Is “Major League” the best “Based on a True Story” Movie?

I’m a huge fan of sports movies. And, of course, many sports movies take their cue from reality. One of the most infamous types is the “Based on a True Story.” Of course, how accurate any of these vary. And regardless of how true the story is, many edit or inflate the story to add dramatization. There is one movie, that is “pure fiction” though that has so many true to life elements, I just had to talk about it. That movie, as you know from the title, is “Major League.” Major League tells the story of the Cleveland [Seriously it’s been 20 years they’re still called this?] baseball team and their owner Rachel Phelps. Here are three ways Rachel Phelps is “Based on a True Story.”

3.) Rachel Phelps is Billy Beane … a decade early

Alright, Billy Beane didn’t become general manager of the Oakland Athletics until 1998 and Major League came out in 1989. So, it’s hard to say it was based on reality. That said the plot of the two is very similar. A team in a depressed market struggles to compete against teams with larger payrolls. By acquiring undervalued assets that don’t look like conventional players, somehow a scrappy team is able to compete, but sadly unable to win in the playoffs. And, it turns out this was actually the “original script” to Major League. The plot we are given is that owner Rachel Phelps plans to tank the Cleveland season for nefarious reasons — we’ll get back to that shortly. However, that’s just a line she feeds the boardroom. Her team is actually cash-strapped, so the only way to compete is to look for undervalued players. There was a scene originally in the movie about this, but it didn’t screen well with audiences so it was cut.

Speaking of that scene

2.) Rachel Phelps is Herb Brooks

Another one of my favorite “Based on a True Story” movies is “Miracle. We’re told the thrilling tale of how the 1980s US Hockey team defeated the unbeatable Soviets. Part of the story is that the US players have a lot of animosity towards each other as many are from rival colleges. Of course, the US is also having a lot of strife at the time, so it’s hard to get the players to gel. US coach Herb Brooks decides the best way for his team to get along is to have a common enemy — him! He is cold and distant to the players, and sometimes sadistic, including making them do sprints after a disappointing exhibition game. Rachel Phelps, who we already know is on the team’s side, is the same way. She’s overtly antagonistic to the team. She seemingly does spiteful things like restricting access to the team plane and take away equipment. The team unites around proving Phelps wrong, so the plan works! The scene showing how this works doesn’t age well though …

1.) Rachel Phelps is Clay Bennett

Admitted this is the weirdest entry. As mentioned, the original ending to Major League was changed after test screenings. As such the plot we’re given is Rachel Phelps inherits a team in a market she doesn’t like. She plans to tank the season so bad that a clause in her contract allows her to relocate the team to Miami. As this was a feel-good movie, of course, that doesn’t happen. Reality can be much crueler. Clay Bennett acquired the Seattle Supersonics and said he planned to keep them in Seattle. However, he then traded away their good pieces and demanded stadium renovations from Seattle. When, shockingly, Seattle didn’t want to pay money for a bad team, Clay relocated the team to his home state of Oklahoma. And oddly, Clay’s real-world story starts drifting into Major League’s universe even more. In Major League II, despite being a contender, Cleveland’s money woes cause them to lose one of their stars. Because Bennett relocated to OKC, he ended up letting James Harden go over money. At least both Cleveland and OKC did make the finals once in their respective universes.

Did Major League Predict the future?

When I set about to write this piece my thesis was of course how much Major League copied reality. Of course, date checking everything shows it’s the other way around. I guess I’ll go rewatch the movie to see what else I should expect! Anyway, until next time.

-Dre

The Boxscore Geeks Show: Another MIT Sloan Analytics in the Tank.

Wow, another long one! We talk my time at the 2018 MIT Sloan Analytics Conference, tanking in the NBA, the NCAA controversy (the most recent one, maybe?), and some around the NBA team talk.

Hosts

Sources

You can watch us live at twitch.tv/nerdnumbers; we usually go Wednesday at 9:30 pm EST. Follow us on Twitter, and we’ll keep you posted!

