In your opinion! Some of us actually watch it because we want to see pro good dancers teaching celebrities new skills. A pro dancer who does a sizzling samba is of much more interest to me than someone who can crack gags and host game shows! The problem with Anton (for example) is that his ballroom is exquisite but his Latin is dreadful. I may be mad but I actually want the pro dancers to be able to dance across both disciplines even if the celebs can't.

I mean, for godness sake, if the pros are chosen for their celebrity profile and ability to do gags and mess about then the show is totally doomed.

How can the BBC sidelines Matthew (a very talented dancer and superb teacher in both dance types) for someone like Anton who consistently fails to deliver in Latin?

Could you rephrase that?!!!!! Poor old Lilia will be exhausted if she is the only female. Imagine the quick changes needed in the dance routines!

Personally, I would be gutted not to see Matthew competing as a pro with his celebrity pupil. He is a dream to behold; but then I am biased since he and Alesha together, in my eyes, can never be rivalled.

Now that said, I think the BBC had better be very very careful, or Simon Cowell will see an opening for setting up his own Ballroom show which, with his money, would end up annihilating SCD for good. I wouldnt worry me because I love watching ballroom and latin so it would matter who was putting it on I'd still be watching.

These changes have annoyed me. In my opinion they try to incorporate ideas from Dancing with the Stars (the current series saw a number of pro's not returning but performing in pro-dances), but I think with DWTS, they got the right balance of who they didn't ask back for the main show. Strictly tries to nick these ideas but end up going about it all the wrong way. I find it very sad to say that I've preferred the last couple of seasons of DWTS to Strictly and I never thought I'd say that, but the changes in Strictly aren't making the show better whereas the changes brought into DWTS has benefited (this is of course my own personal opinion!)

Hopefully simon sees the opening soon and invites all the sidelined pros.That would be fun i can see simons smile now

How can you say that when the series hasn't started, it's a bit soon to be writing it off ..

I don't just mean the current changes - I'm not a fan of binning Arlene in favour of Alesha. But as I said above, that's just how I feel about it all and it's my opinion and obviously everyone is entitled to theirs as I am mine

These changes do seem a little odd. Anton and James, for example, would appear to have their own problems so I would question the logic in keeping either. Anton, though apparently popular, does have a Latin block (particularly in the jive). James seems to have the opposite problem. He's pretty decent across the board but he doesn't seem to attract the votes. I'm not saying the pro partner is responsible for getting the public vote but his partnerships, although he's had three decent partners (Gabby, Cherie and Zoe) haven't caught the imagination.

That said, nobody is irreplaceable. Maybe the new blood brought in will set the dance floor alight and we'll all forget the outrage any of us felt when we heard the plans. I do rather like the idea that Jan had of the pros being on a rotational basis though.

Well said stargazer. I totally agree with you.

AAAHHHHH what an nonsense, to drop a WORLD class dancer like Matthew Cutler ....mad isnt the word. BBC just lost their show.......

silly silly silly........................Matthew was the show.

The decisions of who to keep and who to axe/demote were very puzzling.

They seem to have sidelined the more popular pros and held onto the likes of James Jordan who has yet to last more than a few weeks in any given series!

Hello Sid. Haven't seen you on here for ages. Where have you been?

I agree the decision was puzzling, although I think James came across well this year, and so don't totally agree with you on that point.

Hello gorgeous! x

Good to run into you too

I turn into a bit of a lurker on the SCD board during the off-season. I've been busy battling on the Big Brother forum instead!

Given the choice, I'd probaly have kept all the pros that we've become so familiar with, including James, but in terms of a 'pro hierarchy' if you like, I thought he'd be lower down and in greater danger of getting the boot.

Still, I'm going to try and be optimistic and hope the newcomers win us over with their personalities and dance styles so that we can be entertained by our favourite show once again

P.S How did the dance exams go?

Hey I don't often get called gorgeous - well only two or three times a day I guess (fingers crossed behind back)

Big Brother is one reality programme which has passed me by.

