Oh, how frustrating trying to follow the VMAs while in Los Angeles. That dang delayed broadcast! But I just heard word of the victory of Panic! at the Disco as video of the year. Hooray for the triumph of the best video in that lineup. And the best song. How shocking — especially considering the presumably ignorant masses did the voting for the first time ever.

Forgive me, oh, masses for underestimating you!

Let that be a lesson to us "pro" kudos crystal-ballers, all of whom failed to forecast Panic to prevail.

Hats off to our poster Professor Chaos, however, who proudly crowed in our message boards when the winner was announced, "Who ***in' called this travesty? I want mention on the GoldDerby frontpage!"

There it is, Chaos. Proud of you. You alone foresaw this one. You're right about that, but, wrong, amigo, about your appraisal of "I Write Sins Not Tragedies." In my opinion, it's a real winner music-wise, perf-wise and video-wise and, happily, voters recognized that. I surmised that the first few minutes I stumbled upon it one day while channel-surfing, catching it in mid-tune, thinking, "Wow! Who are these guys?!"

SIDE NOTE: Has anybody figured out what happened just before Panic! made their acceptance speech — when that whack job jumped up from the audience, took the mike from J.Lo and did some rant about never getting his own TV show? Wow! Real panic at the VMAs!

And real panic by this awards guru, who just did worse than he did trying to predict the Emmys! This time I got 100 percent wrong! (Note to self: next year — more than one category, you idiot!)

Photo: Panic isn't respected by snobbish music critics like other recent winners of video of the year Green Day, Eminem and Outkast. Will that finally change now that they've got the cool MTV stamp of approval, even if it was bestowed by internet voters?
(Decaydance)

After bombing so terribly at forecasting the Emmys, witness me — defiantly and shamelessly, no less — rise from my own ashes to predict who'll really win the video of the year prize at the MTV VMAs!

Another flame-out is surely possible, even probable according to my most fiery detractors (legions!), but, undaunted, I dare to take on the music "pros"!

As I note in my article here at The Envelope about leading media predix (CLICK HERE), Rolling Stone backs Red Hot Chili Peppers' "Dani California," Newsday cites Madonna's "Hung Up" and the New York Daily News wimps out and calls the race a tie between the Chilis and Christina Aguilera's "Ain't No Other Man."

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! — at least that part about the Chilis and Madonna.

It's quite obvious to me that those predix are penned by middle-aged white media guys oblivious to who's casting ballots. For the first time ever, voters are those gabillions of cyberkids who hang out at MTV.com and watch "TRL." In short, they're not graying music critics working at midtown Manhattan publications who thrill to watch Anthony Kiedis relive lost loves while dressing up like faded music icons. Rather, they're cyber-crazed boys and gum-snapping girls who care a lot more about Shakira's hips than the return of a California rock group they didn't know even had a heyday back when they were watching "Sesame Street."

Sure, there are enough nostalgic older chaps on line to get "Dani" seven nominations when there were scores of various videos in the running. But now the race is narrowed down to five contenders and lots of the geezer votes will stray off into Madonna's embrace.

And, sure, the kids will split between Christina and Shakira, but, remember, there's the music to consider, too. "Dani" is dull, unlistenable. That video is all about visual schtick. Christina's "Man" has a real shot to win, but "Hips" rules!

Photo: Count on Shakira winning MTV's video of the year award. Panic! at the Disco would get my vote, but that doesn't count at all. Just thought I'd let you know how much I luv that song!
(Sony-BMG/Decaydance)

Now that Helen Mirren just won an Emmy as Elizabeth I, all kudos eyes are on her as she advances toward the Oscar throne next as Elizabeth II in Stephen Frears' "The Queen." In it, she gives a tour-de-force perf times two. Hers is a nuanced role requiring Mirren to achieve "internal acting" we can see, in many colors, through that monarch's notorious gray reserve as she wrestles with her disdain for the recently deceased Princess Di while her peoples demand she join them in hysterical mourning. But it also requires Mirren to nail a perfect imitation of a well-known person. That's key to winning an Oscar, of course, considering voters' fondness for hailing famous folk who portray famous folk (think Jamie Foxx in "Ray"). Obviously, she pulls both off — check out the trailer: CLICK HERE!

Mirren lost two bids in the supporting race at Oscars past: "Gosford Park" (2001 — bowing to Jennifer Connelly in "A Beautiful Mind") and "The Madness of King George" (1994 — she lost to Dianne Wiest in "Bullets Over Broadway"). In the latter she portrayed another real queen — Charlotte, spouse to George III, but not one we recognize today. Certainly, Mirren will be nommed in the lead race next January. Can she win? Considering the shameful Babe Factor (women over age 40 rarely do), the 61-year-old dame faces tough odds, but there are so many older gals prominent in that race already (Judi Dench in "Notes on a Scandal," Annette Bening in "Running with Scissors," Meryl Streep in "The Devil Wears Prada,"Julie Walters in "Driving Lessons," Julianne Moore in "Children of Men," Fernanda Montenegro, "House of Sand") that it's possible they could bump out the babes altogether. Take that, you Oscar-grabbing babes!

Mirren's ascendancy toward an Oscar nomination will become official in the next few days when "The Queen" debuts at the Venice Film Festival.

Photos: From all angles, Mirren bears a striking resemblance to Princess Di's sour foe.
(Miramax)

The Emmy, by far, is the most difficult showbiz award to predict. Since the Oscar, Grammy, Tony and Golden Globe are determined by a popular vote, a prognosticator can sometimes just follow the winds of popular sentiment and trip over the right answers. But that darn Emmy — she makes you fall flat on your face over the wrong answer too often. Like this year — the worst one ever!