Please subscribe to Channel NerdNumbers on YouTube and like us on iTunes!

You can download the show direct here.

Video Show


Show Notes

I attended the MIT Sloan Analytics Conference and had some thoughts, tune in to hear. If you want another fantastic analyst’s thoughts on the state of Sloan, check out Cleaning the Glass’ write up here.

I’m pretty proud that this happened.

Brian notes that sadly, Hinkie is likely not going to be back in the NBA anytime soon.

The NBA is warning teams against tanking. Any fan of behavioral psychology probably has some bad news for them.

We talk about the most recent NCAA scandal. Lots of people agree the notion that paying athletes is fine. We review Stan Van Gundy’s take.

As Shaun King notes, no joke, the NCAA has basically compared “student-athletes” to prison labor.

We discuss a few teams in the NBA including the Wizards, Nuggets, and Bucks.

Seeya next week!

-Dre

The Charles Babbage Basketball Prediction Problem

Charles Babbage is one of the pioneers of modern-day computing. In the 1800s he came up with the idea for a computer when such a thing was a far-off pipe dream. And as often happens with explaining fancy new future technology, some of the questions he got were odd. One of my favorite quotes about this was:

On two occasions I have been asked, — “Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?” In one case a member of the Upper, and in the other a member of the Lower, House put this question. I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.

Source: Wikiquote

I think about this quote a lot when it comes to sports predictions. As fans of the Boxscore Geeks or Wages of Wins will know, I have slowly adopted Dave Berri’s distaste for preseason predictions, primarily as “proof” of anything. And one of the biggest issues I have is encapsulated in the Babbage quote above. You see, when it comes to preseason prognostications, one can put in the wrong inputs and get the “right” outputs.

For example, when we first started the Boxscore Geeks we took on the audacious task of projecting the entire NBA season. We included our projections for every player’s minutes and performance in the NBA and got a win estimate for every NBA team as a result. And here’s the thing, while that’s a fun exercise, it goes off the rails quickly. Let’s use the current NBA season as an example. Here’s a list of teams that had a significant change to their roster either via injury or player movement. The list is not all-inclusive.

  • The Boston Celtics lost Gordon Hayward for the entire NBA season a mere one game into the season.
  • The Chicago Bulls “stars” Bobby Portis and Nikola Mirotic got into a fight two days before the NBA season started. Mirotic missed two months with a broken jaw. Portis was out eight games with a suspension. Eventually, the Bulls traded Mirotic at the trade deadline.
  • The Clevland Cavaliers did a complete overhaul of their roster at the trade deadline that saw Dwyane Wade, Channing Frye, Isaiah Thomas, Jae Crowder, Derrick Rose, Iman Shumpert leave and brought back George Hill, Rodney Hood, Jordan Clarkson, and Larry Nance Jr. Additionally, Kevin Love is out six to eight weeks with a broken hand.
  • The Denver Nuggets recently acquired thirty-million dollar a year man Paul Millsap went down in November and will be out until at least March!
  • The Detroit Pistons had a blockbuster trade deadline trade for Blake Griffin.
  • The Los Angeles Clippers traded away Blake Griffin at the trade deadline.
  • The Los Angeles Lakers traded away Larry Nance Jr. and Jordan Clarkson for Channing Frye and Isaiah Thomas.
  • The Memphis Grizzlies have lost Mike Conley for the season.
  • The Milwaukee Bucks traded Greg Monroe for Eric Bledsoe a month into the season. Additionally, Malcolm Brogdon is out for six to eight weeks with a tendon injury. Jason Kidd was also fired midseason if you believe coaching matters.
  • The New Orleans Pelicans have lost Demarcus Cousins for the season. They also acquired Nikola Mirotic at the trade deadline.
  • The New York Knicks have lost All-Star Kristaps Porzingis for the season with a knee injury.
  • The Oklahoma City Thunder have lost underrated guard Andre Roberson for the season.
  • The Orlando Magic traded Elfrid Payton for a second-round pick at the trade deadline. Also, Aaron Gordon has almost missed twenty games with various injuries.
  • The Philadelphia 76ers number one draft pick Markelle Fultz is out for the season (I believe.)
  • The Phoenix Suns traded Eric Bledsoe for Greg Monroe. They have since waived Greg Monroe. They also acquired Elfrid Payton at the trade deadline.
  • The Sacramento Kings traded away George Hill at the trade deadline.
  • The San Antonio Spurs have been with Kawhi Leonard for most of the season, and his timetable to return is unknown.
  • The Utah Jazz traded Rodney Hood for Jae Crowder and lost Thabo Sefolosha for the season.
  • The Washington Wizards are without All-Star point guard John Wall for six to eight weeks for knee surgery.

