You know, we watched both shows every week at my house and I never got that. Of course I drew the character parallels but the shows had such different energies. TGG was sort of a mix of super witty set-up and punchline jokes and ironic humor with some Jewish and gay sensibilities. DW was a lot more situational (and yes, preachy) and the humor was more based in reality. I guess it was the southern influence, but I always felt that DW was a very "black" show which is kind of hard for me to explain. TGG was always "ha-ha" funny but DW was more likely to "tickle" you.

I think it was definitely the character identities on the show that made Designing Women come off as a cheap knock-off of the The Golden Girls.

Julia was definitely the Dorothy of the group.

Charlene was the Rose of the group.

Mary Jo, though younger, was the stable and sharp Sophia-like figure.

And of course, Suzanne was the Blanche of the group.

We won't even get into those hideous replacements for Charlene and Suzanne in the later seasons.

The character similarities were just uncanny, especially since Designing Women debuted, what, a season or two after The Golden Girls?

Though, The Golden Girls was definitely the more intelligently written and acted show. It set the template for the other female friendship shows that followed, which I guess, Designing Women can be labeled as the first "follower."

Linda Bloodworth-Thomason is the original Marc Cherry. Unimaginative, repetitious, and terribly executed camp.

I don't know enough about MC's work to judge, but I will say that his The 5 Mrs. Buchanans couldn't touch DW regardless of its excellent cast. His work on TGG was hilarious but imho that '90s penchant for ironic humor he introduced to the show in its later seasons hasn't aged as well as the character-driven wit and humor of the earlier seasons. And I mean, come on, Bernice and the Christmas tree skirt, Suzanne and the baby wig, "BLACK MAN, BLACK MAN, WHERE DO YOU COME FROM!?", that was some great stuff.

Let's not forget, Cherry was also the show runner for Delta's flop Designing Women spin-off.

I think it was definitely the character identities on the show that made Designing Women come off as a cheap knock-off of the The Golden Girls.

Julia was definitely the Dorothy of the group.

Charlene was the Rose of the group.

Mary Jo, though younger, was the stable and sharp Sophia-like figure.

And of course, Suzanne was the Blanche of the group.

We won't even get into those hideous replacements for Charlene and Suzanne in the later seasons.

The character similarities were just uncanny, especially since Designing Women debuted, what, a season or two after The Golden Girls?

Though, The Golden Girls was definitely the more intelligently written and acted show. It set the template for the other female friendship shows that followed, which I guess, Designing Women can be labeled as the first "follower."

TGG and 227 debuted on the same night and they both had that character set up.

Dorothy-Mary

Rose-Rose (though 227's Rose wasn't a ditz)

Blanche-Sandra (both ladies found their feet and took off like rockets after the pilot)

Sophia-Pearl

Let's not forget, Cherry was also the show runner for Delta's flop Designing Women spin-off.

Woman of the House! 'Twas awful indeed. Oy, iirc, Suzanne lipsynced "And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going" from Dreamgirls in the first episode.

TGG and 227 debuted on the same night and they both had that character set up.

Dorothy-Mary

Rose-Rose (though 227's Rose wasn't a ditz)

Blanche-Sandra (both ladies found their feet and took off like rockets after the pilot)

Sophia-Pearl

I guess the difference was 227 was always marketed more to African-American audiences, though it had tons of White fans. Also, the women weren't living or working together on the show, at least from what I can remember.

I guess if we want to get technical, The Facts of Life even had, though on a more primitive scale, this character set-up.

TGG and 227 debuted on the same night and they both had that character set up.

Dorothy-Mary

Rose-Rose (though 227's Rose wasn't a ditz)

Blanche-Sandra (both ladies found their feet and took off like rockets after the pilot)

Sophia-Pearl

I didnt feel 227 was anything like GG. The show was totally different. Mary was married and Dorothy wasnt. Mary had a daughter...Dorothy didnt.....Dorothy had a mother.....Mary's mother wasnt on the show..etc.....

DW should have ended once Delta Burke left show. The show totally sucked once she left. At least the GG ladies stayed together till the end until the spin off happened.