Normally, about three-quarters of the winners line up with the oomph of the sample episodes submitted to jurors viewing them at home (watching two per nominee for best series and supporting acting and one for lead acting). Normally. But not this year.

Denis Leary ("Rescue Me") and Christopher Meloni ("Law & Order: Special Victims Unit") gave far more dynamic performances on their screeners than Kiefer Sutherland ("24"), winner of best drama actor. Megan Mullally gave one of the weakest perfs among the five gals up for best supporting comedy actress (she handed in the finale of "Will & Grace"), clobbering the one contender whose performance on her Emmy reel towered over all rivals: Jaime Pressly ("My Name Is Earl").

The vast majority of pundits, "pro" and amateur, I know who watched the comedy-actress screeners thought the race was a tight one between Lisa Kudrow ("The Comeback") and Jane Kaczmarek ("Malcolm in the Middle"). Winner Julia Louis-Dreyfus' submission was OK, but not impressive in performance terms, not packed with the emotional grandstanding that usually wins Emmys.

Several notable Emmy seers predicted "24" to prevail as best drama series — I know, I know — but I didn't take it seriously because Hollywood voters don't usually take TV shows or films in the thriller genre seriously.

So what the heck happened? Look at the lousy prediction score I had (3 out of 12 categories) and how poorly our racetrack odds did (2 out of 12). Out of the 8 "pro" pundits we had forecasting the Emmys, the highest score was 5. How sad, eh? None of us foresaw the victories by Sutherland, best drama actress Marika Hargitay ("Law & Order: Special Victims Unit") or best actor in a TV film/mini Andre Braugher ("Thief"). All of our pundits were shrewd Emmy gurus who watched the episode submissions. How could we have been so far off?

This year we witnessed a drastic and jarring disconnect between Emmy winners and episodes, two elements that are supposed to be related and usually do line up. That turned out fine for the TV academy because winners were worthy rivals with high Cool Quotients like Kiefer and Julia. But these results aren't consistent with past Emmy wins. That scares the bee's wax about of "pro" predictors like me, forcing us to wonder: What does this tell us about trying to predict future Emmys?

To probe possible answers to these befuddling mysteries, I turned to this website's most trusty Emmy expert: our forums moderator "Boomer" (Chris Beachum). Listen to our podcast chat — CLICK HERE! I think you'll be intrigued. We come up with some interesting theories about how, for example, the "cool" contender for comedy actress won (Julia), but not the "cooler than cool" nominee for comedy actor (Steve Carell, "The Office"). Our conclusion: while Julia's episode wasn't a barn-burner, it was still quite good. By comparison, Steve's was lame in every respect (he burns his foot on his George Foreman grill). We don't even hear a yelp. He's so laid back that it's hard to see any performance. Even more important perhaps: Julia's character was endearingly sympathetic, even empathetic. Steve portrays a beastly office boss and succeeds at making TV viewers — and Emmy voters, unfortunately — loathe him as much as his employees.

Uh-oh. A secret source within Harvey Weinstein's inner circle just confirmed this rumor: yes, The Happy Oscar Warrior plans to take his precious "Bobby" to Toronto "unfinished. "

Visions of "Elizabethtown" disaster loom! Last year we Oscarwatchers were told that Cameron Crowe had such complete confidence in his Orlando Bloom/ Kirsten Dunst heart-tugger that he didn't mind showing it in rough form to industryites at the Toronto Film Festival. The audience was not impressed with the result and even though Crowe fine-tuned the pic later on, cutting out some of the dull, drag-on parts, bad word of mouth doomed its debut back in the U.S.

Are we right to be leery of "Bobby"?

Nope, says the (rather biased) source. Harvey's just fussing with issues like how much voiceover we should hear from old tapes of Robert Kennedy. Initially, there was additional voiceover recorded by Martin and Charlie Sheen (father and brother of director/writer Emilio Estevez), but Harvey had that yanked.

"Also there are a couple of tech issues still being worked out," says the source. "And a song. It's being written by a huge, huge music star specifically for the film, but even I don't know who Harvey's got up his sleeve. He's being really secretive about that and it won't be added to the film until after Toronto."

Photo: Harvey hopes that 'Bobby' will be his first best picture contender since he and brother Bob broke away from Miramax to form their own shingle.
(Weinstein Co.)

Hip, hip hooray for the Emmys picking such hip award results like "24," Kiefer Sutherland and Mariska Hargitay in the drama races and "The Office" and Julia Louis-Dreyfus in the comedy contests. (Sorry, Tony Shalhoub. You're no longer "hip" as a two-time past champ.) Imagine how much more ferocious the Emmy bashing from TV critics would be right now if these nominees had prevailed instead — all real possibilities: "The West Wing," Christopher Meloni, Allison Janney, "Two and a Half Men," Stockard Channing and, well, Shalhoub. Those poison-veined, foul-spirited TV critics (about 60% of the total) are pummeling TV's Golden Girl currently, like they always do post-Emmys regardless of the outcome. But they'd be forming lynch mobs, hoisting torches and marching on the TV academy today if the award results had been much different. That's one consolation.

But where does all of this core hate come from? What's behind it?

Two theories: 1.) TV insiders' self-loathing and/or 2.) the Emmys aren't the Oscars and must be punished for it.

While compiling my book on the Emmys, I've observed media coverage spanning roughly 60 years of diverse winners chosen by various voting methods. TV critics have never ceased attacking the Emmys with scorn, hatchets, paper wads, mockery, bazookas, spit, cheap beer, contempt, venom, flamethrowers and lots of incendiary language that proved that they really don't know what they're screaming about.