I’ve left out unexpected changes in performance, surprising rookie performances, etc. Regardless, this season I count nineteen teams that due to either injury or trade had a significant difference to their roster from the start of the year. And that means whatever inputs any of us had for our projections to the NBA season are now entirely different from what’s going on now. Of course, many of us can be “right” in regards to the outcome at the end of the season. My example, for instance, is one could have predicted Boston would win over 55 games this season and credit Gordon Hayward. They are well on their way to that, but Hayward is not a direct factor.

If we’re honest with ourselves, the prediction we made to start the season was answering an entirely different question. And the critical part of this is that this season isn’t an outlier. Every NBA season there are severe injuries that impact teams. Teams are always allowed to trade and waive players. The NBA is huge in that one or two players can completely change how a team does. It doesn’t mean we should stop trying to predict what’s going to happen. We should just acknowledge that by the time the NBA season wraps up, what we thought to start the season has little to do with what the NBA looks like at the end.

-Dre

The Boxscore Geeks Show: Ripping up my Prediction on the Cavaliers

Wow, another long one! We have to backtrack and explain how the trade deadline immediately made las week’s show obsolete. We talk the Bucks and their analytics squad. And of course we talk more about the Twin Galaxies controversies (and kind of tie it back to sports and esports, I swear!) Tune in!

Hosts

Sources

You can watch us live at twitch.tv/nerdnumbers; we usually go Wednesday at 9:30 pm EST. Follow us on Twitter, and we’ll keep you posted!

Please subscribe to Channel NerdNumbers on YouTube and like us on iTunes!

You can download the show direct here.

Video Show


The NBA transactions at basketball-reference.

An article at the Journal Sentinel about the Bucks and their analytics department.

Are video game records broken?

-Dre

p.s. We’ll talk more about this next week I’m sure, but as we recorded the show, Jokic recorded the fastest triple-double in NBA history, which I’m preemptively calling the boxscore of the year.

Should the Mavericks have won the 2003 NBA Finals?

In 1979 the NBA introduced the three-point line. Almost 40 years later, teams have finally realized it’s a good thing. Modern teams are raining down threes, and the best offenses in the league are built around layups and threes (or as we affectionally call it “Moreyball”). And that can’t help make you think of historical players (John Stockton anyone?) and teams.

In 2002-2003 the Mavericks had a 28-year-old Steve Nash and a 24-year-old Dirk Nowitzki on a team together. And this team went on to a 60 win record. They lead the league in Offensive Rating (how many points they scored per 100 possessions). And I think they vastly underperformed what they could have done. That season the Mavericks were second in the NBA in three-point attempts per game at 20.3. Dirk and Steve only combined for 8.2 of them. In the modern NBA, the lowest number of three-point attempts for an NBA team is the Knicks at 22.2. The second place team, the Brooklyn Nets, takes 34.2 three-pointers a game.

And you can’t help but wonder if the Mavericks had embraced Moreyball in 2002-2003, what it would have looked like. Here’s a rundown of the firepower the Mavericks had in 2003.

