I agree that the show was too long last year, however IF they do cut it back to 12 weeks, which pros would go, Camilla has already announced her intention to withdraw from the show, so that leaves 1 female and 2 male pros to be 'dropped', who would you like to see go, for me the female would be Hayley, she made absolutely no impression in me last series. male pros to go, I think definately James after his outburst last series but I can't decide on the second one, they all have their own appeal.

Cutting the show back to 12 weeks should achieve more tghan the required 5% saving.

I do know what you mean about Hayley but I wonder if that was because it was her first series and also she was landed with a bit of a dud

I'm not a fan of James but his outbursts do make for good TV if we're going to be cynical about it. I'm afraid I want to keep the 12 weeks .... I just love it so much that it can't be on for too long for me!

I agree that Hayley did have a duffer in Mark, but I also thought that she wasn't of the same standard when she took part in the pro dances.

Now I don't know if the pros dancing together as they do on SCD is unusual, in which case she might just not be used to group dancing, but I would also like to go back to 12 couples, so Hayley would be my choice to go.

But I understood that Karen was a serious doubt as a dancer for the next series, although I thought she still wanted to remain involved with the show?

So with Camilla and Karen or Hayley gone, two male pros would have to go as well and this is where is gets sticky as some of the partnerships on SCD have been around a long time.

I know Matthew danced with Karen last time after Nicole was dropped, but Karen didn't have a permanent pro partner that she danced with outside of SCD, so the same imbalance wasn't there. It makes you wonder what the producers will do about choosing pros for the next series if they were prepared to split up Matthew and Nicole.

I read somewhere one male celeb was already saying he probably wouldn't do SCD this year and my guess is that it was Brendan (just a guess mind you).

It will be interesting what snippets we hear on the grapevine before the next series is announced.

I hope your guess is right ...!

Half the judges salary

Cut down the couples to 12

That must save the BBC about a million lol

Some good points in this thread.

The question of shortening the series or reducing the no. of couples are actually not related to the cost. They have to put on SOMETHING in those Saturday night slots. BTW - I think 16 couples was too many. 12 would be better, but thats my own preference.

Re Costs - the main single item seems to be Brucie's salary - about 17% of the entire production cost. When you add in Tesspits, it get even worse.

I think the production team have got their head so far up their (.)s, trying to make Strictly like the US version. The Judges job is to JUDGE - not to be friends with everyone. The 10 paddle has become so devalued it isn't worth having. Dancers and judges should be told that the judges should start from a "5" as a median, and go up or down from there. If the first dance out gets an 8 - where do you go from there is the next couple out are twice as good.

Just my 2p

JJ

Other pros were put with duds for their first series but still made a good impression. Hayley didn't seem to make any impression at all. No offence to her, I'm sure she's a very nice person but she didn't bring much to SCD.

Can't argue with that!

At the risk of upsetting many of our male friends on these boards, Ola isn't a pro dancer I would particularly miss. I find her much too interested in making herself look good rather than her partner.

Could just be wishful thinking on my part...but then again I might miss him...better the devil you know...

I agree with everyone who thinks Bruce should get paid much less ...but why should Strictly have to face a 5% cut ...where has all the money gone?

"The format is expected to generate £20 million in income over five years."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4304979.stm


"The BBC format has been sold to some 30 countries around the world from the US to Slovakia - and has inspired other local versions."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7586494.stm


"The BBC is launching a range of Strictly Come Dancing merchandise...The range will include nightwear, glitter balls and ipod covers...Further deals are expected to extend the Strictly Come Dancing merchandise to later include stationary and children's clothing..Products including jewellery, purses, cosmetic bags, earphones and covers for MP3 players are in the pipeline for Christmas."

http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/n...CMP=ILC-SEARCH


I'm not the only one who wonders why the BBC isn't "minted" ...Natalie Haynes on the Newsnight Review debate on TV ..15.40 minutes in:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...ew_13_03_2009/

For me the main problem with the show is that it seemed more about 4 egos at the side than the people actually out on the floor. Cutting back their salaries and/or indeed replacing a couple would be a start. They soured SCD for me so much last year on the various debacles and Austin's eviction was the final straw so that I can't even rouse up any enthusiasm for the next series. None.

