deal.

No offense then but these high class people are stupid idiots. Suddenly Susan, Gimme A Break, and Chico & The Man all are shows where an actor has passed away during the run and they managed to be okay in syndication. TV Land has shown Chico & The Man a lot of times and even showed a 48 hour marathon once of the show I believe. 8SR would have been ok in syndication.

TV Land didn't air Chico and the Man until like 30 years later, though. I'm talking about the normal 5 day a week local channel syndication where the production company chooses the episodes to air. In cable, the cable networks choose the episodes. I'm sure 8SR will be in some sort of syndie, but not the one where the production company makes millions from and chooses the episodes. It'll probably go to cable or some locals, where the locals can choose what episodes to air, like how some older shows do in local syndie today (Taxi, Diff'rent Strokes, etc.).

Besides Chico the other shows you mentioned didn't lose their star player. And also Chico (Freddie Prinze) was in the majority of the run while John was only in the first season + plus 3 season two episodes.

While I am saddened by the cancelation of the show, this reason is a good reason, I think. We will still see the show in reruns in some form, much like Chico and the Man, but not the normal 5 day a week syndie where the production company chooses the episodes for the entire nation. The ratings for the show didn't have much to do with this one, if that was the case Less Than Perfect and Jake in Progress would have been canceled, too. Less Than Perfect is only renewed because of syndication. They'll probably air its 13 episodes in March or April, or even maybe hold off until the summer. I predict since it has been renewed for next season, it'll be back for 13 episodes or so the following year (06-07), then it'll be gone.

That explains Less than Perfect, but I'm still lost about Jake in Progress, what reason did it have for renewal?

That explains Less than Perfect, but I'm still lost about Jake in Progress, what reason did it have for renewal?

I think that is back because Emily's Reasons Why Not has been so highly praised, and they couldn't find a companion for it, so Jake was brought back. They also justified by saying Jake is back because it didn't have a companion last season. I think Jake in Progress is a smart and witty show, so I'm glad it is back, let's just hope it can survive on Mondays.

88. Hope & Faith ABC 6.9 2.4/8 (84) -17/-20
90. 8 Simple Rules ABC 6.8 2.1/7 (96) -32/-42
94. Less Than Perfect ABC 6.2 2.3/7 (88) -30/-38
96. Complete Savages ABC 6.1 2.1/7 (96) N/A

I would call that a big difference between 8 Simple Rules and Complete Savages. Heck, look at Less Than Perfect and it was renewed. This makes absolutely no sense to me at all! Hope and Faith was right up there with 8SR's so this makes no sense at all. All I can think is that they were trying to save money due to David Spade/grampa Jim or the network is aiming towards an older audience. All I can say though is that the Neilson ratings are the most assinine method of mesuring how many people watch a show. They really need to find a new way because it's laughable how few neilson households there really are. Screw you ABC!

Those numbers just deepen the mystery of why ABC cancelled 8SR. By the eyeball test, the overall ratings difference of .1 between 8SR and H&F looks like a statistical tie.

Less Than Perfect is only renewed because of syndication. They'll probably air its 13 episodes in March or April, or even maybe hold off until the summer. I predict since it has been renewed for next season, it'll be back for 13 episodes or so the following year (06-07), then it'll be gone.

Well than ABC is dumber than I think (and I think they are pretty dumb). You mean to tell me they are going to have a terrible rated show on their schedule just for syndication ? I know syndication is important, but I still think getting ratings is more important. 8SR would have given them a better rating in primetime, and despite what they think, it would have been bigger in syndication. Very few people are going to waiting to see LTP come out of it cocoon in midseason, nor is there many people waiting to see this show in syndication. It just does not have the following that 8SR has. With all apologies to the few LTP fans here, the show just does not have the passionate fan base that 8SR had.

How many of us would have been just waiting to run and watch 8SR had it made a midseason debut next year compared to the LTP audience ? Also, how many of us would have flocked to watch the show in syndication, and especially to see the John Ritter episodes. I just don't see the following and passion for LTP that 8SR has. I still think this was an incredibly stupid mistake by ABC. And by that I mean both the canceling of 8SR, and the renewing of LTP. I still can't decide which is dumber. Somehow I think the renewing of LTP is even dumber. I still think when it comes back midseason the ratings will be so bad that they will be forced to cancel it next year. Unless they put it on after Desperate Housewives or Lost the ratings will be terrible for LTP. You watch. Just remember I was the first guy to predict 8SR's cancelation, and sadly I was right. LTP will have terrible ratings and be canceled. The only way it survives is if it has an incredible time slot.

Well than ABC is dumber than I think (and I think they are pretty dumb). You mean to tell me they are going to have a terrible rated show on their schedule just for syndication ? I know syndication is important, but I still think getting ratings is more important. 8SR would have given them a better rating in primetime, and despite what they think, it would have been bigger in syndication. Very few people are going to waiting to see LTP come out of it cocoon in midseason, nor is there many people waiting to see this show in syndication. It just does not have the following that 8SR has. With all apologies to the few LTP fans here, the show just does not have the passionate fan base that 8SR had.