  • Dirk Nowitzki – 4.9 3PA/G, 38.4% career three-point shooter.
  • Mike Finley – 4.7 3PA/G, 37.5% career three-point shooter
  • Nick Van Exel – 4.3 3PA/G,  35.7% career three-point shooter
  • Steve Nash – 3.3 3PA/G, 42.8% career three-point shooter
  • Walt Williams – 2.6 3PA/G, career 37.9% three-point shooter

As mentioned the Mavs finished the season tied for the best record. But due to the stupid playoff seeding rules, they nabbed the 3rd seed! As a result in the first round of the playoffs, they had to play the six-seeded Blazers, who were a 50 win team and took them to seven games. While they got home court, they had to face the 59 win Sacramento Kings in the second round, who also took them to seven games. It turns out home court didn’t matter in their six-game loss to the Spurs. That said, you can’t help what wonder what a more relaxed schedule in the playoffs and an offense based on three-point shooting would have done against the Spurs.

Notoriously, Mark Cuban relented why Steve Nash couldn’t have played like an MVP in Dallas. Of course, we’d argue that he did, but regardless, the major change to Steve Nash was playing under D’Antoni. And one thing D’Antoni did was increase the number of threes the Suns took and then the number of threes that Steve Nash took. We often talk hypotheticals, and it’s hard to know if a player on a different team (for instance, what if Shaq had stayed in Orlando. What if Denver had won the 2003 draft lottery?), but most have too many variables to know anything. But it just feels slightly more certain in the land of absurd speculations, that had D’Antoni taken over the 2003 Mavericks, they’ve have had a much better shot at a title.

-Dre

p.s. Day three of daily posting Monday-Thursday continues! I’ll try and do better at posting in the morning, but I’ll still count today, even though it was “after business hours.”

 

 

LeBron James and LaMarcus Aldridge Lead the Game Changers!

A quick reminder on the “Game Changer” metric. The Wins Produced formula estimates a player’s contribution in regards to how many wins they earn a team over the course of the season. We can translate this into point margin (the Points over Par metric), as in, how many points did they help their team outscore (or get outscored by) their opponent. If we compare their Points over Par (PoP) for a given game to the actual score, we can ask an important question: if you replaced them with an average player, would the outcome have changed? Here’s a fun down of the top ten game changers this season by net wins and net losses.

Player Game Changer  Wins Game Changer Losses
LeBron James 17 6
LaMarcus Aldridge 11 2
Anthony Davis 10 2
James Harden 9 2
Stephen Curry 11 4
Kevin Love 10 3
Klay Thompson 9 3
Clint Capela 5 0
Giannis Antetokounmpo 8 3
Victor Oladipo 9 4

In a revelation that will shock no one, LeBron James has been clutch this season. The Cavs needed his performance for seventeen of their thirty-three wins. Let that sink in. Admittedly he has aged, a little, and cost them a few games too. Our only “perfect” player in the top ten is Clint Capela, our darkhorse MVP candidate. Let’s also give a shout out to Kevin Love as well, who has been key to Cavs this season and will hopefully be back healthy for the playoffs.

A short post for today, but that’s how it goes sometimes! See you tomorrow!

-Dre

The Boxscore Geeks Show: the Anti-Speed Run

Wow, a long one! We talk the Super Bowl, the horrendous Cavs, various NBA trades, Forbes NBA values, and videogame record scandals.

Hosts

Sources

You can watch us live at twitch.tv/nerdnumbers; we usually go Wednesday at 9:30 pm EST. Follow us on Twitter, and we’ll keep you posted!

Please subscribe to Channel NerdNumbers on YouTube and like us on iTunes!

You can download the show direct here.

Video Show


As noted, I’m planning on returning to “daily” postings (Monday-Thursday). I’m starting on a “Friday” with today’s post, and admittedly the show notes will be sparse or rather non-existent today. That said, tune into nerdnumbers.com regularly for blogs, and boxscoregeeks.com for stats and tools.