After wondering if I might dip my toe back in the Strictly pond this autumn, your excellent choice of words has just reminded me why I got so irked last series. I am now back in the corridor of uncertainty - and have another seven months to spend there!

ReGenerist, all BBC shows have cuts imposed on them at the moment. Strictly isn't given any special dispensation (nor is Doctor Who, which probably makes the BBC even more money) - it has to find savings along with every other production.

And if we are stuck with Bruce again (as it would seem), then it has to be the judges who suffer.

Maybe we could have a 'judge-off' where we, the viewing public, can evict our least favourites? Now there's a show I'd happily watch ...

They even put me off seeing the Tour.

For me only the delightful Austin and Erin made the whole thing worth sticking with but no more for me I'm afraid this year UNLESS we get a shake up of the panel or at least the vote system back to how it was.

Now, there's a vote show I could go for!

I know what you mean nancy1975...and that's in spite of the fact that my fave pro was the eventual winner. Not only do I feel that the judges ego's have got out of hand, I also felt that the pro's were a bit sidelined last year too

For me, the dance-off just has to go. That's where the trouble started, and in spite of the judges protestations that they weren't really keen on the idea originally, I think they quickly realised that through tactical marking they could manipulate exactly who went through and who went home. It may be a big accusation, but a lot of the scoring last year was little short of bizarre imo, and I can't explain it any other way

And congratulations to her and Tom that at least the public favourite won in the end in spite of the system...

That is my feeling as well and why that if it's all the same old same old this year to be honest I will not be bothered with it. And I have dearly loved SCD in previous years.

It would be nice to have you watching and posting.

Even though I very nearly burst several blood vessels last series (with no favourite either I might add), I just couldn't not watch.

Mass unemployment sweeps like a dark shadow over this land even as Gordon Brown prints money night and day.

5% cutback looks a token symbol, to signify the Beeb's sympathy and solidarity with licence payers some of whom are going on short time and others to the dole queue.

I'll need a shake-up of the judges to keep Strictly as compulsory viewing on a saturday night. Otherwise it will just be a case of catching the show if I happen to be in...Never thought I'd say that as I've watched it avidly since day 1 but the last series had more moments that irked me than the previous five put together...

I have a feeling Brendan will be back to dance again on SCD

What about the Jordan's could they be going

Thank God Erin is staying on though

Stu- why don't they cut the panel down to three. Keep Craig but ditch the other three- and bring in Karen and Camilla to join Craig as the three judges. There would be no need for any head judge twaddle- or any casting votes

Or is that too much of a simple solution for the PTB

Sorry, but I don't fancy Camilla as a judge and I'd like Len and Bruno to stay. Karen can replace Arlene though!

Bless you, Buddy.

I suspect it will hinge on who the contestants are. And, crucially, what's happened with the judges, and the format. (I have a horrible feeling the BBC will be oblivious to the viewing public's concerns and carry on regardless, but we shall see).

But sorry - Len and Bruno have to go! Especially Bruno - he may be able to stretch his leg in the air () but his blatant favouritism last year was practically vomit-inducing ... ("My girls ..." ).

And yes, he can absolutely take Arlene with him! Maybe she could use the break to be treated for compulsive liar syndrome?

I suspect you are right and the BBC will just carry on as usual.

I think Bruno got carried away last time needs a good smack and Len lost the plot big time (blame it on all that transatlantic travelling :), but I don't want to change the panel too much. In fact, if I can't get rid of Arlene then I'd like another ballroom judge to join them - maybe Karen as she is already a judge in the real dancing world.

I think any one of the pro's could do at least as good a job of commenting and scoring as Len, Bruno and Arlene, and a far better job of conducting themselves with a bit of class Then again, I wouldn't say it was beyond a family of chimps either, given some of last years antics

Although I personally don't think it would be an issue, I think some might question Camilla's impartiality when it comes to Brendan if he dances next season.