25 minutes ago, Khan said:

IMO, SEARCH would have left the airwaves sooner or later, if only because I question whether the show would have withstood losing Larry Haines and Mary Stuart.  (Hey, I loved Jo and Stu, but they weren't going to live forever.)

 

I don't think they would have withstood losing them. They were the heart and soul of the show. Besides, the show didn't really groom any of the secondary characters that well, especially in the last couple of years. When SFT ended, the only actor besides MS and LH with any significant tenure was Marcia McCabe (Sunny), who had been on for 8 years. The final two years had seen the departure of longtime cast members like Rod Arrants, Sherry Mathis, Maree Cheatham and Lisa Peluso (though I believe they all left of their own accord). Most of the cast at the end had only been there for a year or two.

1 hour ago, Khan said:

From what I understand, though, CBS got rid of SFT, because P&G wanted the network to return the show to its former timeslot, even though SEARCH's ratings were improving in the new, later slot.

 

 

Yeah, CBS gave that timeslot to Y&R and moved SFT after ATWT and before GL.

4 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

 

I thought the Corringtons gave SFT their last stable and decent period in the late 70s?

 

In my opinion, Ann Marcus gave the show its last, great period. A few writers who followed her, like Peggy O'Shea, were pretty good. Mary Stuart claimed that O'Shea's team was the best set of writers SFT had ever had, but that comment might have been colored by her extreme dislike of Marcus. Of course, Henry Slesar and Harding Lemay both brought their skill to the show, but O'Shea, Slesar, and Lemay did not last last enough for their efforts to have a long-lasting, noticeable impact. Poor viewers got stuck with a revolving door of hack writers: Irving and Tex Elman, Robert J. Shaw,  Linda Griver, etc., and eventually drifted away from a show they once loved. 

5 hours ago, robbwolff said:

From what I've seen, Search went from a 6.3 in the 1980-81 season to a 6.8 in the 1981-82 season (on CBS). The ratings decline happened when the show switched to NBC in 1982, with the show getting a 3.4 rating for the 1981-82 season (on NBC).

 

Yes, but I do believe that the ratings' decline was a result of endlessly bad writing and production choices, along with the switch from CBS to NBC.  Better material still might have lured viewers back in, but...we never really got it.

2 hours ago, Soapsuds said:

Yeah, CBS gave that timeslot to Y&R and moved SFT after ATWT and before GL.

 

But that was a stellar time slot IMO. The show was placed nice and cushy between it's two stable sister soaps. I don't know why P&G would moan about that slot during that time. 

2 hours ago, Nothin'ButAttitude said:

 

But that was a stellar time slot IMO. The show was placed nice and cushy between it's two stable sister soaps. I don't know why P&G would moan about that slot during that time. 

P&G gambled and lost. I was a CBS viewer and when it moved to NBC I was crushed. At the time there were no VCRs and I wasn't going to watch it instead of Y&R which NBC placed it opposite.

16 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

P&G gambled and lost. I was a CBS viewer and when it moved to NBC I was crushed. At the time there were no VCRs and I wasn't going to watch it instead of Y&R which NBC placed it opposite.

 

Do you that Search would've probably done better had it aired on NBC in it's old slot against Capitol? 

Just now, Nothin'ButAttitude said:

 

Do you that Search would've probably done better had it aired on NBC in it's old slot against Capitol? 

Yes....I think Capitol started with most of Search's ratings of a 6.8.....they had a 6.4 but after that year Capitol dropped but after that its rating never came close to those of SFT.

2 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

Yes....I think Capitol started with most of Search's ratings of a 6.8.....they had a 6.4 but after that year Capitol dropped but after that its rating never came close to those of SFT.

 

Didn't B&B never score higher than Capitol in its ratings too? If so, I just find it odd and karmic that neither show has been able to capture what SFT did.

2 minutes ago, Nothin'ButAttitude said:

 

Didn't B&B never score higher than Capitol in its ratings too? If so, I just find it odd and karmic that neither show has been able to capture what SFT did.

1986-1987 Season

8. The Bold And The Beautiful 5.6

9. Capitol 5.2

 

Capitol's last year and B&B first year. Neither could match the 6.8 SFT had its last year on CBS. I hated Capitol with a passion...LOL. I had thirty minutes of free time until GL started. It took me a couple of years to warm up to B&B as I thought it was a cheaper version of Y&R.