-Dre

Why “The Empire Strikes Back” destroys the Star Wars Universe

Pop quiz time, what’s the best Star Wars movie (so far, don’t let us down Abrams!)? Did you say Empire? You probably said Empire.

If you said any movie in episodes I-III, please leave.

If you said any movie in episodes I-III, please leave.

Alright, so Empire Strikes Back shows that either the Empire, who is striking back, is either dumb or that there’s a major problem with the entire Star Wars mythology.

Let’s start, at one point Darth Vader is having a discussion with Admiral Ozzel via Skype. Darth Vader gets upset and chokes Ozzel, as you do.

Worst performance review ever.

Worst performance review ever.

In Episode VI, Darth Vader says something, which at the time seems silly.

The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force.

In Star Wars, we see Darth Vader choke a guy with his mind, while in the same room. Mind you, this happens after we see him choke a guy with his hands, so it’s essentially just wireless choking. We also see him have a weak sword fight with an old man. And he also gets hit by his wingman. So, this line seems downright foolish when we see the Death Star blow up a planet. Of course, the Death Star is slow moving and easy to destroy.

But let’s get to another important scene in Empire, they have drones. They have drones, with cameras.

Viper Probe Droid

The Empire is scattering these droids across the galaxy in the hopes of finding proof of the rebel’s base. Once the droid sends video back to the Empire, the Empire sends a giant army of large slow tanks on four legs, for some reason.

walkers

You know a better idea? Just send a bunch more probes with cameras and have Darth Vader kill the rebels with his force powers over the camera. No casualties, no major loss of equipment. No lead time for the rebels to escape!

In Empire Strikes Back we see Yoda lift a spaceship with the force. We see Darth Vader make a storm of large objects fly at Luke. And apparently this is all doable if the force user has a line of site, even a camera, at their target! The Empire has the most dangerous weapon in the galaxy. Any place there’s a camera, Darth (or the Emperor, who can also use the force) can kill people using the force. They can even move large objects around. The Empire insists on sending large armies to attack the rebels … just because?

The original Star Wars trilogy was already the story about the scrappy underdogs beating overwhelming odds. But Empire Strikes Back makes it worse. The rebels are essentially fighting an omnipotent being wherever there are cameras. How many times do the Emperor or Darth Vader have a video channel to a major event? Every one of those scenes should end with the rebels being choked or their ships crashing into each other. All I can conclude is that the Empire is idiotic. After all, they’d have to be to be defeated by an army of teddy bears.

NerdCast: WMAC Masters

WMAC Masters

This Week’s Show

Andres Alvarez (@nerdnumbers) and his brother Daniel are back to discuss a TV show from their childhood: WMAC Masters! The world’s best martial artists are all competing for the ultimate prize on a Saturday morning show that tries to blend wrestling, G.I. Joe, and Street Fighter. Did it work? Tune in to find out our thoughts.

Hosts

  • Andres Alvarez (@nerdnumbers)
  • Daniel Alvarez. He’s not on Twitter, but he did also do the editing of the show!

Sources

You can also subscribe to Channel NerdNumbers on YouTube

Video Show

Show Notes

Surprisingly a show cancelled in the mid-90s due to low ratings has never been released on DVD or blu-ray. You can find the entire show on YouTube(for now) here

I normally try and leave highlight of our train of thought on the show. We hop all over the place though. I say just enjoy the show. If you watch the video show, Daniel splices in lots of clips from the show to prove we didn’t just make all of this up. Don’t worry, I’ll add some random footnotes too.

The Wikipedia entry on this show is quite comprehensive and worth checking out if you were a fan of the show.

A Trope I mention is called Stage Whisper, where characters discuss private and important information in a very obvious fashion.

Herb Perez, aka Olympus, ended up becoming a city council member in real life.

More tropes this show used: “Remember the New Guy?” and “Lampshade Hanging”

Correction, Erik Betts is a helicopter pilot in the movie “Ant-Man” not “San Andreas.”

