I like you guys. You seem to be well informed, and all of your points are well communicated... I like you.

I have no intention of watching Leno's show. And they've already blatantly said they're going to declare the show a success based on whatever set of numbers looks most favourable to them.

With that out of the way, I've gotta say that one of the things Poniewosik said that worries you is something I've been advocating for a while. Namely, that the Networks need to get off their high horse and be happy about pulling in numbers Cable would consider a success instead of using them as cause for cancellation.

Frankly, as far as most people are concerned, they're just another set of channels. They need to accept that and move on.

Jonathan -- I'm not sure what planet you live on, but if you include cable and pay TV there are just as many good quality TV shows out there as there ever has been. Of course, this is subjective, maybe you think "The Brady Bunch" or CHIPS was quality TV. As for the number of writers,actors, etc. -- You really don't believe there are fewer working today than there were when there were only three networks, do you??? There were some good shows in the past, but there was also a lot of crap, just like there is now. If you really want to be honest with yourself -- count all the shows you consider good now -- then go back 5 -- 10 -- 15 -- 20 --25 -- and 30 years. Let us know in what year you find the most number of quality shows -- Good hunting -- Mike

Maybe networks need to stop hoping for a golden goose and squeezing it to death. TV is like our diet: portions too large. If one is good, a dozen must be better; why just have one Law & Order for decades when you can have episodes every single night?
I'm beginning to appreciate the British TV sensibility. 6 to 13 episodes a year of a really good drama -- and then, maybe even not EVERY year. Hey, it seemed to work really well doing 5 episodes of Torchwood this year, and I don't see any calls for Torchwood: Las Vegas and Torchwood: Miami to fill out the schedule.
Leno, 5 nights a week at 11:30 was already too much and I had no interest in watching him then. 5 nights a week at 10? Good lord, no. At least with that drivel at 11:30, we had the POSSIBILITY of decent programming at 10 (the first two hours of primetime having long ago been abandoned to reality crap).

Network dramas are no more rewarding than whatever mayonnaise Leno provides. We have a wash of shows trying to compete with cable TV, trying to be lurid and sensationalistic, yet skirting just enough to survive of free broadcasting and sponsor models. What they are, after all, are bleached versions of those cable shows which, excepting one or two, aren't that great either. Critics call this a new golden age of television. If this is gold, they can have it all to their misinformed selves.

But let's be honest and paraphrase Warren Zevon - all TV drama is really is a parade of Lawyers, Cops & Doctors. The s**t has hit the fan.

We get the quality of television that we deserve.

"However, if the show takes off, it could lead to a renaissance in scripted programming. With less time slots, shows will have to be that much better to make the cut."

Um, i think that the way TV works is that with fewer time slots there will be less risk taking and more reliance on "tried and true" formulas. That's just how it is.