1 minute ago, Soapsuds said:

1986-1987 Season

8. The Bold And The Beautiful 5.6

9. Capitol 5.2

 

Capitol's last year and B&B first year. Neither could match the 6.8 SFT had its last year on CBS. I hated Capitol with a passion...LOL. I had thirty minutes of free time until GL started. It took me a couple of years to warm up to B&B as I thought it was a cheaper version of Y&R.

 

I wonder if someone at CBS was kicking themselves after the first 2 years of Capitol and it's dwindling ratings compared to the stable, readymade audience they had with SFT. 

 

But Capitol, much like Edge of Night, is a show that would so flourish in today's climate. 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Nothin'ButAttitude said:

But Capitol, much like Edge of Night, is a show that would so flourish in today's climate. 

 

In many ways, those shows were ahead of their time.

5 minutes ago, Nothin'ButAttitude said:

 

I wonder if someone at CBS was kicking themselves after the first 2 years of Capitol and it's dwindling ratings compared to the stable, readymade audience they had with SFT. 

 

But Capitol, much like Edge of Night, is a show that would so flourish in today's climate. 

 

 

I think CBS wanted to get rid of SFT too though. I think they said it was pulling older viewers and they wanted younger ones thus Capitol.

 

I was never a fan of Edge of Night either but I agree that Capitol would be a hit now with all the mess going on at the WH.

21 hours ago, Soapsuds said:

I agree that Capitol would be a hit now with all the mess going on at the WH.

 

Absolutely.

On 4/15/2017 at 9:58 AM, vetsoapfan said:

 

In my opinion, Ann Marcus gave the show its last, great period. A few writers who followed her, like Peggy O'Shea, were pretty good. Mary Stuart claimed that O'Shea's team was the best set of writers SFT had ever had, but that comment might have been colored by her extreme dislike of Marcus. Of course, Henry Slesar and Harding Lemay both brought their skill to the show, but O'Shea, Slesar, and Lemay did not last last enough for their efforts to have a long-lasting, noticeable impact. Poor viewers got stuck with a revolving door of hack writers: Irving and Tex Elman, Robert J. Shaw,  Linda Griver, etc., and eventually drifted away from a show they once loved. 

 

Yes, but I do believe that the ratings' decline was a result of endlessly bad writing and production choices, along with the switch from CBS to NBC.  Better material still might have lured viewers back in, but...we never really got it.

Vet, I'm surprised that you included the Corringtons in that list.

I think they set up a good structure for the show,although I'll concede they did sabotage some of that themselves.

They were ahead of the times in the sense of including more action stories and 'way out' elements that would become more common in the 80's but handled them well.

The writers that followed really hacked away at the core and it was all downhill from there.

On ‎4‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 9:58 AM, vetsoapfan said:

SFT had enjoyed strong ratings in the 1970s under writers like Ann Marcus (who was awful on some other soaps but well-suited for SEARCH). In 1974-5, the show had a 9.4 (!!!) rating and was very entertaining. By 1981, however, it had plummeted to a dreadful 3.4. We had had to endure terrible writers like Tex and Irving Elman, Robert J. Shaw, the Corringtons, Linda Grover, Don Chastian, etc., and the audience just could not sit through their horrid material.

 

My memory is fuzzy about the plots that were playing out in 1981, specifically, because the awfulness of the late 1970s and early 1980s all runs together in my mind. Pointless newbies like Sylvie Descartes, Zack Anders, Garth and Max Taper, etc., came and went very quickly, without much fanfare at the time. Those were not good years for our beloved show.

 

Decades of watching soaps has taught me that what may look good (or at least decent) on paper, can be completely destroyed by incompetent execution.

 

I once read an interview with Bill Bell where he mentioned CBS approached him as early as 1977 about creating a second show for the network's daytime lineup. Do you think CBS was planning to replace Search for Tomorrow with a second Bill Bell show back then?

 

As we all know, Bill Bell didn't have a second show ready until 10 years later. Even if CBS kept Search for Tomorrow, I still think CBS would've ended it once Bill Bell had a second show ready to go.