Consider this: the Emmys are an award chosen by specific episode entries. Less than 3 percent of America's TV critics (and I'm being generous here) have ever requested copies of the Emmy screeners so they can see the races through voters' eyes. Refusing to watch them would be like covering the Oscars and never bothering to see the films in the race. Can you imagine movie journalists doing that and not being fired by their editors? Why isn't there industrywide outrage over this? Why aren't they fired? Why does anyone take their criticism seriously?

Every year the TV academy makes copies of the screeners available to top journos and I'm always prodding members of the Television Critics Association (of which I'm an associate member) to take advantage of that. But they don't. Because they don't care. Can't be bothered. However, that doesn't stop them from mounting nuclear attacks against the Emmys for not choosing the nominees and winners that meet with their approval. Often Emmy voters have only limited control over who makes the cut due to candidates screwing up their episode selections (the Susan Lucci Syndrome), but they still get blamed. If journalists actually bothered to look at what the voters do, they'd see how and why things happen. Then their criticism would be informed and valid. Even welcome. Even by me! But they don't. Because the Emmys aren't cool. Saying sympathetic things about them just gets you slammed — like I got nailed yesterday by Fishbowl LA at Mediabistro. (CLICK HERE!) Did anyone over there look at the Emmy episodes this year? Ever? I think you can guess the answer.

No other showbiz award has taken such a beating — and consistently so, historically, decade after decade. I've written books about all of the major ones and thus have studied their histories, voting patterns and media reps. Knowing all of the awards as intimately as I do, I have unabashed admiration and affection for only one: the Emmy. That's because it's the only award that takes its job seriously, guaranteeing all nominees that their work will be seen by all voters. I'm talking about its at-home voting process and those judging panels.

Emmy's big problem is on the nomination side, which still employs a popular ballot (thus the Ellen Burstyn 14-second nom problem). Emmy chiefs are experimenting with new ways to fix that — essentially by applying the rule of careful scrutiny via a new judging process, just like they use to pick winners. But TV critics aren't paying attention to the changes, don't understand them, don't want to, and refuse to be patient while further experimentation continues. Of course, it's much more fun to attack and run, giggling like bully schoolkids eager to flee the reach of their firecrackers.

I think I know where the hate comes from.

CLICK HERE to Continue Reading!

Photo: TV's poor "Little Orphan Emmy" has been under media attack throughout her history, dating back to 1948.
(Variety/ Mediabistro.com)

When Barry Manilow won the Emmy for best performer in a variety special for his PBS special PBS special "Barry Manilow: Music and Passion," he promised to bring the award with him into the operating room the next day when he underwent arthroscopic surgery to repair torn cartilage in his hips.

Apparently, it worked. His rep said that the "Copacabana" crooner pulled through the operation "swimmingly" and is now at his Palm Springs home where he'll recuperate over the next two months. Manilow had postponed the surgery so he could be present at the Emmys for that award category and to participate in the special Dick Clark salute.

In the spirit of fair Emmy play, permit me to offer counterpoints to the Emmy disappointments of my L.A. Times colleagues Paul Brownfield and Scott Collins. To read their full articles, CLICK HERE for Brownfield, CLICK HERE for Collins.

Let's take these issues comment by comment:

Brownfield: "The Emmy telecast was . . . a horrible showcase for the series that make TV a hot medium — 'Lost,' 'Grey's Anatomy,' 'The Sopranos,' 'American Idol.'"

Rebuttal: Yes, the shut-out of "Grey's Anatomy" was sad, but it lost best drama series to an acclaimed show cheered by TV critics for just having had its best season ever ("24"). "Grey's" dual defeats in the writing race went to the best episode of a show you also bemoan not doing better ("The Sopranos"). Should "Sopranos" have won best drama? Most critics say it didn't have a superior season, at least not better than "24." Sandra Oh and Chandra Wilson lost to a worthy, gifted rival and one of showbiz's grandest acting dames, Blythe Danner. "American Idol" keeps losing for two reasons: 1.) the thrill of that show has more to do with its competition than what we actually see on the tube and 2.) it deserves to lose based upon its episode submissions. One TV academy member who judged that race told me he was "really disappointed" in the episode sample entered by producers, a complaint I've heard year after year. "Lost" got shut out of the drama series race because it failed to pay attention to how the Emmy game is played, by giving the nomination-panel judges an episode ("Man of Science, Man of Faith") that was full of dangling plot lines that made little sense to judges who aren't regular viewers of the show. That doesn't mean that those judges don't ever watch the show, just not all of them continuously, which was necessary to understand what was going on. Frankly, I didn't think much was going on plot-wise in that "Lost" episode, period: we see a bunch of islanders fretting on and on about opening a hatch they find in the jungle floor, we see glimpses of a mysterious man down below in a bunker pad and meantime, back up above, other islanders chase after a dog into the jungle at night. That's Emmy-worthy? Why didn't the producers of "Lost" submit what TV Guide called its best episode last season? Had they given judges the Tailies episode, it might have done a better job grabbing voters and, egads, it even might've made sense: it had a story line with a beginning, middle and an end. I strongly suspect that if the producers had entered their best work, like they were supposed to do, their show would've been nommed. Do you criticize the Olympics for failing to give a gold medal to a competitor who fails to compete smartly?

Brownfield: "It's not so much that 'Lost' deserved to be nominated, it's that none of the series are being judged in their totality."