How many of us would have been just waiting to run and watch 8SR had it made a midseason debut next year compared to the LTP audience ? Also, how many of us would have flocked to watch the show in syndication, and especially to see the John Ritter episodes. I just don't see the following and passion for LTP that 8SR has. I still think this was an incredibly stupid mistake by ABC. And by that I mean both the canceling of 8SR, and the renewing of LTP. I still can't decide which is dumber. Somehow I think the renewing of LTP is even dumber. I still think when it comes back midseason the ratings will be so bad that they will be forced to cancel it next year. Unless they put it on after Desperate Housewives or Lost the ratings will be terrible for LTP. You watch. Just remember I was the first guy to predict 8SR's cancelation, and sadly I was right. LTP will have terrible ratings and be canceled. The only way it survives is if it has an incredible time slot.



Here we go again ohno:


You are assuming an awful lot. Less Than Perfect's ratings stayed consistent each season. 8SR's ratings dropped from season to season, that's what counts in the long run, yes LTP may be a lower rated than 8SR, but it kept it's ratings, that was probably a factor as well.

Let's see what would a network rather have a show that loses ratings from season to season, or a show that stays consistent with it's ratings each season.

Wow that's a tough one ;)

Here we go again ohno:


You are assuming an awful lot. Less Than Perfect's ratings stayed consistent each season. 8SR's ratings dropped from season to season, that's what counts in the long run, yes LTP may be a lower rated than 8SR, but it kept it's ratings, that was probably a factor as well.

Let's see what would a network rather have a show that loses ratings from season to season, or a show that stays consistent with it's ratings each season.

Wow that's a tough one ;)

Look, I know there are some LTP fans here, and you have a right to like your show. However, 8SR drew 600,000 more fans than LTP every week, and the ratings prove that. And don't forget that the 8:00 time slot is much worse than the 9:30 time slot on Fridays. The bottom line is 8SR just has more of a following whether you care to admit it or not. I think LTP was only renewed because it was in the right place at the right time. If 8SR did not have these syndication problems LTP would have certainly be gone. LTP may have consistent ratings, but it is consisently bad. It couldn't even hold the meager ratings from Hope and Faith. I bet if 8SR was in the 9:30 time slot it would have not only held the Hope and Faith ratings, but maybe even built upon it.

Just one other thing I was thinking about regarding ABC and their dumb syndication decision. Why in the world did they order two additional episodes of 8SR this year if it thought it could not syndicate it ? 8SR had 24 episodes this year, and LTP had only 22. Why wouldn't they give LTP more episodes if they wanted the show for syndication ? If they knew they wanted to syndicate LTP over 8SR than they should have planned their episode inventory better. 8SR has 76 episodes in the bank, and LTP only has 68. I think ABC has no idea what they are doing.

Also, if ABC thought it could not syndicate 8SR than it probably should have just canceled it after season 2. The ratings were already dropping after the Goodbye episode, and if it never had syndication plans it just should have dropped it then.

Just one other thing I was thinking about regarding ABC and their dumb syndication decision. Why in the world did they order two additional episodes of 8SR this year if it thought it could not syndicate it ? 8SR had 24 episodes this year, and LTP had only 22. Why wouldn't they give LTP more episodes if they wanted the show for syndication ? If they knew they wanted to syndicate LTP over 8SR than they should have planned their episode inventory better. 8SR has 76 episodes in the bank, and LTP only has 68. I think ABC has no idea what they are doing.

Also, if ABC thought it could not syndicate 8SR than it probably should have just canceled it after season 2. The ratings were already dropping after the Goodbye episode, and if it never had syndication plans it just should have dropped it then.I was thinking the same thing. :nod:

With all apologies to the few LTP fans here, the show just does not have the passionate fan base that 8SR had.

I (speaking as a LTP fan) will agree with you to a point. I mean here at the Sitcoms Online Messageboards, 8SR board is more popular than the LTP board. And of course the 8SR fans have been through a lot, with the death of John Ritter. And I think 8SR would do great in syndication.

It's ABC's fault that both 8SR and LTP's ratings have dropped. As I understand it, both shows did quite well on Tuesdays. At one point I believe LTP beat out an episode of Frasier. Once ABC moved both shows to Fridays, their ratings dropped and both shows looked like they were getting canceled.

Why can't they just promote Katey and the three kids? Why does it have to be either John Ritter or James Garner? I mean I don't know much about syndication rights or anything, and I'm not trying to sound like a know-it-all. I just don't see how that could be such a big problem (Don't worry Pav, I believe you, I just don't understand it).

One thing I don't get is why did they have to cancel 8SR? I mean, couldn't it get renewed and NOT go into syndication? Or is that something that all shows have to do past a certain point?

I'm assuming that cast salaries were also a factor. 8SR has one big name star and two well known tv stars who were probably pulling down at leats $100,000 an episode each. LTP doesn't have any.

Less Than Perfect's ratings stayed consistent each season. 8SR's ratings dropped from season to season, that's what counts in the long run, yes LTP may be a lower rated than 8SR, but it kept it's ratings, that was probably a factor as well.



Not true. Less Than Perfect is down 30% from last year and 38% in adults. And LTP was declining in the ratings in season two. It did decent in S1, though. While 8SR was also down 32% from last year and 42% in adults, it was still higher rated than LTP. So, that tells you canceling 8SR was not a ratings thing. I think they think LTP will bring in value in 5 day a week local syndication and I respect their decision. But we WILL see 8 Simple Rules in some sort of syndication. Whether it be on cable or limited locals, it will be done. It just won't be the normal syndie where the production company decides which episodes. So, maybe this is better, lol, we will get to see the episodes in order, rather than jumbled.

