There seems to be a bit of a debate here as to whether an Emmy win is always deserved.

So in light of this, what particular Emmy wins have you thought were undeserving? Particularly if there was someone else in the category who should have been victorious or someone else who was completely bypassed for a nomination. Give some explanation as to why you feel a certain way.

Let 'em rip.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: winterwonder,

I don't think Kiefer Sutherland deserved to win for 24, especially during Season 5. I know it was the best overall season but he wasn't at his best. He just got swept in with all the love. Martin Sheen or Peter Krause would have made much better winners in my book. I don't know if anyone else feels the same way here, but that was one win I didn't care for.

Also, Tony Shalhoub. All three times. Seriously.

So who would you have preferred instead of Shalhoub taloson?

quote:

Originally posted by winterwonder:
So who would you have preferred instead of Shalhoub taloson?

Larry David the first time, Jason Bateman the second time, and Steve Carell the third time. Each of these actors deserved a win MUCH more than Shalhoub's stupid schtick. Although he is better than Charlie Sheen, but that's not saying much.

The West Wing winning best drama for the fourth consecutive time springs to mind. I'm sure there are many others, but that is one of the most upsetting in my opinion.

I loved the west wing's 4th season win. They submitted tapes perfectly. Tonally they went together well and they were very strong/relevant episodes. They've held up particularly well too.

However, the season 3 win for The West Wing is pretty upsetting. Six Feet Under submitted terribly that year so it's understandable that voters went with what was comfortable, but the first two seasons of SFU were extraordinary.

Katherine Heigl's win over Sandra Oh bothers me. A lot.

Keifer won because he got swept in. He probably deserved to win eventually, but that award should have gone to Leary or Meloni. Even sheen had a stronger tape.

I really like Sally Field in Brothers and Sisters, but she has Minnie Driver's emmy. Driver's tape is one of the best tape submissions in that category this decade(only "Whitecaps" is better).

Doris Robert's 2nd Raymond win and 4th Raymond win are appalling. The 2002 emmy should have gone to Kim Cattrall(who had 4 great tapes) and the 2005 one should have gone to Jessica Walters or Holland Taylor.

Brad Garrett over Peter Boyle in 2005. Really emmy voters?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: G.Penn,

The Drama Lead Actor/Actress wins in 2007 really urk me like no one's business.

James Spader's win makes me laugh though. He wins with a crap tape, but then can't win the next year with a tape that is 10x better (I've seen "Angel of Death" several times and still do not understand how that was the best of the best). No way should he have beaten James Gandolfini. And that category would have been so much better had Michael C Hall, and Kyle Chandler - who besides Gandolfini had the best tapes that year - been nominated.

Still don't understand how Sally Field won. Don't get me wrong, I love her and I love the show, but she really has never done anything that would warrant an Emmy in my mind. Should have been Minnie Driver. (But it really should have gone to Connie Britton. But, oh wait, she was snubbed so she must not have been deserving in the ~voters eyes~ Nevermind!)

Do I have to explain why I hate Katherine Heigl's win? Oh, I don't? Well, good, cause I wasn't going to.

Allison Janney winning like 10 million times. Can't believe Jennifer Garner never got an Emmy.

But I won't complain too much because ~*every winner is a deserved winner*~. Duhhhhh.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Bazookka Joe,

Allison Janney can win like a hundred thousand times, but they can't give Sarah Michelle Gellar ONE nomination? Bull.

I was angry when the first, and best, season of "The Sopranos" lost to "The Practice" and James Gandolfini lost to Dennis Franz.

The first season of "Desperate Housewives" losing to "Everybody Loves Raymond" was a pretty boneheaded move too. I like that the Golden Globes honors shows when they are still new and worth a damn... it is probably the only good thing about the Golden Globes.

And it is not even a little bit true that all Emmy winners deserved their awards.

Janney beating Garner twice.

Katherine Heigl. She beat Lorraine Bracco and Sandra Oh.
Think about this...only one member of the Grey's Anatomy cast has an Emmy...and that's Heigl. Eewww.

I'm sure this'll send the mud flying, but Huffman didn't deserve to win an Emmy over Hatcher and Cross for season 1. Housewives became a phenomenon in season 1 because of Cross and mainly Hatcher. There's good reason Huffman was the "underdog" here.

G'Day,
well it will be no surprise that my most upsetting wins are the 7 years Martin Sheen lost for the West Wing. In particular in season 2 when he had his best ever tape and season 7 when he was beaten by someone who had a bad tape. Sutherland is very good in 24 and the series deserved to win that year (which Sutherland picked up another emmy for). However he didn't submit his best and I don't think he's in the same leauge as the other winners in this category or Sheen (and other losers such as McShane, Laurie, etc.). The emmy voters don't always go with performance and this was one of the cases in which other factors played a role.

Each season Sheen delivered such a complex performance with depth and range. He stayed strong even when the writng and his number of episodes went down. The fact he never won for his portrayal is one of Emmy's biggest crimes.

quote:

Originally posted by GH:
I'm sure this'll send the mud flying, but Huffman didn't deserve to win an Emmy over Hatcher and Cross for season 1. Housewives became a phenomenon in season 1 because of Cross and mainly Hatcher. There's good reason Huffman was the "underdog" here.

Yeah, at the time I was surprised and not in a bad way that she won that year, and I'm glad she is an Emmy winner, but I agree-that year Hatcher or Cross should've won. Especially since both of them have been completely shunned ever since then. Had Felicity lost to one of them, I think she would have stood a good shot at winning in one of the years following.

Julia Louise Dreyfus in 2006. that was the worst decision the academy made that emmy she has is none other than Jane Kazmareck

^ I forgot about that one. I felt kinda bad for Kazmarek to have lost so many times even though I never really liked "Lois". But hey, Brian Cranston's now a winner so anything can happen! Maybe she can score a nice guest spot or a dramatic HBO TV Movie role sometime soon LOL.

JLD is so likeable (and her amazing "Curse this" speech) that it's hard to call her win undeserving even though Kaczmarek(and Kudrow and imo Channing) had better tapes.

Who knows though, Kaczmarek could get in for "Raising the Bar". I've seen about 20 minutes of it and didn't like it but with a 6th slot and nominations being decided by popular vote she could get in on her name.

Easily the multiple wins for Doris ROberts, Brad Garret and especially Michael Richards

Janney in 02. Sorry, I just don't get it with her that year. Any of the other nominees deserved it over her. Noteworthy, the bravura performance of Frances Conroy in Six Feet Under's pilot showed exactly why she was subsequently nominated for each of the show's eligible years.

Don't even get me started on Hargitay beating out any of the other nominees with her over the top performance in "911". Lamely written tripe.

Spader winning over Gandolfini in 2007. What an awful, awful decision.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Ercan,

quote:

Originally posted by Ercan:
Spader winning over Gandolfini in 2007. What an awful, awful decision.

Totally agree.

James Spader's Emmy wins

Allison Janney's 4th Emmy win (for that ridiculous "Access" episode)