James would be lower down than Matthew in my hierachy I agree. But then most of the pros would be. And I'll miss the other three too. I'm also trying to be optimistic and give the new dancers a chance.

Dance exam went very very well - surpassed my expectations and probably those of my teachers! .

Probably just as well, it gets quite heated over there (yes, more so than here!).

Anyway, well done on passing your exams, I knew you would

He took Cherie more than a 'few' (by dictionary definition 2-4) weeks, likewise Zoe. Some credit where it's due please. And I think he did come across better last year, especially on ITT.

There are several pros (including another of my own absolute favourites!) who have been knocked out in earlier weeks multiple times. Just because James has never been as far as the quarter finals does not make him on an average any worse than pros who have previously made a series final...

I do like Matthew, and I'm sorry to see him leave (I loved him and Aliona dancing together, and in my opinion there's nothing better as a pro dance than a Matt (and Nicole)-choreographed jive), but it's not the other pros' fault they were kept on! And popularity is subjective - this forum is not reflective of the actual popularity of pros - most general viewers would very probably name Anton as the first pro they could think of and he seems to be one of the least well-liked pros on this forum.

i think u should leave james alone yes he had a bad start on strictly but he has improved every year and has been amazing on the tour, and is always up for fun even if his does get a boo for it, i am glad that he has been give the chance to stay as i think he is an amazing dancer and has a lot to give to the show

Why?

I haven't broken the forum rules in any way.

We're all entitled to our opinion and I shall continue to voice mine.

If you read carefully, I didn't state that Strictly should wash its hands of James. I'm happy for him to stay. What I said was if they were to sideline anyone, I would expect it to be someone like him as opposed to the likes of Matt, Ian, Lilia and Darren because they've had a lot of success on the show and seem to have large fanbases. That's all. I don't think that was an outrageous or especially unreasonable suggestion.

They seem lost. The TV is full of dancing shows and talent shows with dancers which try and look modern and lively and they seem to be trying to take that audience away from X factor . Hence new young pros from similar backgrounds. They also seem to want reality TV stories - which for example rules out Brian who has just had the biggest one possible for a show. That argues for keeping Anton, Brendan and James as they produce headlines and James doubly because you might lose Ola if he was terminated.

Its typical of what happens when people let the marketing people loose with 2.2 ideas. You end up losing your quieter but well liked dancers, you keep the people who are the kiss of death to any celebrity and the leap in the dark that someone young and new will be any better usually proves wrongheaded. the result is dumbed down and doesn't work. Add to that, there's an element of despair in it too as they are still trying to deal with their public vote problem as it keeps on removing their competitive dancers and leaving the hunks, journeys and comedians. The plan seems to be to give them more reality TV, more Ola and more modern dancing if thats what the voters want. There's also possibly a bit of tail wagging horse too as the Sunday Bruce free show creates a need for more content that the existing pros couldn't fill in a working week. There may be an element of give the pros some compensation in the troupe idea but you wonder if its a move to fill the content gap that led to other silly ideas?

It can't work because they have succeeded in getting rid of a lot of their most successful people in popularity, training ability or record of achieving terms. They also can't have more modern more dynamic dancing without changing the age profile and ability level of their celebrities and there they seem to be going older rather than younger. Even if they did find the right people its doubtful if the format of the show would allow any celeb to get up to the standard of the dancers the public see in other shows. Ali made it after the show and even when someone like Rachel, Ali or Ricky reaches the right standard the history suggests they don't get the votes.

Essentially its floundering around and risks things getting worse rather than better.

I agree with much of that.

Oh dear, my optimism is fading again!

There used to be quite a gentle feel to Strictly, but I think the show is heading in the direction of DWTS which is more obvious, more about the razzle dazzle.

I would have binned Anton. While his ballroom is beautiful, his latin is rubbish.

Hope the new dancers have sufficient skill in both.

I agree with a lot of what you say about dumbing down in a way, but you have rather tarnished what I think was otherwise a well-thought out post by some unnecessary jibes towards certain professionals.

