One not mentioned yet was Y&R introducing the Williams and Abbott families  and shifting the center of the show around them and pretty much completely away from the Brooks and Prentis families.

In many ways, Y&R focusing so heavily on a peripheral and new character with no historical ties like Cassandra Rawlins over a two year period was a risk, but that's the story that helped solidify Y&R at #1 in the ratings.  

Edited October 31, 20214 yr by BetterForgotten

The only reason I tuned in to Guiding Light in the mid-2000s is because all the soap mags were raving about Tom Pelphrey and how he's a godsend to the show. I did find his acting compelling but what was the actual story line to him being front and center at the time? Was he Reva's long lost son? I guess his movie career didn't go anywhere once he left the show which is a shame cuz he was good

Edited October 30, 20214 yr by Lex S
Adding

28 minutes ago, titan1978 said:

I think Robin’s diagnosis was a turning point- because the audience knows Stone is going to die and now the story is going to continue on in a real way, with Robin Scorpio.  This was also before HIV medications had started really giving people back their lives, so it was shocking to go that far.

Yes, and GH was putting all its chips on an actress who wasn't even out of her teens at the time. I know KMc was popular since she began as a little kid on GH, but did longtime fans even know she had this in her before the Stone story?

Did Cassie's death on Y&R pay off in 2005? I thought it was fantastic acting on everyone's part, but they sacrificed the actress who was there from an early age. I haven't seen her back on the show as Mariah but I guess she's in a lot of storylines now?

14 minutes ago, BetterForgotten said:

In many ways, Y&R focusing so heavily on a peripheral and new character with no historical like Cassandra Rawlins over a two year period was a risk, but that's the story that helped solidify Y&R at #1 in the ratings.  

I guess pairing Nikki and Victor would count as well. Am I correct that both were on the canvas for a couple of years and never or rarely crossed paths? Putting a stripper and a business tycoon in a star-crossed romance was pretty risky. Y&R did this years before Pretty Woman!

6 minutes ago, Lex S said:

Did Cassie's death on Y&R pay off in 2005? I thought it was fantastic acting on everyone's part, but they sacrificed the actress who was there from an early age. I haven't seen her back on the show as Mariah but I guess she's in a lot of storylines now?

Killing off Cassie was a waste 

They knew it was a waste of storyline because they had to retcon a long lost twin

The only thing that storyline added was pushing Nick and Phyllis together,  and even the writers could come up with a better way to advance that plot point 

41 minutes ago, Frank2803 said:

Killing off Cassie was a waste 

They knew it was a waste of storyline because they had to retcon a long lost twin

The only thing that storyline added was pushing Nick and Phyllis together,  and even the writers could come up with a better way to advance that plot point 

I have to say I disagree with you on this.

Killing Colleen was a HUGE waste. Besides the immediate plot point of giving her heart to Victor, this had literally no follow-up, no impact and the story itself sucked.

On the other hand, killing off Cassie is what allowed them to break up Nick and Sharon. We take Phick as a viable option as granted now but Sharon/Nick were the supercouple then and there was no way the audience would have been ready to accept anything else other than them as the endgame.
The slow deterioration of their relationship after her death in parallel to his chemistry with MS (with whom Nick only started to only interact because of Daniel's involvement in Cassie's death) is what allowed them to open up a whole range of stories for both characters .
For younger characters they had already been in a deadend of repetitive stories when stuck to each other. This really opened a lot of doors; a lot of those doors ended up sucking but that's another problem.
Those two were important figures of the next generation at Y&R and they were already tired. Revitalizing them as individuals has had a huge story-driving impact.

I am not saying *I* would have killed her off. I still think killing any legacy child is a short-sighted move that soaps often regret and try to undo (and indeed the idiotic Mariah retcon shows why it is stupid no matter how good the story) but Cassie's death is one of the few child deaths that had an impact that lasted beyond the immediate aftermath.

That doesn't mean not having taken the risk and going in a different direction wouldn't have been better. Cassie's death is such a case imho: it worked but it would have been not to have done it. I think Cassie would still have an even bigger impact had she stayed alive and that they could have figured another organic way to split Shick. But it did "pay off" and we will never know what the payoff for the alternative scenario would have been.

Colleen's death on the other hand was and is and forever will be a wasteful idiotic travesty. 

Edited October 31, 20214 yr by FrenchBug82

34 minutes ago, FrenchBug82 said:

I have to say I disagree with you on this.

Killing Colleen was a HUGE waste. Besides the immediate plot point of giving her heart to Victor, this had literally no follow-up, no impact and the story itself sucked.

On the other hand, killing off Cassie is what allowed them to break up Nick and Sharon. We take Phick as a viable option as granted now but Sharon/Nick were the supercouple then and there was no way the audience would have been ready to accept anything else other than them as the endgame.
The slow deterioration of their relationship after her death in parallel to his chemistry with MS (with whom Nick only started to only interact because of Daniel's involvement in Cassie's death) is what allowed them to open up a whole range of stories for both characters .
For younger characters they had already been in a deadend of repetitive stories when stuck to each other. This really opened a lot of doors; a lot of those doors ended up sucking but that's another problem.
Those two were important figures of the next generation at Y&R and they were already tired. Revitalizing them as individuals has had a huge story-driving impact.

I am not saying *I* would have killed her off. I still think killing any legacy child is a short-sighted move that soaps often regret and try to undo (and indeed the idiotic Mariah retcon shows why it is stupid no matter how good the story) but Cassie's death is one of the few child deaths that had an impact that lasted beyond the immediate aftermath.