Here's a commercial for syndication I made up.

Sometimes John Ritter's there. Sometimes James Garner's there. But something that's always there are those 8 simple rules. Watch 8 Simple Rules on (name of station). :)

Hey, they could do what they did with "Saved by the Bell". They included the "Miss Bliss" episodes in syndication and then had Zack open each episode. "When I was in Junior High, this happened." Why can't they shoot some new openings for the Ritter episodes with one of the castmembers saying, "This happened before Grandpa and C.J. moved in" or somthing.

I'm talking about the normal 5 day a week local channel syndication where the production company chooses the episodes to air.

As long as Seinfeld and The Simpsons and Friends are popular, there's no room for any other show anyway, popular or not. Screw syndication...just put it on DVD.

Trust me,ABC will come crying back to Katey Sagal and James Garner when their replacement pilots fail miserably. I read the info about those new shows,and they all sound awful except for the Geena Davis drama.ABC pisses me off because they let TGIF go down the toilet once again.

I am the guy who first predicted that 8 Simple Rules was facing cancellation all the way back in February. If everyone remembers here, I had to fight everyone off here in this forum, because most people here thought I was crazy. See here :

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=132062

Well, the point is I have another prediction. You can write it down and check me next year. The prediction is Less Than Perfect will never make it past next season. It will be canceled after the 2005-2006 season. I know syndication is important, but it also needs to get some kind of ratings to get renewed. This show just does not draw an audience. Just look at its ratings this year. I don't see why the ratings will increase. The only slim chance I can seeing it making it is if it gets a very, very plum time slot. The only way I see it drawing any kind of audience is if ABC ends Rodney's season very early and puts it on after According to Jim. The only problem with that is by then American Idol will be on, and Jim and its 8:30PM partner will be in big ratings trouble anyway. If you look at the other three one hour blocks that ABC has set up for sitcoms I do not see how LTP can succeed in any of those time slots.

And, no LTP fans, I am not picking on your show. I am just stating it the way it is. This show does not draw an audience. It could not even hold the small Hope and Faith audience. I was a huge fan of 8SR and I predicted its demise, and now admittedly I am not a fan of LTP, but I cannot see almost any circumstance that ABC will renew it if the ratings are as low or lower than last seasons.

I am the guy who first predicted that 8 Simple Rules was facing cancellation all the way back in February. If everyone remembers here, I had to fight everyone off here in this forum, because most people here thought I was crazy. See here :

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=132062

That was an outrageous prediction back then. Especially since in January and February the show was always above a 5 rating.

And who is to say Less than Perfect will air during the season next season? They can always air it in the summer and burn off 13 episodes then and do the same the following year and make a ton of money out of it in syndication in 2007.

That was an outrageous prediction back then. Especially since in January and February the show was always above a 5 rating.

And who is to say Less than Perfect will air during the season next season? They can always air it in the summer and burn off 13 episodes then and do the same the following year and make a ton of money out of it in syndication in 2007.

Well, it is really more of what I was hearing in various media outlets than a prediction. Unfortunately, my "outrageous" prediction did come true.

As to LTP, I cannot see them burning off episodes two years in a row. I think they may do this for one year. Burning off two years worth of episodes just for syndication would really be something. I also don't think this show will be so popular in syndication anyway. It has a limited audience now, so how many people are going to watch it in syndication ?

Trust me,ABC will come crying back to Katey Sagal and James Garner when their replacement pilots fail miserably. I read the info about those new shows,and they all sound awful except for the Geena Davis drama.ABC pisses me off because they let TGIF go down the toilet once again.

:rolleyes:

Oh for pete's sake... THE SHOW WAS GETTING TERRIBLE RATINGS! Television is a business in the end. You fire employees who don't do well, same deal here.

TGIF overall placed 3rd during the season... behind CBS and NBC.

:rolleyes:

Oh for pete's sake... THE SHOW WAS GETTING TERRIBLE RATINGS! Television is a business in the end. You fire employees who don't do well, same deal here.

TGIF overall placed 3rd during the season... behind CBS and NBC.

I know I keep seeing people here act like 8SR was a ratings blockbuster or something :rolleyes:

True 8SR wasn't a ratings blockbuster, but it was a great comedy. Besides Reba, it was the only sitcom I loved watching on Fridays. If your favorite sitcom or drama was canceled, wouldn't you be acting the same way?

I know I keep seeing people here act like 8SR was a ratings blockbuster or something :rolleyes:
Nobody is saying it has great ratings, just better than some renewed shows, therefore Rating's aren't the reason it was cancelled.

Brent, the show was not doing that bad in the ratings. I wouldn't call it terrible, it did modestly for its time period (you failed to mention it usually was 2nd in its slot among adults). If the ratings were TERRIBLE (as you like to call it), then the show would have been replaced ASAP, just like they did with Complete Savages. And again, the ratings have NOTHING to do with the cancelation. If that was the case, Less Than Perfect would have been out first.

True 8SR wasn't a ratings blockbuster, but it was a great comedy. Besides Reba, it was the only sitcom I loved watching on Fridays. If your favorite sitcom or drama was canceled, wouldn't you be acting the same way?

