Well, Billy may have picked that name, but it was Hart's true first name. It was one of those "noncoincidence coincidences". And Hart had been named after his grandfather, Peter.
I don't know why it's so prevalent on GL. I understand Billy wanting his son named after him and his father. Sometimes (like with Stacey), it's a manipulation. Sometimes it's a nod to the audience, like Vanessa naming her kid Maureen, or Jenna with Henry (Coop). But sometimes it just feels like the writing regime du jour didn't want to offend anyone. (like OH, we know history---we're trying to name the kid after Bert.)
Oh, yeah. And when Ross and Vanessa tried warning Cassie that Dinah wasn't stable enough to be a responsible surrogate, she got on her high horse about it. (I guess Princesses really can stomp their feet and get their way...RME)
I do love me some Danny Cosgrove. Thank goodness he rescued the role. I think part of the reason they kept Bill around was the less than stellar Shaynes that were cast.
but how many of those kids would the audience connect to? And who (assuming they'd be around 16 at the time) has some kind of relative in town to supervise them? Do you really want to stick Ross in a third "some one's got to raise this kid" story? (or fourth, if you count how he was essentially Phillip's father figure for a number of years) Was Holly ever truly stable enough to raise a child? Giving Lujack a child would've been interesting, but a teen Spaulding?
I do love the idea of bringing Stacey. She should've come back with Nola. If there was one legacy kid who should've been a slamdunk to impact Springfield, it's Stacey.
By
P.J. ·