Rebuttal: A juried award system can't do that. We can't realistically expect jurors to watch two dozen episodes of all five nominated series and then pick a winner. That's why nominee wannabes must submit a sample of their best work for the nominating process, and, if nommed, then six samples in the final round to decide a winner. Unfortunately, this year, when the Emmys experimented with a new nominating system, there was an epidemic outbreak of the Susan Lucci Disease, which doesn't happen often, but "Lost," "Desperate Housewives" and even Lauren Graham ("The Gilmore Girls") all came down with delirious fevers (or something) that caused them to hand in lousy sample episodes. Granted, the Emmys shouldn't decide anything based solely upon one episode and I think they know that now and will field more episodes from contenders next year.

Brownfield: "So you sit there and watch Megan Mullally win for 'Will & Grace,' a show living in syndication, and Blythe Danner for 'Huff,' a canceled Showtime series watched by less than the population of Palm Springs, and Tony Shalhoub for 'Monk.' Already, you could sense the demo leaving the room — and that was before Barry Manilow won the award for outstanding individual performance in a variety or music program."

Rebuttal: It would be outrageously unfair if the Emmys penalized a TV show for leaving the airwaves after airing episodes during the same eligibility period as ongoing programs. Why shouldn't they all be judged equally? What if a show had its best year as its last? It should be dismissed by voters whose job is to critique quality? It would be equally bad if voters punished a program for low ratings. If Emmy voters did that over decades past, it's a good bet that some of TV's greatest series — including "Cheers," "Hill Street Blues," "Cagney and Lacey" and/or "All in the Family" — would've been canceled without the Emmy wins that saved them. Is Tony Shalhoub undeserving? Did you watch the episodes submitted by the five contenders for comedy actor? What's wrong with Barry Manilow? He should be shuttled because he's old news like "Will & Grace"? He's widely regarded as one of the greatest music artists of this era.

Brownfield: " By the end of the evening, I had lost total faith in the idea of an Emmy."

Rebuttal: By the end of the evening, my faith in the Emmy was greatly enhanced.

Collins: "Wow, NBC's 'The Office' won the Emmy for outstanding comedy Sunday night. This means ... well, something. Right? Certainly it tosses some welcome creative validation to writer-producer Greg Daniels, lead actor Steve Carell and colleagues, who've bravely soldiered on with their loony satire of corporate life, even in the face of anemic ratings. 'The Office' is indeed one of the best comedies on TV, although when the Emmy competition includes 'Two and a Half Men,' it's safe to say that our epoch is not to the sitcom what the Restoration was to stage comedy."

Rebuttal: There are some esteemed TV critics who disagree with you. Robert Bianco of USA Today is among those who believe that "Two and a Half Men" is not only underrated because it suffers from the reputation of its genre, being a sitcom, but that it's one of the best shows on the tube. Indeed, I think one of the nicest surprises that resulted from the new Emmy nominating panels was that oft-dismissed genres like sitcoms ("Two and a Half Men," "King of Queens") and procedural crime dramas ("Law & Order: Special Victims Unit") suddenly got hiked respect from TV professionals (those Emmy judges) when viewed up close during panel inspection. Later, when I watched those episode samples submitted to jurors, I agreed that they were good, even worthy of Emmy consideration — and one win (Mariska Hargitay).

Collins: "But, more important in the calculus of Hollywood, does this mean that 'The Office' will finally turn into the slow-roasting hit that, say, Fox's spy drama '24' has become? Here's an answer in two words: 'Arrested Development.' You may recall that Fox's low-rated, critically acclaimed comedy about a loony Orange County clan won the Emmy for best comedy in 2004. The producers held hands with the network suits and waited for the surging influx of viewers who watched 'Arrested's' Emmy triumph. Two seasons later, they were still waiting. 'Arrested' had its swan song Sunday, losing out to 'The Office' in the comedy category. The show was canceled earlier this year."

Rebuttal: One more time — the Emmys, if they do their job right, shouldn't care a hoot about Nielsens or even whether or show is alive or dead. Only with how good it is. When "Arrested Development" won best comedy two years ago, its victory was widely hailed by America's TV critics as one of the best Emmy wins ever. As a result, the Fox network gave the show an extra year or two of life that can now be enjoyed by the TV fans on DVD for generations. TV's Golden Girl, Emmy, did her job brilliantly, and nobly, as she has done so often in the past by bravely embracing a deserving, low-rated show with a top win. She shouldn't be condemned now because mass viewers failed to follow. As you say, Emmy voters got best comedy right this year — "The Office." Why do you turn that into a damning negative?

Oh, yeah, two more things: Conan O'Brien performed brilliantly as host, especially that irreverent "River City" slam at his employer and the Emmy telecaster. That took guts and he pulled it off with panache and a deft soft shoe. His opening montage should not have been nixed because a plane went down in Kentucky.

Preliminary Nielsen numbers show that the Emmys pulled a 13.1 rating/ 20 share, which is down 12 percent from last year's 14.9 rating/ 22 share. But that's actually good news considering:

* TV ratings at the end of August are usually down 10 percent or more anyway

* The Emmys were on CBS last year, a network with higher Nielsens than NBC

* All of the counter-programming that other networks dared to run against it (usually a no-no on the night of TV's Oscars): ABC aired "Pirates of the Caribbean," CBS telecast a new episode of "Big Brother: All Stars," HBO unveiled the season finales of "Deadwood," "Entourage" and "Lucky Louie," USA network aired the season finales of "The 4400" and "The Dead Zone" and Fox showed "Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones."

Photo: Those frisky "Entourage" dudes squared off against frisky Conan O'Brien in primetime on Emmy night in the battle for eyeballs.
(HBO)

Congrats to Hal Boedeker (Orlando Sentinel), Ray Richmond (Hollywood Reporter) and David Zurawik (Baltimore Sun) for scoring the highest tally when forecasting 12 Emmy races here at The Envelope: all nailed 5 correct predix.