Actually... it was my favorite current sitcom(that's not saying a whole lot).

Here we go again ohno:


You are assuming an awful lot. Less Than Perfect's ratings stayed consistent each season. 8SR's ratings dropped from season to season, that's what counts in the long run, yes LTP may be a lower rated than 8SR, but it kept it's ratings, that was probably a factor as well.

Let's see what would a network rather have a show that loses ratings from season to season, or a show that stays consistent with it's ratings each season.

Wow that's a tough one ;)

Ad rates and how much money the network makes depends on how many people are watching at any given time, not how many people are watching now compared to another time. Also, you are ignoring that 8SR was moved from Tuesday, a night when many more people are watching than Friday. If what you say is true a show that only had one viewer who watched every week would be renewed over a higher rated show that lost some of its audience.

As Pavan has said it can't just be a ratings thing with 8SR. Personally, I think a network should renew shows with the best ratings and not be renewing shows based on their syndication ability. By the way 8SR was the highest rated sitcom on Friday night (and don't forget 8:00 is the worst time slot), too bad it doesn't seem to matter to ABC. See here :

Next up was ABC (households: 3.7/7, #2; adults 18-49: 1.6, #3) with its mix of "8 Simple Rules" (households: 2.9/6, #6; adults 18-49: 1.2, #8), "Complete Savages" (households: 2.7/5, #T9; adults 18-49: 1.1, #9), "Hope & Faith" (households: 2.7/5, #T9; adults 18-49: 1.3, #7), "Less Than Perfect" (households: 2.7/5, #T9; adults 18-49: 1.4, #6) and "20/20" (households: 5.5/10, #2; adults 18-49: 2.4, #1).

No I think they are just self absorbed in their new comedies.It's not a ratings issue,I think.

[QUOTE=TMC]1. John Ritter's death obviously played a factor because the entire show was built around him and his personality. TV shows were one of the main stars suddenly die during its run usually haven't had a good track record. We've had "The Royal Family" (Redd Foxx), "Chico & the Man" (Freddie Prinze, Sr.), "Dennis the Menace" (Joseph Kearns), "Gimmie a Break" (Dolph Sweet), "Newsradio" (Phil Hartman), "Suddenly Susan" (David Strickland), "Cover Up" (Jon-Erik Hexum), and "Petticoat Junction" (Bea Benaderet). Maybe the results would've been much different if the show was about Katey Sagal, David Spade, and James Garner from the very beginning.



um hun, Brooke Sheilds was the star of Suddenly Susan, David Strickland was simply a supporting player on that show... and while his death did affect that show. the reason that show was canned was simply because of Ratings and the fact that the scripts sucked.

I am the guy who first predicted that 8 Simple Rules was facing cancellation all the way back in February. If everyone remembers here, I had to fight everyone off here in this forum, because most people here thought I was crazy. See here :

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=132062

Well, the point is I have another prediction. You can write it down and check me next year. The prediction is Less Than Perfect will never make it past next season. It will be canceled after the 2005-2006 season. I know syndication is important, but it also needs to get some kind of ratings to get renewed. This show just does not draw an audience. Just look at its ratings this year. I don't see why the ratings will increase. The only slim chance I can seeing it making it is if it gets a very, very plum time slot. The only way I see it drawing any kind of audience is if ABC ends Rodney's season very early and puts it on after According to Jim. The only problem with that is by then American Idol will be on, and Jim and its 8:30PM partner will be in big ratings trouble anyway. If you look at the other three one hour blocks that ABC has set up for sitcoms I do not see how LTP can succeed in any of those time slots.

And, no LTP fans, I am not picking on your show. I am just stating it the way it is. This show does not draw an audience. It could not even hold the small Hope and Faith audience. I was a huge fan of 8SR and I predicted its demise, and now admittedly I am not a fan of LTP, but I cannot see almost any circumstance that ABC will renew it if the ratings are as low or lower than last seasons.

LTP will air until they have 100 episodes for syndication, as it is a Disney-Owned show so it will stay until they can syndicate it. but all your points are valid

Ok, I know we're beating this topic to death but I had a thought-- why would the execs at ABC fear people might get confused if they suddenly don't see John Ritter in the syndication? They weren't worried about that when "Chrissy Snow" was axed from Three's Company. I'd say she was a major character and I believe that people would've noticed her absense as well. Gradually audiences got used to the new blondes and moved on....I understand John Ritter was a major character in 8 simple rules....but I do think that the ensemble has a great fanbase as well. I don't see how they could get so confused about him not being there, unless they lived in a bubble.

1) The most obvious reason. It seemed like the show only made it to its third season, because they were at least trying to stretch it to the synidcation line.

2) Basically the reason that truned me away from the show. Without its starring character, the whole show was lost. The newer characters didn't do much for me at all.

3) To an extent, Katey Sagal was more of a supporter in this one. I've known her to play the more offbeat roles, particularly Leela from Futurama.

4) Somewhere in the same vein as Reason #2. New characters usually ruin any TV show if they're overexposed, or if brought in for no reason. In this case, it was nobody's fault that this happened, so it was only natural that the results wouldn't work out.