Is it Ola's fault she won the series? No. Is it her fault that many viewers were endeared to her by the partnership she and Chris created? No. Does that automatically mean that she will get more air time? Of course not. I'd like to see your source for the claim that the producers intend to give the viewers 'more Ola'. So what if she is liked by a lot of the public, that's not a bad thing and certainly nothing to get angry at the producers for. It's very demeaning to her to insinuate that her popularity is in some way detrimental to the show.

And as for 'reality TV' - when was the last time either James or Brendan had real fireworks and arguments with their celebrity partners? At least 4 years ago! It saddens me that because of one year where he had a partner with whom he didn't gel and coupled with the way the show is edited (anyone who believes what they see at face value should think again) that some people still hold a grudge against James and fail to take into account the past 2 years where he has got on very well with his partners. He has mellowed, as Len said in a VT last year, so let the past be so and stop dragging up instances that are no longer relevant. He is certainly not the kiss of death to any celebrity, no celebrity's elimination from the competition is down to their professional partner alone As much as I personally dislike Anton, I would never call him the kiss of death to a celebrity - that's an insult to his dancing and teaching ability overall, regardless of his limitations at Latin.

Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion, and entitled to think that James should not be on the show. But to say without foundation that the only reason he and Brendan are still on the show is for reality TV purposes is wholly unfair.

I think you are probably right that the producers are looking to the very successful DWTS to try and boost flagging ratings for Strictly.
I think though that they may be wrong in forgetting that what works in America may not work for UK viewers. The thing that Strictly had going for it to start with was that it was the "reality/celeb" show which actually had some credibility with viewers who hated the Reality genre in general. Celebrities weren't embarrassed to do Strictly - it didn't smack of the same career desperation as, for example, I'm a Celebrity. I think the problem is that many of those "non-reality" fans are now leaving the show as it becomes increasingly dumbed down by poor production and development decisions. Whilst those decisions may suit some, the target audience the producers are now going for is exactly the same as that attracted by X Factor which the BBC is never going to be able to compete with. Why not leave the populist audience to X Factor and concentrate on pulling in the audience who WON'T be watching X Factor?
Swapping quality dancers for "personality" pros is not going to achieve that.

I didn't say that or anything like it about Ola. Ola is a big draw. The fact that she is a big draw makes it more difficult to not have James on the show as she might go with him. Both of these seem undeniable propositions. The calculation may be part of the explanation of who went and who stayed. Saying someone stayed because they provide the reality TV aspect isn't saying they didn't deserve to stay on ability - if anything its suggesting an issue with the choice of who went.

There seems to me to be a clear relationship between Anton's Latin being limited as you agree and no celebrity going that far with him and several arguably underachieving. Hi profile yes, headline grabbing at times even yes., likely to produce a winner - no. If you produce weak weeks as inevitably as Cha follows Cha and can't do an exciting Latin or a dynamic free dance, you just can't win and you will go in one of those weak weeks. James and Brendan are more subjective and are more all around capable. My perception though is that neither is particularly popular with the public and both tend to underachieve now with better celebs partly because they carry a negative vote. Its also pretty undeniable that its Brendan and James who tend to make the dramatic answers back or statements that stoke the reality story side of the show. No one would call either reserved . The result of that is more story - but the result again for their celebs I think is fewer votes. Even if they painted out all their spots, I suspect the voters would still see them as Leopards.

They are obviously more than reality TV stars as they are indeed professional dancers, but in the terms of the show they also provide the reality TV element. Few of the female celebs add drama, Ola adds something else in terms of humour and something for the male audience , most of the male pros are quiet and the other ones that might produce onscreen stories probably now have. Viewed from a producers perspective, you either have to rely on the new untried people to generate your reality TV drama or you keep your old hands or you have no reality TV drama at all. My betting is you keep the old hands as you ditch the quieter people. Net result is what we seem to have on offer. Getting a pro who is unpopular and may well do something unpopular in the series, or getting someone who can't dance half the dances that well himself, looks pretty much like the kiss of death to me

Should never have removed, givin his popularity. I have a feeling this years show will not be as good as last years.