A goal of this show was clearly to sell action figures. This failed spectacularly. A byproduct? The toys from the show are now rare and expensive.

Retail $129.99

Retail $129.99

We talk a bunch about season one’s feud between “Great Wolf” and “Tiger Claw”, which was the conversation we had that lead to us actually making this podcast episode.

Despite having a women’s division, WMAC Masters ignores their female characters (reminds me of the WWE) Out of twenty-six episodes, only seven feature womens’ fights. And many times these fights are shown in highlight flashbacks or even just characters telling each other what happened.

The idea any of these fights could happen is silly. Here’s a clip of Herb Perez in the 92 Olympics, where the fighters wear full pads, and he knocks a guy out with a kick.

With that, I’ll leave you with, in my opinion, the best dialogue in the show

“It was an accident” – Olympus
“No, YOU’RE an accident” – Chameleon

Behind the Scenes from a Contestant on “Pop Quiz, Hot Shot”

Remember that episode of “The Critic”, where he excitedly goes to show his family his college indie film and then has to conclude: “It stinks.”? Yeah, “Pop Quiz, Hot Shot” from Channel Awesome felt like that. I’ve been a big fan of the Nostalgia Critic and other Channel Awesome shows. I was “lucky” enough to be a contestant. I was not in the pilot episode. I am, I believe, one of the contestants in one of the other five episodes they’ve recorded. As it has been over a month since the pilot was released, there’s a good chance my episode never sees the light of day. I wanted to give some insight into what I saw as a contestant and some general thoughts.

I Enjoyed the Experience

Pop Quiz Hot Shot

Let’s start with the following. I did not contribute to the Indiegogo campaign. I did not expect to win any prizes by agreeing to be on the show and was more excited about the experience. I live in Wisconsin. I have friends in Chicago. I enjoyed taking a day trip up to Chicago. I got to see the Nostalgia Critic’s studio. I got to meet and talk with Doug, Rob, and Barnie Walker in depth. Tamara showed up to record her scenes, and it was great to meet her as well.

In spite of some of the issues surrounding Channel Awesome lately, I’ve still been a fan for a while. It was fun to meet the crew. And the “game show” was fun as well. It was akin to getting a chance to play Trivial Pursuit with a TV personality you like. My excitement at the experience of that probably clouded what should have been some obvious issues with the show itself.

Background the Show Story

The show attempts to use a narrative to explain the show. A tactic that doesn’t quite hit the mark. But let’s review it.

Brad Jones, a Channel Awesome personality, wanted to host a game show. After being turned down by the Nostalgia Critic, he decided to make his own game show. With the help of his henchman General Anaesthetic, he kidnaps Ms. Stockholm to be his lovely assistant. He now kidnaps various contestants to be on his show. If they win, they get fabulous prizes! If they lose, they die!

Background the Show Format

Popquiz Hot Shot

The show consists of five rounds. The pilot did a horrible job of explaining the rules of scoring. Hopefully, this helps.

Round one is a “physical challenge.” In the pilot, this was a game of Hasbro’s “Let’s go Fishin’” and in the episode I was on, it was a game of Hasbro’s “Don’t Break the Ice.” The winner of this round gets four points. Again, this was never explained on the show that aired. And we’ll get back to some more issues with it later.

Round two is a trivia round. Each correct response is worth a point. Each incorrect answer costs you a point. For the show I was on, the theme was 80s trivia.

Round three is another “physical challenge.” In the pilot, the contestants had to solve a giant maze. In the episode I was on, we had to spell the names of a bunch of actors from their pictures — the hook being all of the actors had hard to spell names. Also, spoiler, I did horrible at this! The winner of this round gets four points.

Round four is another trivia round. The same rules apply, a correct answer is worth a point, an incorrect answer costs you a point. For the show I was on, the theme was 90s trivia.