Ok, I know we're beating this topic to death but I had a thought-- why would the execs at ABC fear people might get confused if they suddenly don't see John Ritter in the syndication? They weren't worried about that when "Chrissy Snow" was axed from Three's Company. I'd say she was a major character and I believe that people would've noticed her absense as well. Gradually audiences got used to the new blondes and moved on....I understand John Ritter was a major character in 8 simple rules....but I do think that the ensemble has a great fanbase as well. I don't see how they could get so confused about him not being there, unless they lived in a bubble.


we are talking about two totally different situations. back when Three's Company was on, syndication wasn't nearly as important as it is now-a-days... now if a network wants to make a profit they need shows that will get sold into syndication, this wasn't the case in the 70's when syndication was still an up-and-coming market...

but i agree that people would understand, especially as the show did a good job of establishing what happened to Ritters character...

Ok, I know we're beating this topic to death but I had a thought-- why would the execs at ABC fear people might get confused if they suddenly don't see John Ritter in the syndication? They weren't worried about that when "Chrissy Snow" was axed from Three's Company. I'd say she was a major character and I believe that people would've noticed her absense as well. Gradually audiences got used to the new blondes and moved on....I understand John Ritter was a major character in 8 simple rules....but I do think that the ensemble has a great fanbase as well. I don't see how they could get so confused about him not being there, unless they lived in a bubble.

I am sure Pav is accurately repeating what he was told and that his sources are authoritative, but first ABC makes a decision that doesn't seem to be justified by the numbers then leaks the lamest explanation I have ever heard. That makes me wonder whether the people who originated the "explanation" are being truthful and what the real reason was for the cancellation of 8 Simple Rules.

Another reason why the show might of got canceled. I think since 8 Simple Rules moved to Friday nights, the show ratings probably starting going down hill because most people are out on Friday nights doing something and they are not home to watch 8 Simple Rules. In my opinion, 8 Simple Rules was better when it was on Tuesday nights. Most people are home on Tuesday nights because its a regular work week and people are most likely home. The ratings were most likely excellent when it was on Tuesday nights. 8 Simple Rules should of stayed on Tuesday nights, not moved to Friday nights. Maybe if it didn't change to Friday nights like it did than maybe 8 Simple Rules maybe would of came back for more seasons.

Another reason why the show might of got canceled. I think since 8 Simple Rules moved to Friday nights, the show ratings probably starting going down hill because most people are out on Friday nights doing something and they are not home to watch 8 Simple Rules. In my opinion, 8 Simple Rules was better when it was on Tuesday nights. Most people are home on Tuesday nights because its a regular work week and people are most likely home. The ratings were most likely excellent when it was on Tuesday nights. 8 Simple Rules should of stayed on Tuesday nights, not moved to Friday nights. Maybe if it didn't change to Friday nights like it did than maybe 8 Simple Rules maybe would of came back for more seasons.

The odd thing is, that after the end of Season 2, when it was still on Tuesdays, even though they lost their star, the ratings were only down a little bit from Season 1. You might think, not bad, leave it where it is, it's a hit for the half the season when it is not up against American Idol. You might even think, move it to a later timeslot on Tuesday, get it away from American Idol. But not ABC. They not only send it to the Friday night "death slot," but they also put it up against Joan of Arcadia and What I Like About You, splitting the young viewers who were at home 3 ways. Brilliant counter-programming.

Even stranger is that in Season 2, they aired it on Friday one night and the ratings were even worse than when they were up against American Idol. What that tells us is that ABC would have to be pretty stupid not to know what was going to happen when they moved 8SR to Fridays.

Another reason why the show might of got canceled. I think since 8 Simple Rules moved to Friday nights, the show ratings probably starting going down hill because most people are out on Friday nights doing something and they are not home to watch 8 Simple Rules. In my opinion, 8 Simple Rules was better when it was on Tuesday nights. Most people are home on Tuesday nights because its a regular work week and people are most likely home. The ratings were most likely excellent when it was on Tuesday nights. 8 Simple Rules should of stayed on Tuesday nights, not moved to Friday nights. Maybe if it didn't change to Friday nights like it did than maybe 8 Simple Rules maybe would of came back for more seasons.


sounds good in theroy, but thats not quiet the way networks make programming decisions. they thought probally that a younger audience would be attracted on friday nights, which networks need and want. so moving it to fridays made perfect sense.

sounds good in theroy, but thats not quiet the way networks make programming decisions. they thought probally that a younger audience would be attracted on friday nights, which networks need and want. so moving it to fridays made perfect sense.

Yeah, but putting 8SR up against Joan of Arcadia and What I Like About You split younger viewers three ways. A better strategy would have been to put programming on that could take away some of 1st place Dateline's older audience, not to try to take younger viewers away from 2nd place Joan of Arcadia and 4th place What I Like About You. ABC already tried 8SR once on Friday nights in Season 2 and knew it would do worse on Fridays than on Tuesdays against American Idol.

Yeah, but putting 8SR up against Joan of Arcadia and What I Like About You split younger viewers three ways. A better strategy would have been to put programming on that could take away some of 1st place Dateline's older audience, not to try to take younger viewers away from 2nd place Joan of Arcadia and 4th place What I Like About You. ABC already tried 8SR once on Friday nights in Season 2 and knew it would do worse on Fridays than on Tuesdays against American Idol.


i see what you are saying, but networks don't want to attract an older audience, its all about the younger demographic... thats what networks want.

i see what you are saying, but networks don't want to attract an older audience, its all about the younger demographic... thats what networks want.

