... for the past 3 or 4 seasons, I've been keeping up with the 'CGoM' in the SNL Threads.

It has been our experience that some folks don't agree with Goose's s and s, so I propose an Entertainment Weekly Critics style ranking system.

Let's choose 7 'Reviewers' for the season (Goose get's a spot automatically) and we'll average their grades (A-F) and then award a or based on that.

This weekend, let's take a vote and see if it's something we should consider. The poll closes Monday.




The new system would look like this:





The next step would be to nominate and vote on the reviewers.

Thanks in advance.

That's really cool. We should do this for every show, not just SNL. (With a different volunteer gathering votes in each thread, of course).

Sounds like a good idea to me.

das

I will definitely have to agree, as, to be frank, Goose has not exactly been the standard by which to judge "SNL."

I merely hope that, in choosing reviewers, we opt for those who are able to fully articulate what they believe is either inherently flawed, or fundementally correct in the episode in question, as oposed to simply alluded to it.

(Kudos to Goldberg for initiating this proposal. In question to reviewers, however; are we taking into account those with DVR's, and allowing for a day before those reviewers present their rating? Or, are we going to pick those who will be able to watch the episode that night, and rate it as such?)

I would vote to impose a 48 hour time limit for a response, and post the results sometime on the Tuesday following the show (I can put the info together during my office hours ).

If a reviewer misses the posting deadline, their grade will not be included in the average (like on EWs polls).

I think it's an outstanding idea, but I'd encourage everyone thinking of going out for one of the slots to carefully consider whether or not he is up for the commitment involved.

You make an excellent point. Watching an entire season of SNL these days is a task not to be taken lightly.

das

I like Goose's breakdowns. I probably read more of those than I watched SNL. I usually just look at the thread to confirm I didn't miss anything funny.

To be frank, SNL has not exactly been the standard by which to judge television. I think this would be a good idea for new shows that the "official critics" would agree to continue watching even if it turned out that they didn't like it. It could work with some of the hyped shows like Studio 60 or Heroes.

It might be interesting just to have the thread starters put a poll for everyone to give their or and keep track of that for each show as the season goes along.

I think the Goose tu/td is lacking in terms of agreement with my personal opinion, but I find myself mostly agreeing with his writeups. I attribute the problem to the fact that SNL is of marginal quality -- none of the episodes are ever really so good that everyone will love them, and I have to suggest that few are so obviously bad that everyone will hate them.

I'll set them up...you knock them down.

I don't think I agreed much with his decisions either, especially during this last season, though I tivo the show and fast forward as soon as I see something I don't like. Which allows me to often get through the show in a half hour, sometimes even less.

I loved Charlie Goose's writeups for the skits in each episode and as long as the "guest" reviewers continue doing that, I have no problem with the new method.

I think this is a great idea for all of the shows threads with the exception of shows such as Survivor, The Amazing Race and American Idol in which polls are already in use.

I do not come to this site to look at spreadsheets. So no. I don't like it.

D

It'll look pretty than a spreadsheet. I promise.