I agree that just because they won't take the time to figure out who Tad really is and will be (they seem to be uncomfortable negotiating the character in terms of who he once was and the kind of flawed hero they perhaps wanted him to be, now he's getting old yadda yadda) he still shouldn't be scrapped altogether. Tad should be more in line with OLTL's Bo Buchanan.

In a way I thought Pratt's idea to make him lighthearted again (cuz of a bullet to the brain? umm k...) made sense but it was poorly excuted (we got him being giggly and silly when those close to him were having huge problems! lol) and then they just sorta phased it out. (Speaking of though I did like his friendship with Aiden, will he address Aiden's massive freefall? ). I know many on here hated anything to do with Taylor but I really liked her with him--in lighter stories like them bonding over having to look after Baby Trevor, etc.

Gross. Taylor.

Thought you might pop up

He was looking a bit schlubby for a bit I admit (though in a way that doesn't bug me--people in real life--yes even Cads--start to get shlubby more often than not at his age and sometimes I get tired of the perfect looking soap cliches) but has been looking better lately (I have to admit with the dyed hair on Halloween it made a big difference). The actor is commited to the show, I agree that there's been some awful damage done to his character but I don't think its beyond repair and I find it ironic that fans of history to a show (not to point fingers, but since we nearly always agree I don't mind saying I mean CarlD specifically here ) want him off the show. Maybe backburnered, fine, or a changein character but I think at this point its more important than ever to keep characters with long ties to the show around, and even more so to allow them to age into the tentpole characters the show is now more without than ever--with Myrtle gone and Palmer almost gone. Frankly we can't afford to just let go of characters who could grow into that spot IMHO, and I think MEK's love for the show also speaks volumes.

My problem with Tad is where do they go with him? It's great if he's going to get some of his charisma back, but until he stops being a self-righteous jerk who obsesses over scapegoats while neglecting his children, I think he's a drag on the show. If they can fix that and if he can have chemistry with a love interest, then he would be OK, but as it is now I think he's just a reminder of the show's lost luster.

On the one hand, Tad the Self-Righteous Hypocrite? Don't care for him. But, Tad the Sarcastic Cad? Don't want that guy back, either.

Is it too absurd to say this guy's Ted Orsini-in-disguise, and that he took over Tad's life, say, oh, five years ago?

On the one hand, Tad the Self-Righteous Hypocrite? Don't care for him. But, Tad the Sarcastic Cad? Don't want that guy back, either.

Is it too absurd to say this guy's Ted Orsini-in-disguise, and that he took over Tad's life, say, oh, five years ago?

Ah, Ted Orsini. And Nola. Barbara Rush was so good in the role. What's Tad's involvement with Orsini Vineyards now?

Ah, Ted Orsini. And Nola. Barbara Rush was so good in the role. What's Tad's involvement with Orsini Vineyards now?

He just collects checks. Oh Lawd, remember Tad's house once he got the money? Apparently the creators of Friends are big AMC fans, that set was like the precursor to Joey and Chandler's apartment.

My problem with Tad is where do they go with him? It's great if he's going to get some of his charisma back, but until he stops being a self-righteous jerk who obsesses over scapegoats while neglecting his children, I think he's a drag on the show. If they can fix that and if he can have chemistry with a love interest, then he would be OK, but as it is now I think he's just a reminder of the show's lost luster.

You forgot "hypocrite!" Don't forget hypocrite! Tells Jake not to let David ruin his holiday with his family -- and then immediately turns around and abandons his family along with his two little girls on Christmas day to stalk David.

My problem with Tad is where do they go with him? It's great if he's going to get some of his charisma back, but until he stops being a self-righteous jerk who obsesses over scapegoats while neglecting his children, I think he's a drag on the show. If they can fix that and if he can have chemistry with a love interest, then he would be OK, but as it is now I think he's just a reminder of the show's lost luster.

Oh come on The fact the show isn't great is the main reminder of its lost lustre--MEK doesn't deserve that blame. I think he's shown he CAN deliver when given decent material--I say wait to see what Broderick (or whomever is writing) does for him... Under the past writers EVERYONE has been scapegoagts for bad behaviour. Should we fire Debbi Morgan and Darnell W as well?