The person with the most points after the four rounds gets to face the Nostalgia Critic head to head! Brad asks the Critic and the contestant six quickfire questions. In the pilot, it was Disney love songs. In my episode, it was cartoon theme songs.

If the contestant beats the Critic, they get a $100 gift card. In theory, this prize rolls over if the competitor loses. By the time I filmed, they weren’t sure. Spoiler, the Critic won, so we never found out.

One note, for our taping in the trivia round, we were told we had to wait until Brad finished reading the question before buzzing in. As we saw in the Pilot episode, there was an issue with one contestant spamming the buzzer. Also, the negative point for an incorrect answer was added. Again, this was to help alleviate the issue of just spamming in and guessing.

With all the background, let’s get to some of the issues with the show. Fish in a barrel, I know.

Scheduling Issues

I listened to a podcast with some former Channel Awesome employees. They had some hope that maybe the quality of the show would improve, as the pilot was a disorganized mess. The sad news that it hasn’t.

It appears a major issue for the show has been scheduling conflicts. Malcolm Ray was not around to shoot when we were there. I believe this is why Fard Muhammad was brought in to play General Anaesthetic. Except, he too had some scheduling conflicts. Barney Walker wasn’t sure Fard would be around for filming, so he purchased a “Dictator” costume so he could fill in if need be.

082112-the-dictator

This is who Barney is supposed to be.

Barney then took the name of Colonel Klink, a character from Hogan’s Heroes and spoke with a German accent. Of course, Fard was able to make filming, so both are inexplicably filmed, to the confusion of everyone!

I answered a casting call that Doug put on the tail-end of one of his episodes on Avatar. I was told to arrive for filming at 12:30pm. I then spent a lot of time waiting. As I mentioned, I didn’t hate this too much as I got to hang out in the Channel Awesome studio. But it was still somewhat troubling that a scheduled recording took quite a while to get going.

I also know both weather and sickness have caused some scheduling issues of previous episodes. But the big takeaway should be that even several episodes in, they hadn’t gotten to the point of being able to schedule a taping. Somewhat troubling given their goal is forty episodes.

General Disorganization

The show itself still had some organization issues. Remember the physical challenges? Well, neither myself or the other contestant had ever played “Don’t Break the Ice.” but they just started the timer and away we went! We played it incorrectly it turns out. I’ve also heard the contestants aren’t playing “Let’s Go Fishin'” with the correct rules either.

I mentioned the trivia rounds were broken into two categories, 80s and 90s. Well, it turns out that the cards got shuffled up and some of the 90s trivia made it into round one! Oh well!

After the show was over, my wife and I went and grabbed some food nearby. We ran into both Barney and Fard from the show. We were actually told our episode had recorded the quickest they’d seen yet. Not the best sign.

I should note, this was recorded in October! I sent an email to the Channel Awesome Game Show email account when I was done to ask about airtime. I never heard back.

Audio/Video Quality

I can’t speak to the audio/visual quality of our episode. But as far as I can tell, no new camera or microphones were added between the pilot and our episode. So, if they continue to air the episodes, it’s unlikely they’ll get any better. There were no updates to the set either, so don’t hold your breath there.

There was some hope that things improved since the pilot. I believe I was in the third or fourth round of taping. So, unless they scrapped all their initial episodes and went back to the drawing board, don’t hold your breath.

The Show Doesn’t Know What it Wants to Be

Alright, one of the big issues with this show is it has no idea what it wants to be. The trivia rounds are essentially “Jeopardy”. The physical challenges are supposed to be reminiscent of “Double Dare”. The final round with the Nostalgia Critic is meant to be like “Win Ben Stein’s Money.” Ms. Stockholm, I think is supposed to be a joke Vanna White or Bob Barker assistant. The show’s set is “Saved by the Bell” themed. The Brad Jones background story is supposed to be something. But in the end, none of it works together. Tack on the editing in the final cut of the first show, and it does, unfortunately, come out a big mess.

