If it couldn't of course, be on ABC proper like Boy Meets World was. Girl Meets World always felt kind of hamstrung by it being on Disney Channel. On that end, you always got the sense that they couldn't truly tackle deep and sincere real world issues, much like what BMW did with it being on ABC. With it being on Disney Channel, you were always going to risk yourself having to adhere to the more wacky, childish/manufactured (complete with overly bright colors, overacting, and being way too cheesy) means of storytelling like other Disney Channel shows. And even when GMW tried to be serious, they perhaps felt forced (with its over-the-top melodrama and constant grand statements) whereas BMW was better able at making the topics feel important.

I'm glad that Girl Meets World was on the Disney network because that it was kept if from getting too adult oriented.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

On the same token, maybe in hindsight, Girl Meets World actually would've fit in fine on Disney Channel, but in a different era. Like, imagine if GMW came along during Disney Channel's "Zoog" (https://disney.fandom.com/wiki/Zoog_Disney) era, where they were more of an edgy, yet wholesome network for young teens. You can argue that Lizzie Maguire, was in a sense, the Girl Meets World of the "Zoog" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajoXV0HIlbU) Disney era, to give you some perspective.

Instead, Girl Meets World had to come along when Disney (https://www.reddit.com/r/disney/comments/1w5i9s/why_does_disney_keep_working_with_its_a_laugh/) had many of their live-action shows produced by the It a Laugh Productions! (https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/a4b60y/lets_talk_about_its_a_laugh_productions_the/) assembly line factory. So naturally, the show had to have this formulaic (https://www.reddit.com/r/writing/comments/2kf5kl/disney_channel_sitcommovie_formula/), wacky and glossy sheen to it.

I'm glad that Girl Meets World was on the Disney network because that it was kept if from getting too adult oriented.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

The thing is though is that like I said, Boy Meets World in comparison, actually did tackle (https://www.reddit.com/r/boymeetsworld/comments/evjl7a/adults_who_rewatched_boy_meets_world_give_me_your/) numerous "adult-oriented" (https://hiddenremote.com/2015/05/16/revisiting-boy-meets-world-adult/) or at the very least, very serious subjects (https://screenrant.com/boy-meets-world-episodes-serious-subject-matter/). So why couldn't its sequel series about Cory and Topanga's daughter theoretically, be allowed to do so also? It seemed like the closest that Girl Meets World got to doing something like that was their autism episode. And they even bungled that by taking going at it from an "ablest" perspective and acting like Farkle might have a life-threatening illness.

I seriously doubt that Riley would have been depicted as less annoying,meddlesome or nosy (with all the regulars expected to adore her instead of calling out her unpleasant traits) had it been on ABC/Freeform than she was on Disney.

But I wonder if any of the networks suits would have vetoed any of the pointless,dopey and stupid stuff that happened (e.g. Riley getting 'counselled' by a . ..talking tater tot [?!?]) .

The thing is though is that like I said, Boy Meets World in comparison, actually did tackle (https://www.reddit.com/r/boymeetsworld/comments/evjl7a/adults_who_rewatched_boy_meets_world_give_me_your/) numerous "adult-oriented" (https://hiddenremote.com/2015/05/16/revisiting-boy-meets-world-adult/) or at the very least, very serious subjects (https://screenrant.com/boy-meets-world-episodes-serious-subject-matter/). So why couldn't its sequel series about Cory and Topanga's daughter theoretically, be allowed to do so also? It seemed like the closest that Girl Meets World got to doing something like that was their autism episode. And they even bungled that by taking going at it from an "ablest" perspective and acting like Farkle might have a life-threatening illness.
Maybe the original series having so much serious content is the reason why the new series did not have so much, but of course with the world being the way that it is now, maybe having the new show be more reality based would've made more people tune in. Blue Bloods is always addressing whatever is going on in the news these days which is why I love the show so much.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

I seriously doubt that Riley would have been depicted as less annoying,meddlesome or nosy (with all the regulars expected to adore her instead of calling out her unpleasant traits) had it been on ABC/Freeform than she was on Disney.

But I wonder if any of the networks suits would have vetoed any of the pointless,dopey and stupid stuff that happened (e.g. Riley getting 'counselled' by a . ..talking tater tot [?!?]) .

I was reading comments on the Boy Meets World subreddit, and there seems to be the opinion (https://www.reddit.com/r/boymeetsworld/comments/1429o5v/comment/jn3p591/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) that Girl Meets World may have come along at a "wrong" time for Disney Channel if you want to call it that. Girl Meets World was following shows like The Suite Life of Zack and Cody, Hannah Montana, ANT Farm, Jessie, etc.

This is unlike Boy Meets World, which really felt like such a grounded show where real people had real problems and this family was just trying to live day to day and love life and love each other. The point is that By the time that Girl Meets World came on the air in 2014, the tone of children's sitcoms was completely different, and this was reflected in the show.

Granted, Boy Meets World was on ABC whereas Girl Meets World was on Disney Channel (https://www.reddit.com/r/boymeetsworld/comments/1429o5v/comment/jn4klhk/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), so there was always going (https://www.reddit.com/r/boymeetsworld/comments/1429o5v/comment/jn6bk9l/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) to be a "limit" (https://www.reddit.com/r/boymeetsworld/comments/1429o5v/comment/jn4fdog/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) for where the latter show could go.