That doesn't mean not having taken the risk and going in a different direction wouldn't have been better. Cassie's death is such a case imho: it worked but it would have been not to have done it. I think Cassie would still have an even bigger impact had she stayed alive and that they could have figured another organic way to split Shick. But it did "pay off" and we will never know what the payoff for the alternative scenario would have been.

Colleen's death on the other hand was and is and forever will be a wasteful idiotic travesty. 

In hindsight you're right 

I never got Colleen's death also, it just seemed like a way to create Emmy reels 

 

45 minutes ago, FrenchBug82 said:

I have to say I disagree with you on this.

Killing Colleen was a HUGE waste. Besides the immediate plot point of giving her heart to Victor, this had literally no follow-up, no impact and the story itself sucked.

On the other hand, killing off Cassie is what allowed them to break up Nick and Sharon. We take Phick as a viable option as granted now but Sharon/Nick were the supercouple then and there was no way the audience would have been ready to accept anything else other than them as the endgame.
The slow deterioration of their relationship after her death in parallel to his chemistry with MS (with whom Nick only started to only interact because of Daniel's involvement in Cassie's death) is what allowed them to open up a whole range of stories for both characters .
For younger characters they had already been in a deadend of repetitive stories when stuck to each other. This really opened a lot of doors; a lot of those doors ended up sucking but that's another problem.
Those two were important figures of the next generation at Y&R and they were already tired. Revitalizing them as individuals has had a huge story-driving impact.

I am not saying *I* would have killed her off. I still think killing any legacy child is a short-sighted move that soaps often regret and try to undo (and indeed the idiotic Mariah retcon shows why it is stupid no matter how good the story) but Cassie's death is one of the few child deaths that had an impact that lasted beyond the immediate aftermath.

That doesn't mean not having taken the risk and going in a different direction wouldn't have been better. Cassie's death is such a case imho: it worked but it would have been not to have done it. I think Cassie would still have an even bigger impact had she stayed alive and that they could have figured another organic way to split Shick. But it did "pay off" and we will never know what the payoff for the alternative scenario would have been.

Colleen's death on the other hand was and is and forever will be a wasteful idiotic travesty. 

Wow. you brought back a lot of memories and put so many things in such a good perspective! Cassie's death really did shake the whole canvas of the show for that entire year and did bring Nick and Phyllis together due to their originally antagonistic attitude towards each other when Nick was after Daniel. It also gave Sharon legitimate reasons to spiral later on. I can totally buy going off the rails due to the death of a child.

I was starting to tune out due to work commitments by the time Colleen's heart was given to Victor and I was gone shortly after

 

1 hour ago, FrenchBug82 said:

Colleen's death on the other hand was and is and forever will be a wasteful idiotic travesty. 

And then there is Delia's death. I can't say I was particularly attached to that child the way I was with Cassie and Colleen, but that was a real waste of time. There was short-term shock value and yes, Adam and Billy hated each other after it, but every character has beef with Adam anyway, so it wasn't necessary. Chloe even works with Adam now and doesn't seem particularly bothered. And they had to replace Delia with "Bella" who is a completely pointless character who is growing up entirely offscreen and no one even knows she's Billy's daughter. If Delia were around, she could be a teen right now playing the mean girl against Faith, and there might be some story there with the tension between Billy and Chloe, and connections through Victoria's children and Billy's relationship to Lily (via Moses as part of the teen scene).

Edited October 31, 20214 yr by BoldRestless

AMC - creating a front burner young love story b/w 2 totally new characters Cliff and Nina. Until then AMC had pretty much relied on the Tyler and Martin families to create story.

Although it was short term gain as the writers got a few good years from the pairing then there was nothing left .Once Taylor Miller left, Cliff didn't seem viable.

Edited October 31, 20214 yr by Paul Raven

@titan1978's choice of the Y&R reboot is a good one. I'll go with similar and even more extreme -- Dark Shadows going all-in on the supernatural with the introduction of Barnabas. Talk about an answered Hail Mary!

4 hours ago, BetterForgotten said:

The storyline was so dominant and also preceded by things like BJ's death and Monica's breast cancer, that the popular opinion had been GH had gotten too "dreary" and wasn't a "fun" soap to watch anymore so people tuned out. Hence why the planned story of giving Audrey alzheimer's was canceled soon after. 

I didn't mind, but I could totally see if you were a fan of 80's GH not really being too thrilled with this creative direction. 

It wasn't just those things back then.  Luke/Laura were broken up, Ned/Lois were on and off, and Sonny/Brenda had a brutal breakup all at the same time.  It was kind of dreary.  Still a great soap, but it was kinda depressing lol.  

3 hours ago, ironlion said:

OLTL Viki's DID revisitation in the 90s,

GH- giving Jason brain damage.Taking the Quartermaine golden boy into a brain damaged gangster. It went on to establish the next 25+ years of story.

AMC - Re writing history a d making Kendall Erica's daughter. It set up years of story with the fantastic Sarah Michelle Gellar.

DAYS- recasting Wayne Northrup with Drake H. as Roman, then bringing back Wayne. It lead up years of tension especially the John & Marlena story which created evil Sammy! 

I will always think bring Wayne back was a mistake.  It worked for the years that he was there, but lead to Roman being a total side character.  He was the first of the Brady's on the show, had a great romance with Marlena, and is now played by Josh Taylor lol.

Was it a risk to move Sheila and the Lauren to B&B? Whatever - it definitely paid off.