The most confounding Emmys ever resulted in the lowest score ever for GoldDerby's racetrack odds: only 2 out of 12.

Below is our score breakdown among pundits. Note none of us foresaw the Emmy victories by best drama actor Kiefer Sutherland ("24"), best drama actress Marika Hargitay ("Law & Order: Special Victims Unit") or best actor in a TV film/mini Andre Braugher ("Thief"). Christopher Lisotta (TV Week) also participated in our panel, but only forecasted three races, all incorrectly, alas. (Memo to Chris: If it's any consolation, please note that most of us got those wrong, too.)

FIVE CORRECT
Hal Boedeker, Orlando Sentinel
Ray Richmond, Hollywood Reporter
David Zurawik, Baltimore Sun

FOUR CORRECT
Robert Bianco, USA Today

THREE CORRECT
Tom O'Neil, GoldDerby, TheEnvelope.com
Maureen Ryan, Chicago Tribune

TWO CORRECT
Matt Roush, TV Guide
Diane Werts, Newsday

Photo: The Envelope's holy trinity of pundit champs (from left) Boedeker, Zurawik, Richmond.

"Who wins an Emmy for police procedurals? In their eighth season? It's crazy!" roared Mariska Hargitay backstage, reflecting a larger, shocking trend at this year's TV awards.

The thriller genre was really the big, surprise winner at the Emmys. It's a showbiz classification that rarely gets its due. Sure, detective series like "NYPD Blue," "Hill Street Blues" and "Cagney and Lacey" won gads of Emmys in years past, but they were nonconventional shows more about their characters' lives, really, than the crimes the characters solved. Rarely do more traditional crime series win like Hargitay's "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit." One exception: the original "Law & Order," which won best drama series in 1997.

Now to the biggest shockeroos: those victories by "24" as best drama series and Kiefer Sutherland as best actor. "24" has a bit of that detective series quality to it — that righteous hunt for bad guys — but, more than anything, it's pure thriller TV. You have to go back to 1967 and 1968 to find its equivalent winner at the Emmys in this category: "Mission: Impossible."

You see the same disdain for thrillers at other showbiz awards. For example, rarely do heart-stoppers like "The French Connection" win best picture at the Oscars.

The big Emmy wins for "24" seem all the more odd considering the show's previous losses over four seasons. Why victory now all of a sudden? Usually shows and stars win when they're new and red hot — like "The Office" now claiming best comedy series (well, it's relatively new) and Julia Louis-Dreyfus nabbing comedy actress. Or brand-new "Lost" winning best drama last year. This year it was supposed to be "Grey's Anatomy's" turn.

But we often see delayed victories at the Emmys, come to think of it. Just like "24," "The Sopranos" won on its fifth time up. "Law & Order" won on its sixth try. Heck, "Barney Miller" didn't win best comedy till its seventh nom — after the series was off the air.

But in all of those cases there were rational explanations for the delays, which usually had to do with specifics of Emmy voting. For example, "Sopranos" is far too nasty to win best drama under the old judging-panel process, which required voters to ink their ballots immediately after viewing sample episodes. So those mobsters-on-Prozac lost after their first season. After that, when their show was already pegged an Emmy loser, the TV academy ditched the panels in favor of at-home voting, which is much more forgiving of meanies. So the "Sopranos'" delayed win in 2004 was really no surprise. In the cases of "Law & Order" and "Barney Miller," everything depended on the episodes submitted back then and, off hand, I don't remember what they were. (No doubt "Barney Miller" handed in the series' finale — back then programs only handed in one episode to jurors, as opposed to six today. "Barney Miller's" farewell episode was a tube masterpiece.)

Bottom line: there isn't such a strict correlation nowadays between episode entries and who wins. At-home voting permits voters to ink their ballots long after viewing the sample DVDs, thus allowing time for other considerations to sink in.

Still, the strength of the episodes has still chiefly governed wins. Since the switch to at-home voting in 2000, there has remained a clear connection between the two, just less of a strict one, that's all. In general.

But not this year. If there's one stunner that befuddled Emmy pundits like me, it was a sudden disconnect.

Take Hargitay's win. Sure, her episode featured slick acting, but it was a pale imitation of a similar episode she handed in last year when she lost to Patricia Arquette ("Medium"). In both episodes, Hargitay fretted and wept over the fate of children as crime victims. Last year her episode was such an impressive fireworks display that I thought she'd win. After guessing wrong then, I didn't dare to stick my neck out for her again when she returned with a similar episode that had fewer sparks and less bang.

I don't think Julia Louis-Dreyfus' or Kiefer Sutherland's episodes were the strongest entries in those races either. But it's getting late here in the press room backstage at the Emmys where most of my colleagues have skeedattled and workmen are folding up the chairs. 'Tis time for me to head home. Let me ponder all of this some more while driving back to old Hollywood and pick up this topic in an hour or two. I'll be back soon . . . promise . . . We must figure out these head-scratching Emmys!

Photos: Thirty-eight years separates the Emmy wins of "24" and "Mission: Impossible" as best drama series. "M:I" won in both 1967 and 1968. "M:I" supporting star Peter Graves (above) never won, but Barbara Bain claimed best drama actress three times. Bain was so furious over the three Emmy losses of her costar and husband Martin Landau (bottom photo) that she threatened to withdraw from competition, but she remained in the race, never losing.
(CBS/ Fox)

More tears backstage as another winner mentioned her dad. Mariska Hargitay wept as she cited her papa, Mickey Hargitay, who was Mr. Universe of 1955 and a former member of Mae West's stage show.

