But first...

CANE MUST DIE!!!!

Dorothy(me)- Foul! Foul!..This man is trying to put us to sleep!

Rose(Alvin)- You're just tired and blaming it on me.

Dorothy(me)- Tired!?? I'll show you who's tired!

You are so repeating yourself Alvin with the Cane stuff and Phick

If Phick wasn't so horrible, there would be nothing to talk about in regards to them, from my view...

If Phick wasn't so horrible, there would be nothing to talk about in regards to them, from my view...

Sophia: That's the attack command Bingo!!

Cara Mia, but what happens if MG doesn't become a big star, we'll just get a Daniel doppelganger. Better to just have him dump Amber and leave town.

Why would there need to be a Daniel doppleganger? The character isn't that important to the fabric of the show. If Billy Miller up and quit, then hell yeah, we have to get a new Billy Abbott. If MG leaves, what's the point of another Daniel? The show needs to bring on characters like Kyle or Keemo or even Ricky. I am honestly asking the question: What is point of Daniel? If anyone can answer the question, I will be very interested in what you have to say.

If Phick wasn't so horrible, there would be nothing to talk about in regards to them, from my view...

well I guess we can all thank the Soap Gods we don't all have the same views!! if we all liked the same thing it would be boring as hell!

I would take any PHICK day good or bad over any SHICK day! I had enough of their story, time to move on and forward instead of backwards and boring! we can not re-visit the past in the REAL world, why should we be forced to endure it in the REEL world!!

well I guess we can all thank the Soap Gods we don't all have the same views!! if we all liked the same thing it would be boring as hell!

Exactly, I agree.

I would take any PHICK day good or bad over any SHICK day! I had enough of their story, time to move on and forward instead of backwards and boring! we can not re-visit the past in the REAL world, why should we be forced to endure it in the REEL world!!

How about putting an end to both couples, and givng Phyllis someone dynamic partner to play off of, which will never be Nick? Phyllis could do MUCH BETTER.

They need some creative writers to break these coupls up and pair them all with new people.

Edited May 18, 200916 yr by Y&RWorldTurner

we can not re-visit the past in the REAL world, why should we be forced to endure it in the REEL world!!

Plenty of people revisit past relationships in the real world and especially in the reel world.

I liked Sharon and Nick before they bogged down in the "true love" cliche, when they were a young and very complicated couple. The current version of Nick and Sharon do nothing for me because Nick has treated her very poorly, he's used her, and somehow, we are supposed to root for them to be together, root for this child to be Nick's, because of this supposed fate of their relationship.

I would have been more drawn into them if they hadn't started having sex again, and if this wasn't about her sleeping around or being pregnant. I think the idea of Phyllis coming unglued because Nick wasn't having a sexual relationship with Sharon, but a purely emotional affair, would have been very compelling.

I've never thought in terms of it is written so as one should root for this ONE couple. People will like who they like and in some cases some like neither, I don't know maybe it's a bit naive of me to think MAB gets that at this point. I mean I assume Shick is endgame but I think even in this case this works to the shows benefit

If we going to give Sharon a Abbot baby it should be Jacks, Not only he had a child by his ex step son ex wife. I'm sure the writers would think of something with Jack vs Victor on a whole different level. Then it will bring Nikki into play. Maybe she'll remember that she once was pregnant by Jack.

If we going to give Sharon a Abbot baby it should be Jacks, Not only he had a child by his ex step son ex wife. I'm sure the writers would think of something with Jack vs Victor on a whole different level. Then it will bring Nikki into play. Maybe she'll remember that she once was pregnant by Jack.

She's never forgotten it. She and Jack have talked about it many times over the years.

She's never forgotten it. She and Jack have talked about it many times over the years.

This is even better to have Sharon carrying Jack kid. Just to show Nikki what she would have missed out on. the nwe finally can see Jack as an hands on father. Because I'm sure Sharon won't send the child away. & She 'll to busy get back with Nick & whoever.

Not that intrigued by a Shack baby the plotlines that event will drive can and will be driven by many other important elements. From my perspective why tie the Abbotts and Newmans through bloodline anymore than they are already (ABBY)? I'll continue to buy the feud with less common relatives involved. The less the better. I'm already a bit on the fence about legacy characters Noah and Abby's relation (though many times I forget and have to be reminded), but that I get. After the fans get increasingly tired of the whole quad there goes the benefit of having a Shack baby, I might be the only one but I'm not interested....

Not that intrigued by a Shack baby the plotlines that event will drive can and will be driven by many other important elements. From my perspective why tie the Abbotts and Newmans through bloodline anymore than they are already (ABBY)? I'll continue to buy the feud with less common relatives involved. The less the better. I'm already a bit on the fence about legacy characters Noah and Abby's relation (though many times I forget and have to be reminded), but that I get. After the fans get increasingly tired of the whole quad there goes the benefit of having a Shack baby, I might be the only one but I'm not interested....

So you don't want Billy has the father either.

Not that intrigued by a Shack baby the plotlines that event will drive can and will be driven by many other important elements. From my perspective why tie the Abbotts and Newmans through bloodline anymore than they are already (ABBY)? I'll continue to buy the feud with less common relatives involved. The less the better. I'm already a bit on the fence about legacy characters Noah and Abby's relation (though many times I forget and have to be reminded), but that I get. After the fans get increasingly tired of the whole quad there goes the benefit of having a Shack baby, I might be the only one but I'm not interested....

Naturally, I disagree. Who cares about Abby? She's a teen that was SOARSED basically because Noah was and because Ashley came back to town. The writers have a good three or four years of story with a Sharon sired Abbott. There are not enough baby boys on the playing field. But then, they can make Summer and Baby Boy Abbott nearer to each other's ages in a decade for a romance that would draw the quad together again.

Edited May 18, 200916 yr by soapydoc

So you don't want Billy has the father either.

No I don't believe an Abbott should be the father. It would be interesting if this who's the daddy tale involved a non-Newman- non-Abbott if they didn't want to make the baby Nick's for story reasons, but I'm not interested in the Sharon/abbott offspring. I however would find it interesting if the part of the twist was the belief that baby was an Abbott, where (planned quite well/thoroughly) quite delciously the twist is that the baby is actually a Newman