You know, we watched both shows every week at my house and I never got that. Of course I drew the character parallels but the shows had such different energies. TGG was sort of a mix of super witty set-up and punchline jokes and ironic humor with some Jewish and gay sensibilities. DW was a lot more situational (and yes, preachy) and the humor was more based in reality. I guess it was the southern influence, but I always felt that DW was a very "black" show which is kind of hard for me to explain. TGG was always "ha-ha" funny but DW was more likely to "tickle" you.

I always thought DW was very romance novel-ish, like if Danielle Steel wrote a sitcom. Definitely a compliment coming from me, though. I discovered DW before GG, so I always drew the parallels backwards, but GG had an explosion in popularity all over again in the 00s that DW will probably never get, unfortunately. If DW was airing at a decent time today, I'd watch it as much as I could.

OT, but I always thought the template of 4 female characters is kind of a funny one. If you get vague with it, you can apply it to many, many TV shows and movies based around four females.

I guess the difference was 227 was always marketed more to African-American audiences, though it had tons of White fans. Also, the women weren't living or working together on the show, at least from what I can remember.

I guess if we want to get technical, The Facts of Life even had, though on a more primitive scale, this character set-up.

FOL...nah......I actually liked FOL and 227 more than DW.

I guess if we want to get technical, The Facts of Life even had, though on a more primitive scale, this character set-up.

And Living Single as well.

Jo - Dorothy - Julia - Khadijah

Blair - Blanche - Suzanne - Regine

Tootie - Rose - Charlene - Synclaire

Natalie - Sophia - Mary Jo - Maxine

Yeah, I don't think any of the shows we're talking about were similar beyond some very basic character archetypes. This is weird, but when I heard that Julia Duffy and Jan Hooks were coming to DW, I though they were playing recast Charlene and Suzanne. I think the concept of uppity Yankee-assimilated Allison was interesting, it just didn't work out. I love Jean Smart and would have preferred that she stayed, but I think Jan Hooks is damn funny. Judith Ivey is a great actor, but I found her B.J. to be a bit of a bore. She drew an interesting character, but I think she would have been more effective on the stage.

And Living Single as well.

Jo - Dorothy - Julia - Khadijah

Blair - Blanche - Suzanne - Regine

Tootie - Rose - Charlene - Synclaire

Natalie - Sophia - Mary Jo - Maxine

Blair wasnt trampy like Blanche or Suzanne....lol

Tootie as Rose...haha..nah

Natalie was more the Rose part than Sophia

FOL had no Sophia

Oh no! This is terrible news... I never really saw Designing Women, but I absolutely loved Dixie Carter on Desperate Housewives as Gloria Hodge.

May she rest in peace!

Yeah, I don't think any of the shows we're talking about were similar beyond some very basic character archetypes. This is weird, but when I heard that Julia Duffy and Jan Hooks were coming to DW, I though they were playing recast Charlene and Suzanne. I think the concept of uppity Yankee-assimilated Allison was interesting, it just didn't work out. I love Jean Smart and would have preferred that she stayed, but I think Jan Hooks is damn funny. Judith Ivey is a great actor, but I found her B.J. to be a bit of a bore. She drew an interesting character, but I think she would have been more effective on the stage.

All those ladies were awful on DW. I never got the appeal of Julia Duffy at all.

I always thought DW was very romance novel-ish, like if Danielle Steel wrote a sitcom. Definitely a compliment coming from me, though. I discovered DW before GG, so I always drew the parallels backwards, but GG had an explosion in popularity all over again in the 00s that DW will probably never get, unfortunately. If DW was airing at a decent time today, I'd watch it as much as I could.

OT, but I always thought the template of 4 female characters is kind of a funny one. If you get vague with it, you can apply it to many, many TV shows and movies based around four females.

I don't think DW's humor is as obvious, as "easy" as TGG's. DW was not a "badumpbump" kinda show, not as colorful and OTT, and therefore, not a show I first think to turn to when skimming the sitcom selection for a good laugh. I have warmer feelings for DW that have everything to do with my mother. The reason why I'm on a soap opera board for that matter.

As for the four women thing, you could take it as far as Knots Landing and of course SATC.