Indiegogo thoughts

Channel Awesome - Indiegogo

I’m really conflicted here. The biggest complaint I hear about the show, repeatedly, is “Ninety thousand dollars! Can you believe they stole ninety thousand dollars?” I’m going to try and be a little nice to Channel Awesome for a second. But just to avoid any anger while you read the next few paragraphs, I have to be clear. After reviewing the Indiegogo campaign, and observing the state of things first hand, there is no way to say Channel Awesome hasn’t royally screwed up here.

I’ve found in the age of Patreon, Kickstarter, etc. that many people take on the role of shareholder when they find out how much a creator collected. Except, most of these collection techniques aren’t the same as owning stock in something. Additionally, many people that don’t contribute, take it upon themselves to explain what the creators owe.

And, in general, I find people don’t get finances. Things like Kickstarter take a cut of the profits. What’s more, some pledges don’t pay. And many reward tiers do require some cost to fulfill. Then, of course, there are taxes, etc. to be considered. So I find people think there’s a bigger stack of money than there is.

Now, even with all of that said….this ended up a major cluster. Let’s be clear about a few things. First, their initial budget was absurdly stupid from the get go. At the amount they reached ($89K and change) they promised:

  • 40 episodes of the Pop Quiz, Hot Shot game show.
  • 52 Episodes of a Comic Book Show
  • 40 Episodes of a “Gaming Gauntlet Show”

That’s 132 episodes! Even if they had the full budget, that’s $681 an episode! As of the pilot release they said they’d spent $47,767.67 of the funds they’d collected. In the same notes they said they’d filmed ten episodes of Pop Quiz Hot Shot — that’s assuming they count the five test episodes.

Now, I have no idea of the communication Channel Awesome has had with their backers. As per Indiegogo’s FAQ, transactions are non-refundable once a project is successfully backed. You are allowed to contact the seller directly – see their FAQ here.

The basic thesis of Doug’s initial video was essentially that with the money Channel Awesome would:

  • Improve the quality of their equipment for recording.
  • Build more sets. Note, I had not seen any built when I visited in October.
  • Use the new equipment and sets to make new shows.
  • Produce new content quicker and with better quality.

The reality is that almost two years after the campaign finished, they are over halfway through their budget and less than ten percent of the way to their goal. And that’s ignoring the whole improved quality issue as well. A lot of the criticism of the show is the poor quality of the set, recording, and editing.

The truly rough part about this is that, in theory, they should have been able to do better. A big reason I’m sure many people gave money was because of how quickly shows like Nostalgia Critic were released with mostly good quality. The number of mistakes that have been made are hard to take. Especially, as in the original video, Doug talks about many of them. You can’t say, for instance, you want to improve the quality of your recording equipment and then have issues with soundproofing.

On the one hand, I can kind of sympathize. I’ve definitely decided to take on a project, invest in some equipment and then never go anywhere. The issue is, I did this with my own money. I have absolutely no idea the best way forward here for Channel Awesome. They need new sets, and a faster turnaround. But that’s what they said two years and $50,000 ago! Is it likely with less time and less money they’ll actually accomplish it?

They’ve burned a lot of goodwill. In short, I’m sorry if you contributed money. The show is every bit the trainwreck you imagined. That said, I had a fun day playing trivia with a guy that makes funny videos on the net. Since then, it’s been sad to realize that Channel Awesome has a lot of issues that make it not-so-awesome.

A Sad P.S.

The Giddy Owl has a fun rundown of the pilot episode. They also posted a mini-update from Rob Walker about the show. First, the update promises corrections and fixes. Second, it mentions an episode with Fard as host should be coming out “this month”, which refers to April. Finally, they say Brad should be filming four new episodes in the first week of May. The show with Fard as the host, to my knowledge, did not appear in April. If they are filming new shows then I’d say it’s fair to say they scrapped the other episodes, which means that Channel Awesome is back to square one. Again, I’m sorry to all the Indiegogo backers.