Well, they could take some of Dateline's 18-49 audience better with programming other than 8SR. If they wanted 8SR to regain it's young audience (and I think that would have been a good idea), they should have moved it to a night and time slot where they young audience wasn't split three ways.

I know this is a moot point, but look at 8SR ratings last Friday night compared to the other ABC sitcoms :

"8 Simple Rules" (households: 3.1/6, #5; adults 18-49: 1.2, #T6), "Complete Savages" (households: 2.7/5, #T8; adults 18-49: 1.0, #9), "Hope & Faith" (households: 2.7/5, #T8; adults 18-49: 1.1, #8), "Less Than Perfect" (households: 2.6/5, #11; adults 18-49: 1.2, #T6)

I know we have heard about the syndication reasons, but it is still a total shame that ABC renewed Hope and Faith and LTP over 8SR. Look how much better it did in on Friday in a much lesser time slot. LTP got a lower rating than Complete Savages.

Yeah I agree with that. ABC was crazy not to renew the show.

I'm from England and I've been watching 8SR on abc1 here. I hadn't heard of John Ritter before this (sorry) and I was a tiny bit confused when I saw the first episode without him, but its not that hard to figure out, and the announcer tells you the situation before most episodes anyway. I've got to admit John was the main focus but surely the kids and Katey Sagal were interesting enough to find some storylines? Sad to find its been cancelled and I hope abc listens to you and puts it on dvd soon.

I'm from England and I've been watching 8SR on abc1 here. I hadn't heard of John Ritter before this (sorry) and I was a tiny bit confused when I saw the first episode without him, but its not that hard to figure out, and the announcer tells you the situation before most episodes anyway. I've got to admit John was the main focus but surely the kids and Katey Sagal were interesting enough to find some storylines? Sad to find its been cancelled and I hope abc listens to you and puts it on dvd soon.


are you people all stupid? they clearly explained that the character of Paul Hennessy died... they had like three episodes about the family mourning... so all they had to do was show those episodes or at least one of them in syndication and people with half a brain could figure it out.

are you people all stupid? they clearly explained that the character of Paul Hennessy died... they had like three episodes about the family mourning... so all they had to do was show those episodes or at least one of them in syndication and people with half a brain could figure it out.

I think the only one who is stupid here is ABC. The clearly cancelled the show, because they thought it would be a problem in syndication. I just can't see any other reason they renewed LTP over 8SR. Even in the summer repeats 8SR is still the top rated sitcom on Friday night, and it is the one that is cancelled. ABC is a bunch of morons to cancel this show. and renews shows like Less Than Perfect, Rodney and Jake In Progress over it. To this day, I still cannot believe they did that. :mad:

I think the only one who is stupid here is ABC. The clearly cancelled the show, because they thought it would be a problem in syndication. I just can't see any other reason they renewed LTP over 8SR. Even in the summer repeats 8SR is still the top rated sitcom on Friday night, and it is the one that is cancelled. ABC is a bunch of morons to cancel this show. and renews shows like Less Than Perfect, Rodney and Jake In Progress over it. To this day, I still cannot believe they did that. :mad:


well i know that Less Than Perfect keeps getting renewed because it is owned by ABC/Disney and thus finiacally more porfitable to them in the long run.

well i know that Less Than Perfect keeps getting renewed because it is owned by ABC/Disney and thus finiacally more porfitable to them in the long run.

Sorry, but 8 Simple Rules is owned also by Disney. They both are Touchstone Television shows. So ABC apparently thought LTP was a better syndication show for them, because 8SR always did and continues to beat it in the ratings every week.

I just stumbled across this thread. I didn't realize that 8 Simple Rules was cancelled. That's too bad. I know it had a devoted and large fan base. I'm sorry for all the fans here. It's difficult when one of your favorite shows is cancelled. I feel the same way about American Dreams.

Yeah, we experience withdrawl. It is difficult,but I hope it eventually gets syndication or DVD release.

Yes, I agree John's death is a major reason the ratings went down and the show got cancelled. Another reason I beleive is because after his death the producers added more character that really didn't need to be added at all. They should have let the show gone on with Cate as a single mother instead of adding the grandfather to act as a sort of replacement father for the show.

I think that with John Ritters death the main point of the show was lost. It had been about his reaction to them growing up but then it was forced to change. I agree that without him they didn't really get a good charector to replace him. Instead they added alot of new charectors that wern't very important. For me the show just wasn't funny anymore without him.

I think the show was still funny after John's death. I thought Kaley Cuoco, James Garner and Martin Spanjers were very funny, although I just don't find David Spade's brand of comedy funny. Someone on another board said his character was less mature than the kids and I agree. Those stupid sight gags made me want to throw my shoes through the TV set. I also think Kerry was not funny, just annoying.Though I think the show was at its best when John and Kaley were riffing back and forth.

I think it's still somewhat of a mystery why ABC cancelled 8 Simple Rules. They moved it to the tough Friday timeslot, when ratings only fell a bit in Season 2 (Ratings fell more within both Seasons 1 and 2, due to American Idol, than they did from the end of Season 1 to Season 2). Still, ABC had to ignore the usual ratings standards to cancell it: Less Than Perfect's ratings were lower and Hope and Faith's were a statistical tie with 8 Simple Rules. Then they put out this cockamamie story that audiences wouldn't understand that John Ritter died and was "replaced" by James Garner and David Spade.