Considering he's alive, a journalist asked, "Is he OK?"

"Yes," she said, but he was on her mind in a sentimental way tonight because "my father, when I started acting, was so supportive and when I was really bad, he told me I'm going to be the greatest and I am the best. He told me to work really hard. I used to get mad at him when I didn't understand why he was so supportive. He believed in me when I didn't believe in myself. I've got the greatest father in the world, who makes dreams happen and makes miracles happen."

Kiefer Sutherland got sentimental about his own papa, who lost an Emmy in the TV movie/mini races. "It wasn't about two actors tonight," he said describing his relationship to Donald Sutherland. "A father was proud for his son."

"This is a joke! I can't believe it!" Julia Louis-Dreyfus roared backstage. "By the way," she added, coyly, "I have no problem with the new voting system and I do feel I benefited from it, although I will tell you I don't understand it.

"But I'll keep it!" she said, waving her new Emmy proudly.

To celebrate, she said, "I'm gonna have a meal — whatever they're serving at the Governors' Ball. I'm gonna eat it."

She has one regret: "I forgot to thank the other nominees in my category and that was terrible. I respect them and I admire their talent."

"There's a lot of animosity among us," Steve Carell said about "The Office" gang backstage. "That's why the show works so well."

The directing win by the Academy Awards solidifies its status as second-biggest winner of Emmy Awards over all: 34. "Frazier" leads with 37.

According to our forums poster DS0816, "For the record: HBO's 'The Sopranos' win in the writing category is its fifth. It now matches with CBS's 'The Mary Tyler Moore Show' for most Emmy wins in writing for a regular drama series (MTM, on the comedy side). 'The Sopranos' has won for writing in: 1999 ('College'), 2001 ('Employee of the Month'), 2003 ('Whitecaps'), 2004 ('Long Term Parking'), and 2006 ('Members Only'). 'The Mary Tyler Moore Show' has also won for writing in: 1971 ('Support Your Local Mother'), 1974 ('The Lou and Edie Story'), 1975 ('Will Mary Richards Go to Jail?'), 1976 ('Chuckles Bites the Dust'), and 1977 ('The Last Show')."

"I'm sure we'll be nominated next year," said Greg Garcia when asked if he thinks it's crazy that "My Name Is Earl" could win best writing and directing, but not be nommed for best comedy. There was a recent precedent that could prove him right. "Malcolm in the Middle" won writing and directing its first year when it wasn't nommed for series. It did score a bid in year two.

"The one thing I took from my experience of starring in Will & Grace is confidence," said Megan Mulally backstage. "Comedy is going too far and taking a chance.

"After I won and they took me back to my seat to wait for Sean's category, When I was 20 or 21 when I lived in Chicago I went to a psychic and she told me that I'd someday win 2 Emmys for playing a secretary in a sitcom. I said that couldn't happen because I'm a serious actress. Isn't that weird? I didn't remember that till tonight."

Bob Newhart going to live? "He's definitely going to die and it'll be for a good cause because it's a great show. He's a lovely man and all that, but it's time."

Photo: Joan Collins said backstage: "What do I remember about 'Dynasty'? Not alot, I see the reruns and I think,'Did I wear that?' I do remember the fight scenes with, Linda, of course."
(L.A. Times photo by Tom O'Neil)

Jeremy Piven isn't the cad he portrays on "Entourage" — and he's no longer the wigged-out boozer he's portrayed in the tabloids, or at least he told us so backstage.

Backstage, after winning best supporting actor in a comedy series, he teared up while mentioning his deceased dad, who he also mentioned in his acceptance speech "for giving me all the movement." He also mentioned his mom in that speech and backstage, too, noting what great parents they were.

"I am proof that you can have a great family and still be dysfunctional," he said backstage. When asked how he planned to celebrate his win, he began saying, "I'm detoxing," so he planned to take it easy, but then he added, "I'll be hoisting adult beverages with my mother. But she only drinks one glass of wine." They plan to attend the HBO party, then head out to other parties thereafter. He didn't seem to know which ones, but he implied that he might have more than just one glass of wine despite detoxing.

When asked how much he resembles his TV character Ari Gold — a volcanic, foot-stomping, demanding agent, he said, "I have tremendous road rage, which I channel into the character." But he added, "an agent like Ari could never represent an actor like Jeremy Piven because I don't work for a paycheck."

This just in: Another Jeremy — Irons — just dropped a real bomb on the press room. When asked what he thought about the government taxing gift baskets, he said, "If they have to tax it, so be it, but they'll only spend it on bombs!"

Alan Alda's victory as best supporting actor in a drama series for portraying Senator Arnold Vinick boosts "The West Wing's" tally to 26 Emmys, thus tying the record held by "Hill Street Blues" as Emmy's biggest winner among drama series.

Alda holds an esteemed Emmy record himself. He's the only person in academy history to win for writing, directing and acting, an accomplishment he achieved back in his "M*A*S*H" days.

Meantime, elsewhere at the Emmys — Wow, "Daily Show" just beat "Letterman" for best variety show! "Letterman" seemed to be invincible because he submitted that whopper episode with Oprah!

Only at the Emmys: "My Name is Earl" just won best writing and directing, a show that wasn't even nominated for best comedy series!

Photo: Alda with Jimmy Smits on "The West Wing."
(NBC)

Last time Conan O'Brien hosted the Emmys, back in 2002, he did a similar intro, dropping in on the Osbournes when he woke up in bed next to Ozzie. This year he just dropped in, literally, on "The Office" gang plus the casts of "Lost," "House," etc. It's a riff, in a way, on Bill Crystal's hilarious openers at the Oscars. And just as successful. The press backstage howled with approval throughout that howler of an opener.