He just collects checks. Oh Lawd, remember Tad's house once he got the money? Apparently the creators of Friends are big AMC fans, that set was like the precursor to Joey and Chandler's apartment.

Kinda ironic that now he's meant to be one of the few not completely wealthy people on the show (another thing I hope Broderick--or again whomever--changes)

Oh, please! Tad hasn't taken responsibility for ANYTHING wrong in his life over the last 10 years. He tried to justify stealing Chandler Enterprises from Adam as a way to finally make something out of himself (forgetting his private investigation firm, running Orsini vineyards and producing/hosting the syndicated Cutting Edge) after being abused by Ray Gardner. He blames David for breaking up his marriage -- because working overtime at Chandler Enterprises with Liza, the woman he cheated on Dixie with, had nothing to do with it. Greg Madden deserved to be tortured because he convinced Dixie into putting Kathy up for adoption -- oh, and because he was abused by Ray Gardner. JR's warped because Adam raised him for a year before he took off on a tramp steamer -- not because from birth to teenage years, Tad and Dixie were on and off more times than Ross and Rachel. David broke up his marriage to Krustal because he's evil -- not because Tad basically told Krustal to get over Babe's death, take care of his children and abandoned all three of them while Krustal was grieving to go running off to the Congo. He's like Babe -- except 20 years older and with a penis. Sets things in motion and then plays the victim and blames everyone else.

Edited January 3, 201015 yr by R Sinclair

And this is unlike most current soap characters, how?

Oh come on The fact the show isn't great is the main reminder of its lost lustre--MEK doesn't deserve that blame. I think he's shown he CAN deliver when given decent material--I say wait to see what Broderick (or whomever is writing) does for him... Under the past writers EVERYONE has been scapegoagts for bad behaviour. Should we fire Debbi Morgan and Darnell W as well?

I think the problems with Tad have been going on for nearly a decade now, if not longer, through bad and decent periods for the show. I remember around 1999/2000 when a lot of people were happy with the show again, and I had started to hate Tad. The way he treated Dixie after she got pregnant and he thought she should abort the child. The awful story where we had to have Adam as the evilest of evils for wanting to put JR in a boarding school. This is when I believe Tad really started to permanently shift from being a character who had any humor, charm, or warmth, and when Tad/Dixie started to fade away.

Later writing did make it worse, especially the Madden story, but I think the core problem is that Tad is as a hypocrite and a self-righteous jerk who spends so much time going on about the evils of David (or Adam) while ignoring his own failings as a father and a husband. I don't believe that Tad is suited for this role.

It's not even that this is different from other men on the show -- but those other men suck too. Jake, Ryan, Zach (when he was around) are all repulsive in this type of role. It's a horrible way to write a leading man.

Tad was never popular for this type of material. He was popular for comedy, romance, warmth, wit, charm. If that Tad can return, then I'm very happy. If that Tad is gone for good, then what is he?

Edited January 3, 201015 yr by CarlD2

I get that. I guess I think MEK can still do the material, and that Tad isn't gone for good.

But Tad has something that none of the other men on the show have which are glory years as a (flawed) romantic lead at the height of the show's success and a long-term emotional investment from the audience. He is beloved at the core of it, and they can ruin and stretch him in all sorts of bad directions, yet (*IMHO*) there is just something about him that keeps him tethered to the hearts of longtime fans. None of the flashy womanizer-come-hero types of the '90s/'00s have come close to his genuinely charming cad of the '80s, and I think many of us would take Tad, warts and all, over the majority of male characters that have breezed in and out of Pine Valley over the last two decades. I would rather he stick around broken with the potential of being repaired than see him scrapped, only to be left with Tad-less Jake and J.R. Tad's presence alone in scenes with these guys makes me give them the benefit of the doubt, he kind of makes them *click* in my brain, like, "Okay, that's right, that's Joey, we like him, oh, and there's little curly-headed Junior all growed up, theyre's something way deep down inside there that we like too..." As I said in another post, Tad should function more like Bo Buchanan. Writer and actor need to find their focus, let's hurry up and decide who Tad's going to be, there's been ample time to explore the gray area.