what shows that despite high ratings got cancelled, led to you going WTF??

I remember Archie Bunker's Place still ranking in the top 15 when CBS pulled the plug.
The most famous one maybe Bridget Loves Bernie--it ranked #5 for the season, but CBS wanted to end the controversy (which today seems so trivial now) about a Jewish/Catholic intermarriage.

any others you recall?

Christina Applegate's "Jesse." NBC decided that it didn't hold enough of the "Friends" audience, so they canceled it after only two seasons.

Season 1 (1998-1999) - #4 (20.1 million viewers)
Season 2 (1999-2000) - #12 (16.65 million viewers)

:crazy:

what shows that despite high ratings got cancelled, led to you going WTF??

I remember Archie Bunker's Place still ranking in the top 15 when CBS pulled the plug.
The most famous one maybe Bridget Loves Bernie--it ranked #5 for the season, but CBS wanted to end the controversy (which today seems so trivial now) about a Jewish/Catholic intermarriage.

any others you recall?

I've never heard of Bridget Loves Bernie, although that was before my time. That's pretty sad that it was cancelled over something like that. I mean, All in the Family was full of controversies, but they didn't cancel it. I guess I don't understand the difference. But then, people got mad over the dumbest things back then, unfortunately a lot still do.

Hee Haw still in the top five during its last year on network TV but CBS wanted to purge itself of all country programing at the time so it along with Green Acres and The Beverly Hillbillies that were also very popular got the ax due to cBS wanting to cater to the young hip urban crowd.

I've never heard of Bridget Loves Bernie, although that was before my time. That's pretty sad that it was cancelled over something like that. I mean, All in the Family was full of controversies, but they didn't cancel it. I guess I don't understand the difference. But then, people got mad over the dumbest things back then, unfortunately a lot still do.
and what's also puzeling is, the 2 shows aired back to back on the CBS saturday night schedule.

Star Trek: The Next Generation was still playing huge (in fat it was its 2nd best year). The cast was still very inexpensive, in comparison to other major players.

But the thought was with a new trek on tv, they could make a killing at the box office.

What baffled me was why they thought this. The last tv trek (DS9) was dropping quickly in the ratings. VOY would have far less coverage then TNG or DS9 enjoyed. And Trek at the box office dropped year to year when Trek was also new and free on tv.

Christina Applegate's "Jesse." NBC decided that it didn't hold enough of the "Friends" audience, so they canceled it after only two seasons.

Season 1 (1998-1999) - #4 (20.1 million viewers)
Season 2 (1999-2000) - #12 (16.65 million viewers)

:crazy:

nbc did that a lot; they had a show in 1997 called "Something So Right" with Mel Harris and Jere Burns that was fantastic and used to win it's timeslot each week; and yet it was still cancelled. It was picked up the following year by ABC but they made too many changes and it wasn't the same.


NBC also cancelled another great show called "FIRED UP" with Leah Remini and Sharon Lawerence that was excellent and had strong ratings; but never was given a chance to succeed before it was cancelled.

When NBC had the killer THursday lineup many shows in the 830 and 930 time slots got cancelled because of their retention.

NBC wanted 80% retention or better for their half hours as the had very, very strong shows on each of the three hours.

When shows feel to 70% or lower then were toast.

Networks feel that even a test pattern will get some viewers. When a show thats stuck between two very strong show does poorly, they see the viewers that stick with it are only doing it to get to the next show.

Thus that intermediate show is generating little or no interest on its own.

The only problem I ever had with this line is that often NBC did not give those shows a chance to air elsewhere to see if they could perform ok or better on a night that didn't feature such heavy traffic.

And some shows are going to be a bit more niche then others, and thus not have as huge of appeal. But on some nights those types of shows can survive (heck even thrive). But NBC had such a strong lineup (boy how things have changed) they could axe away and still have a killer lineup.

When NBC had the killer THursday lineup many shows in the 830 and 930 time slots got cancelled because of their retention.

NBC wanted 80% retention or better for their half hours as the had very, very strong shows on each of the three hours.

When shows feel to 70% or lower then were toast.

Networks feel that even a test pattern will get some viewers. When a show thats stuck between two very strong show does poorly, they see the viewers that stick with it are only doing it to get to the next show.

Thus that intermediate show is generating little or no interest on its own.

The only problem I ever had with this line is that often NBC did not give those shows a chance to air elsewhere to see if they could perform ok or better on a night that didn't feature such heavy traffic.

And some shows are going to be a bit more niche then others, and thus not have as huge of appeal. But on some nights those types of shows can survive (heck even thrive). But NBC had such a strong lineup (boy how things have changed) they could axe away and still have a killer lineup.

Steve Harvey's "Me and the Boys" was in 20th place for the season it got canceled. That was a dumb move.

Steve Harvey's "Me and the Boys" was in 20th place for the season it got canceled. That was a dumb move.
I agree. I loved that show. Phenom was another show ABC shouldn't have cancelled.

When NBC had the killer THursday lineup many shows in the 830 and 930 time slots got cancelled because of their retention.

NBC wanted 80% retention or better for their half hours as the had very, very strong shows on each of the three hours.

When shows feel to 70% or lower then were toast.

Networks feel that even a test pattern will get some viewers. When a show thats stuck between two very strong show does poorly, they see the viewers that stick with it are only doing it to get to the next show.

Thus that intermediate show is generating little or no interest on its own.

The only problem I ever had with this line is that often NBC did not give those shows a chance to air elsewhere to see if they could perform ok or better on a night that didn't feature such heavy traffic.

And some shows are going to be a bit more niche then others, and thus not have as huge of appeal. But on some nights those types of shows can survive (heck even thrive). But NBC had such a strong lineup (boy how things have changed) they could axe away and still have a killer lineup.
I think the fact that the critics didn't care for them and they were the butt of jokes led NBC just to give up on the shows. I tried to give them a shot but most of them I didn't like. Caroline and the City and Suddenly Susan were okay during their early seasons but I got tired of them. At least those two were tried on other nights and lasted 4 years. Single Guy was awful. That was nother high ranked show that was cancelled after year 2.

Steve Harvey's "Me and the Boys" was in 20th place for the season it got canceled. That was a dumb move.

No doubt! ABC fumbled the ball on that one!

CBS also screwed My Sister Sam over left and right throughout its 2nd season, 1st by moving it from its Monday slot where it aired alongside fellow Monday night stalwarts Newhart and Kate and Allie (MSS ranked #22 in the Nielsens in its 1st season) by putting it up against NBC's Thursday Night Juggernaut line-up and despite the competition it faced, that show held its own and still remained a Top 25 Show and CBS canned it anway.