My fave moment: when he told upcoming winners, "When you're handed the Emmy, don't say, 'Wow, it's heavy!' Of course, it's heavy. It contains the shattered dreams of four people who lost."

The audience of TV pros gave their loudest cheer for that part of his intro, which was a great vote of confidence for a TV award that they obviously still care about despite the industry dissing this year over the nominations process.

Very brave of Conan to lampoon the ratings plummet of his own network, NBC, in that parody of that "Music Man" song-and-dance number, eh? How the heck he get that by the network chiefs?

I snapped this photo two hours ago! That's how long the poor seat-fillers have already been in their own seats (hard red-metal folding chairs) out in the side lobby of the Shrine Auditorium, getting ready to leap into empty seats of stars inside once the ceremony is under way at 5 p.m. Pacific. Notice how many seat-fillers are needed (this photo only shows about half of them). That's how many pampered stars sneak off throughout the ceremony to grab a smoke outside, a drink in the lobby or else to use the powder room. Oh, yeah, a few actually leave their seats for a good reason now and then — like winning an Emmy Award.

Look how happy the seat-fillers are finally to get some media attention! So many big, happy smiles! Suddenly, they're stars at TheEnvelope.com, as they should be because it's a job often treated with scorn by the hoighty-toighty types who stroll by them, noses upturned as the seat-fillers sit dutifully out of the way, behind a velvet rope.

One more thing deserves comment: notice how many of them are not kids. Lots of middle-age folk, even a few golden-agers.

There's already a tech screwup in the general press room as the big white tent fills up slowly with journos. Normally, back here you can watch rehearsals going on inside the Shrine Auditorium just yards away, but there's a goofup, a funny one, and Emmycast producers are a bit embarrassed by it.

We're being serenaded with flamenco music. Makes ya feel like dancing! Looks like the Emmys are trying to seduce us into good moods so we'll write good things. They even put out food and drink early today! I just spotted some of the orneriest TV journos I know actually smiling while they grab smoked turkey sandwiches, bags of chips or — in sync with the music, ethnically speaking — hot salsa and tortilla chips.

Notice in these photos how the room is set up: You can see how the primary kudos press like THE MIGHTY ENVELOPE has its own spot at one of the long tables that are classily covered with linen.

That's our spot marked by the red arrow and that's my laptop there zapping these urgent insights to you at 1:28 p.m. Pacific, three and a half hours before the start of the Big Show! Stay tuned.

For now I'm gonna wander around and see what nifty pix I can snap. Wish me luck. I'm gonna try to sneak inside the Shrine and spy rehearsals going on, see if I can give ya a peek.

Ever wonder what an Emmy ballot looks like? Plus that mysterious affidavit that voters must sign after viewing the DVDs? Check out these images — here and on the next, click-through page.

Notice that the names of the nominees are listed alphabetically by last name. That's just true of ballots used for the primetime Emmys. Names are arranged randomly for the Daytime Emmys.

On top is the instruction: "Please assign a ranking of First - Fifth," then, below, voters are asked to fill in circles with numbers inside, 1 to 5. Alongside is the instruction: "Select only one rank by completely filling in the corresponding bubble."

At the bottom of the ballot is the notation: "Please be sure you have selected only one rank in each vertical column."

Although voters rank each nominee 1 (best) to 5, really only their top choice counts. The winner is the nominee who gets the most number-one votes. Subsequent rankings numbers two and three are used only in cases of ties.

On average there are about 200 to 300 voters who decide best comedy and drama series; 50 to 100 voters choosing the acting winners.

Here's the language on the affidavit:

CLICK HERE to read and see an Emmy affadavit!

The process of choosing Emmy winners is a mystery to most people because it's so unique. The Emmy is a juried award — unlike its kudos cousins, the Oscar, Grammy and Tony — so it involves tapping 5,500 members of the Academy of TV Arts & Sciences to scrutinize video samples of 55,000 DVDs, then signing affidavits attesting that they've viewed everything required. The only thing that shuffles between the voters and leaders of other showbiz awards are paper ballots, but the Emmys employ an elaborate — and fascinating — procedure that aims to guarantee that an example of every nominee's work will be seen by every voter.

Voters are restricted to judging in a maximum of four categories so they're not overloaded with screeners. Usually, they volunteer to weigh two races each, according to peer group: actors judging actors, writers critiquing writers and everybody eligible to judge program contests.

Lead acting nominees submit one sample episode from the past TV season as an example of their best work, supporting stars submit two. Six episodes are sent out in the program races, grouped according to three pairs, which are distributed randomly to voters.

Distribution of those DVDs is handled by Affusion, a fulfillment firm based in Glendale, California, that's handled the job since 2000, the year at-home judging replaced judging panels held in hotel rooms.

Once nominations are announced, "we have one month to complete our job," says project manager Jordana Glick-Franzheim. "We get a master DVD from every nominated show. That comes from the network, the producer or the individual. We examine every submission to make sure it's technically good and to make sure there are no marketing aspects, like sections that say 'vote for this series or star.' We only permit the show and the credits. Some DVDs must be edited before they're sent to us, like the entries for casting. Nominees submit a sampling of casting choices in that particular show up to 30 minutes in length. Nominees for supporting acting used to edit out scenes of their show that they're not in, but that's not so anymore."

