I've been re-watching season 8 reruns and so far, they're not as bad as I remember them.

I'm not saying the show was as good as it had been with Ron Howard and Donny Most, but it's not that bad, either.

But any adherence to the period detail is gone by now: Chachi looks like a kid I could have gone to high school with in 1980 and Joanie's perm was not invented prior to 1980.

I'll be curious to see how long the show holds up, but it's nice to go back and not have it be the train wreck I remember it being.

The thing I remember most about the post-Richie era of "Happy Days" was the characters coming and going. The Belvins, Flip, the other guys from Fonzie's class, Krystal Bernard, etc. And Arnold's was seen less than it was with Richie.

Ted McGinley wasn’t in it as much as I remembered, but then again I don’t watch every day. I believe that changes in seasons 9 and 10.

One thing that I do remember is that Potsie seemed lost without Richie and Ralph. He makes a token appearance in most episodes, but has nothing to do with the main plotlines. It's like they had to give him something to do, but had no idea what to do with the character.

I watched Happy Days in its entirety in 2019. I enjoyed all the seasons. The later ones were great too.

8 and 9 aren’t much worse than 7. There are plenty of clinkers, like the musical one about the olden days. But there are some good ones, too, like the “Queen for a Day” spoof where Lori Beth tries to win money on a game show so she can go visit Richie in Greenland.. And the two-part “Home Movies” is one of the best of the later episodes.

It’s season 10 where it fell apart. The show had smoothly transitioned from focusing on Richie and his friends to Joanie and her friends in season 8. Why they decided to weaken the show by trying another transition in such a short time is beyond me.

I actually enjoyed Season 10. I liked the new characters

8 and 9 aren’t much worse than 7. There are plenty of clinkers, like the musical one about the olden days. But there are some good ones, too, like the “Queen for a Day” spoof where Lori Beth tries to win money on a game show so she can go visit Richie in Greenland.. And the two-part “Home Movies” is one of the best of the later episodes.

It’s season 10 where it fell apart. The show had smoothly transitioned from focusing on Richie and his friends to Joanie and her friends in season 8. Why they decided to weaken the show by trying another transition in such a short time is beyond me.

They saw dollar signs ($$$) in a Joanie and Chachi spinoff. Baio was a teen hearthrob at the time, so it must have seem like a show with potential.

But it weakened the host show and characters like K.C. had to be fashioned so Jenny would have someone.

At least when Joanie Loves Chachi tanked, they were allowed to go back to the show. But by then, the damage was done and HD was heading to its last roundup.

Coming to the end of season nine and still...not bad.

It's not anywhere near the peak of seasons 3 to 4, but it's not bad, really.

But Henry Winkler was starting to look a little old with those young girls.

I watched Happy Days in its entirety in 2019. I enjoyed all the seasons. The later ones were great too.

I feel the same way. I loved the later years. :wave:

I actually enjoyed Season 10. I liked the new characters

Me too. :D

The thing I remember most about the post-Richie era of "Happy Days" was the characters coming and going. The Belvins, Flip, the other guys from Fonzie's class, Krystal Bernard, etc. And Arnold's was seen less than it was with Richie.

Why did Garry Marshall's ABC sitcoms that were hits in 1978-79 (Happy Days, Laverne & Shirley, and Mork & Mindy) go into a slump in 1980 and never recover?
(https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Garry-Marshalls-ABC-sitcoms-that-were-hits-in-1978-79-Happy-Days-Laverne-Shirley-and-Mork-Mindy-go-into-a-slump-in-1980-and-never-recover/answer/Jon-Mixon-1)

They didn’t.

Happy Days and Mork & Mindy were beginning to; however Laverne & Shirley's writing was still pretty steady and that series was higher rated after 1980 than its progenitor program was for the remainder of its run.

Why did the slumps that did occur?


The writing was dropping off - For reasons that aren’t clear Marshall’s series hired mediocre writers whose output, by definition, was always going to be mediocre. If he had employed better writers, then he would have received better results.

The casts were of mixed quality - Happy Days and Mork & Mindy depended too heavily on a single performer and when that performer grew bored (Ron Howard and Robin Williams) or they were no longer what they started out as being at the beginning of the program (Henry Winkler) the program suffered. All three series could have benefited from a more diverse cast.

Marshall had too many “balls in the air” - Garry Marshall had three top-rated programs on television at the same time. That had to have been a great deal of work, coupled with his personal life. Things have a tendency to “slip” and that means the quality of the programs occasionally declined.

Robin Williams was looking for the “door” - It’s clear that Robin Williams wanted to make films instead of being a television actor. While his earlier performances on Mork & Mindy were exemplary, as the series aged, he was clearly “phoning it in”. By the time that the series was cancelled, he was on his way to becoming a movie star and the show was left behind him.

Happy Days always had limited narrative potential - Basically The Cunninghams were dull, The Fonz was a one-note character that was expanded beyond his limitations, and the assorted other members of the cast weren’t that interesting. By 1980 that was becoming painfully apparent; however the ratings were still acceptable and the program was selling well in syndication so no one was going to “pull the plug” on it.


Laverne & Shirley remained strong until the combination of the California relocation and Cindy Williams leaving the program caused it to fail. That was AFTER 1980 however and after Mork & Mindy had already been cancelled itself.

I thought that The Simpsons "had limited narrative potential" -- but I remember thinking that back before the year 2000...! So I'm not convinced that's a valid argument for any family sitcom, live action or otherwise.

Why did Garry Marshall's ABC sitcoms that were hits in 1978-79 (Happy Days, Laverne & Shirley, and Mork & Mindy) go into a slump in 1980 and never recover?
(https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Garry-Marshalls-ABC-sitcoms-that-were-hits-in-1978-79-Happy-Days-Laverne-Shirley-and-Mork-Mindy-go-into-a-slump-in-1980-and-never-recover/answer/Jon-Mixon-1)

There were some valid points here. Even though I still feel that Season 8 began a downhill slide for Happy Days, in truth, even season 7 was starting to show signs of being tired.

While my season 8 rewatch went okay a couple of years back, last night I put on Pluto TV's Happy Days channel and when I realized it was a post-Richie episode, I put on something else instead.

All shows only have a certain amount of good shows and great seasons and Happy Days probably had it's best run from seasons 3-6. Even if Ron Howard and Donny Most had stayed, the show would have declined -- just not perhaps as much as it did with the weak replacement characters.

As for Laverne & Shirley, the move to California was a creative mistake IMO. The show was never the same and Cindy Williams' abrupt departure in the final season hastened that show's demise.

Mork & Mindy was comedy gold that first season -- once the network forced out Conrad Janis and Elizabeth Kerr in favor of younger actors, the show's chemistry was altered and it never recovered creatively. And I'm sure Robin Williams' experimentation with "chemistry" didn't help much either.