I have heard only 2 plausible explanations why 8 Simple Rules was cancelled. One is that 8 Simple Rules was offered and turned down the midseason replacement slot that eventually went to Less Than Perfect. However, that wouldn't explain why Hope and Faith, with about the same rating, was an early renewal, while 8 Simple Rules was cancelled. The best explanation I have heard is that costs were to great for the ratings it was getting and that one or more of the highest paid cast members had "ironclad" contracts where the only way to avoid paying them the agreed amount was to cancel the show. One thing that is overlooked in explaining why 8SRs ratings were low enough that ABC could make even the shakiest justification for cancelling it is counterprogramming. In season 1, 8SR debuted at #4, I believe, but finished the season at #45. That is a pretty steep drop, due to competition from American Idol (note John Ritter was still alive then). The (unfortunately from my pov) brilliant piece of counterprogramming by Fox was followed by one of the most ineffective instances by ABC or any network in memory. They not only moved it to Friday where the audience is small and a lot of young viewers are out, but against Joan of Arcadia (which finished second but was still cancelled) and What I Like About You, which split the young viewers who were at home even further and neutralized their biggest draw imho, Kaley Cuoco. 8SR didn't have an 18-49 draw to challenge Dateline's domination of this demo and the time slot as a whole. I think John Ritter's death led to 8SRs cancellation in a different way than I have heard most people express: if he had been alive, he could have peeled off some of those viewers from Dateline and kept the show from being cancelled (though if he had lived, the show may never have been moved, we will never know that for sure.)

But that's just water under the bridge. Kaley will be joining my favorite drama with my other three favorite women of TV this fall, and starting January I will get to watch the three seasons of 8 Simple Rules again on the WB, so I'm not angry at these inconsistencies like I once was. All's well that ends well.

I think the show was still funny after John's death. I thought Kaley Cuoco, James Garner and Martin Spanjers were very funny, although I just don't find David Spade's brand of comedy funny. Someone on another board said his character was less mature than the kids and I agree. Those stupid sight gags made me want to throw my shoes through the TV set. I also think Kerry was not funny, just annoying.Though I think the show was at its best when John and Kaley were riffing back and forth.

I think it's still somewhat of a mystery why ABC cancelled 8 Simple Rules. They moved it to the tough Friday timeslot, when ratings only fell a bit in Season 2 (Ratings fell more within both Seasons 1 and 2, due to American Idol, than they did from the end of Season 1 to Season 2). Still, ABC had to ignore the usual ratings standards to cancell it: Less Than Perfect's ratings were lower and Hope and Faith's were a statistical tie with 8 Simple Rules. Then they put out this cockamamie story that audiences wouldn't understand that John Ritter died and was "replaced" by James Garner and David Spade.

I have heard only 2 plausible explanations why 8 Simple Rules was cancelled. One is that 8 Simple Rules was offered and turned down the midseason replacement slot that eventually went to Less Than Perfect. However, that wouldn't explain why Hope and Faith, with about the same rating, was an early renewal, while 8 Simple Rules was cancelled. The best explanation I have heard is that costs were to great for the ratings it was getting and that one or more of the highest paid cast members had "ironclad" contracts where the only way to avoid paying them the agreed amount was to cancel the show. One thing that is overlooked in explaining why 8SRs ratings were low enough that ABC could make even the shakiest justification for cancelling it is counterprogramming. In season 1, 8SR debuted at #4, I believe, but finished the season at #45. That is a pretty steep drop, due to competition from American Idol (note John Ritter was still alive then). The (unfortunately from my pov) brilliant piece of counterprogramming by Fox was followed by one of the most ineffective instances by ABC or any network in memory. They not only moved it to Friday where the audience is small and a lot of young viewers are out, but against Joan of Arcadia (which finished second but was still cancelled) and What I Like About You, which split the young viewers who were at home even further and neutralized their biggest draw imho, Kaley Cuoco. 8SR didn't have an 18-49 draw to challenge Dateline's domination of this demo and the time slot as a whole. I think John Ritter's death led to 8SRs cancellation in a different way than I have heard most people express: if he had been alive, he could have peeled off some of those viewers from Dateline and kept the show from being cancelled (though if he had lived, the show may never have been moved, we will never know that for sure.)

But that's just water under the bridge. Kaley will be joining my favorite drama with my other three favorite women of TV this fall, and starting January I will get to watch the three seasons of 8 Simple Rules again on the WB, so I'm not angry at these inconsistencies like I once was. All's well that ends well.


I mostly agree with you, although imho Katey Segal is a big enough draw for the dateline crowd, she was just as big a star as John Ritter was.

I keep reading where people think that it was John Ritters death is one of the main reasons that this show is cancelled. Ever think that maybe after 3 seasons with John Ritter it may have been cancelled also.
We will never know, but we do know that it lasted another 2 seasons without John Ritter, and I am a fan of his as well as Katey Sagal. David Spade is/was not funny and this may have a lot to do with the decline of the show, but also as stated before 8SR got a big fan base at the start of the second season out of curiosity. I tuned in to see how they would bid JR goodbye, and tuned out not long after that when they brought in David Spade. Many people tuned in for curiosity nothing more, bringing the ratings up and then when the whole capitalizing on JR death was over they quickly tuned out, thus bringing ratings back down.
If I recall correctly, didnt the cast help in making the decision to keep going on with the show, not just ABC/Disney whoever owns the show?

Syndication - As most of us know JR passed during the run of the show but not everyone tuned into the show while he was alive. The syndication out of order would be confusing to people who have not watched the show in the past 1st run. If it is shown in order then it would be reasonable to show the episodes, but out of order or skipping any episodes that deal with JR and/or his death would simply be disrespectful to JR, the show and JR fans.
If it is about who to promote then promote it as a show that started with the late JR or give the promotion to Katey Sagal or just show it in syndication without the promotion of any actor but rather the last sitcom JR started, with started being the key word.

As for saying the only reason people watched was for JR and it was his show, well thats is fine for some of you, but dont take away from the other actors who did contribute to make it a show. This was not a 1 man show, it took other talents to even get it an audience and keep it going for 2 years past the death of JR.

As in life the show moved on past the death of Paul/JR, and in life when someone dies you move on and continue to live.

I mostly agree with you, although imho Katey Segal is a big enough draw for the dateline crowd, she was just as big a star as John Ritter was.

As a matter of personal taste, I agree with you about Katey Sagal. I just meant that the show underperformed among the 18-49 age group and no one in the cast or no storyline could prevent that. You would expect that if anyone could, it would be either Katey Sagal or David Spade, since they are around the same age and people in this group grew up watching them and identifying with them (although I am sure many of the cast members have fans of all ages, I am talking about their core fan base).

I keep reading where people think that it was John Ritters death is one of the main reasons that this show is cancelled. Ever think that maybe after 3 seasons with John Ritter it may have been cancelled also.
We will never know, but we do know that it lasted another 2 seasons without John Ritter, and I am a fan of his as well as Katey Sagal. David Spade is/was not funny and this may have a lot to do with the decline of the show, but also as stated before 8SR got a big fan base at the start of the second season out of curiosity. I tuned in to see how they would bid JR goodbye, and tuned out not long after that when they brought in David Spade. Many people tuned in for curiosity nothing more, bringing the ratings up and then when the whole capitalizing on JR death was over they quickly tuned out, thus bringing ratings back down.
If I recall correctly, didnt the cast help in making the decision to keep going on with the show, not just ABC/Disney whoever owns the show?





Syndication - As most of us know JR passed during the run of the show but not everyone tuned into the show while he was alive. The syndication out of order would be confusing to people who have not watched the show in the past 1st run. If it is shown in order then it would be reasonable to show the episodes, but out of order or skipping any episodes that deal with JR and/or his death would simply be disrespectful to JR, the show and JR fans.
If it is about who to promote then promote it as a show that started with the late JR or give the promotion to Katey Sagal or just show it in syndication without the promotion of any actor but rather the last sitcom JR started, with started being the key word.

As for saying the only reason people watched was for JR and it was his show, well thats is fine for some of you, but dont take away from the other actors who did contribute to make it a show. This was not a 1 man show, it took other talents to even get it an audience and keep it going for 2 years past the death of JR.

As in life the show moved on past the death of Paul/JR, and in life when someone dies you move on and continue to live.

I agree with you about giving credit to all cast members, whoever our personal favorites were and that there is no reason I can see not to show the episodes in order. As far as promoting it, if they showed the episodes in order, that problem is solved, promote it with different people as different seasons are shown. The fact that it will be on the WB in January shows that is not an insurmountable problem.

I think that if they kept Kyle on the show,it would've stayed on the air

I think that if they kept Kyle on the show,it would've stayed on the air

That is one of the most interesting viewpoints I have heard yet. I have always thought he was a nice guy (although a bit of a wuss for putting up with Kerry's henpecking) and very funny and it was a mistake to drop him. More generally, this season they had less of those great minor characters (like Anthony, Andre, Mary Beth and Lacey) they used to have (but they did that some late in the season with "Dorky" Dwayne McDougal).

I just found out the canceled 8 Simple Rules, and I am kinda shocked. It was a very funny show, and it got funnier after Ritter. I liked Ritter, but David Spade and James Garner have done a wonderful job.

Since they have 75 episodes filmed, it is stupid to cancel the show now. They should have done one more season, to get to that magical number of 100 so the show can be syndicated.

The show was starting to get very good.

I just found out the canceled 8 Simple Rules, and I am kinda shocked. It was a very funny show, and it got funnier after Ritter. I liked Ritter, but David Spade and James Garner have done a wonderful job.

Since they have 75 episodes filmed, it is stupid to cancel the show now. They should have done one more season, to get to that magical number of 100 so the show can be syndicated.

The show was starting to get very good.


well the show just got sold into syndication, so maybe it was canceled because it has been sold? maybe they knew it was close to getting syndicated and decided to cancel it. and keep LTP and H&F on the air to collect more episodes to get into syndication.

well the show just got sold into syndication, so maybe it was canceled because it has been sold? maybe they knew it was close to getting syndicated and decided to cancel it. and keep LTP and H&F on the air to collect more episodes to get into syndication.

It's just a test syndication to see how people react to the John to James and David switch. Hopefully people,if you want to see the John episodes,we have to watch all the episodes,John or no John.