Affusion then makes mass copies of the DVDs and ships them with all voting materials, including a ballot, affidavit, worksheet and voting instructions. Packages are shipped to Los Angeles residents via regular mail. Emmy voters outside L.A. (about one-third of the total) get packages via Federal Express. Filled-out ballots had to be sent to the accountants' firm of Ernst & Young by Aug. 15.

"We have a lot of members in Canada and several in Australia and Great Britain who also get their packages from FedEx," says Glick-Franzheim. "We've noticed some voting preferences based upon geography, by the way. Canadians like to judge animation. British voters like to see the drama categories. It's fascinating to see what everyone's interested in."

Photo: Employees at Affusion assembled and shipped 5,500 Emmy voting packages by hand.
(L.A. Times photos by Tom O'Neil)

You can read a full breakdown of our 8 experts' Emmy predix in the posting below — or CLICK HERE to go straight to their thorough musings in the top races. But, come on, why bother plodding through the feeble blatherings of other "experts" who never wrote a comprehensive book about TV's top award, like I did? Just to make things easy for ya, I excerpted my own, brilliant, can't-be-wrong musings about top Emmy races from that breakdown and listed them here. I recommend that you also check out The Envelope's racetrack odds — CLICK HERE!

BEST DRAMA SERIES
X - "Grey's Anatomy"
"House"
"The Sopranos"
"24"
"The West Wing"

"Grey's Anatomy" should win because it was TV's big winner this past year: a Nielsen ratings hit and critics' darling that America talked about obsessively around the water cooler and over the backyard fence. But beware: voters may want to give four-time past champ "The West Wing" a final salute after it rallied creatively this season. Sometimes voters get all sentimental about departing shows, but, strangely, only comedies like "Everybody Loves Raymond." No drama series has ever prevailed after exiting the airwaves. "The Sopranos" could also be a spoiler. It won the last time it was in this category, but it wasn't eligible last year so Emmywatchers may underestimate its strength.

BEST COMEDY SERIES
"Arrested Development"
"Curb Your Enthusiasm"
X - "The Office"
"Scrubs"
"Two and a Half Men"

"The Office" is not only the best comedy on TV, but it's the hippest and has snob appeal, which matters a lot in Emmy races. Remember "Frasier" triumphing five times in a row? Compare that to Roseanne Barr's number-one Nielsen show that won best comedy at the Golden Globes: it was so vulgar and blue collar that snooty Emmy voters never even nominated it in this race. Past winner "Arrested Development" has a shot, but, granted, it's a long shot. "Curb Your Enthusiasm" loses all the time. Why should this year be different? "Two and a Half Men" has no chance because it has no snob appeal.

BEST MINISERIES
X - "Bleak House (Masterpiece Theatre)"
"Elizabeth I"
"Into the West"
"Sleeper Cell"

"Elizabeth" feels more important, but "Bleak House" was just better, period, and voters seem to go for "Masterpiece Theatre" productions automatically.

BEST MADE FOR TV MOVIE
X - "Flight 93"
"The Flight That Fought Back"
"The Girl in the Cafe"
"Mrs. Harris"
"Yesterday"

I'm torn between "Flight 93" and "Girl in the Café," but I think Emmy voters have displayed, historically speaking, a strong bias toward films with a more urgent political message.

BEST VARIETY, MUSIC OR COMEDY SERIES
"The Colbert Report"
"The Daily Show With Jon Stewart"
"Late Night With Conan O'Brien"
X - "Late Show With David Letterman"
"Real Time With Bill Maher"

Looks like a slam-dunk for David Letterman since he submitted the Oprah episode, which was supposed to be (I didn't see it) a whopper. But Conan calls his Finland episode the best of his career (I didn't see it), so maybe he can pull off an upset? Maybe none of this matters considering how automatically loyal viewers seem to be to Stewart's show, but maybe they'll let his spinoff rival, "Colbert," pull off an upset? Ah, well . . . eenie, meenie . . . I better stick with that killer Dave and Oprah combo.

CLICK HERE to Continue Reading!

Photo: Letterman will win best variety series for his brilliant episode submission to Emmy judges: Oprah Winfrey's first appearance on "Late Show" in 16 years, finally forgiving him for his numbskull "Uma/ Oprah" nonjoke when he hosted the Oscars a few years ago.
(CBS)

As usual, we've assembled a stellar lineup of experts to predict who'll claim the top kudos in Hollywood. Here's our pundit team and who they predict will win the top races — see below. Plus CLICK HERE for their more detailed analysis category per category.

In addition, check out our racetrack odds in the top contests— CLICK HERE!

EMMY PUNDITS:
Robert Bianco, USA Today
Hal Boedeker, Orlando Sentinel
Chris Lisotta, TV Week (partial predix)
Tom O'Neil, GoldDerby, TheEnvelope.com
Matt Roush, TV Guide
Maureen Ryan, Chicago Tribune
Ray Richmond, Hollywood Reporter
Diane Werts, Newsday
David Zurawik, Baltimore Sun

PUNDIT PREDIX ROUNDUP

BEST DRAMA SERIES
"Grey's Anatomy" - Bianco, O'Neil, Roush, Ryan
"24" - Boedeker, Richmond, Zurawik
"The West Wing" - Werts

BEST COMEDY SERIES
"The Office" - Bianco, Boedeker, O'Neil, Richmond, Roush, Ryan, Zurawik
"Two and a Half Men" - Werts

BEST MINISERIES
"Bleak House (Masterpiece Theatre)" - Bianco, Boedeker, O'Neil, Roush
"Elizabeth I" - Richmond, Ryan
"Into the West" - Werts, Zurawik

BEST MADE FOR TV MOVIE
"Flight 93" - Bianco, O'Neil, Richmond
"The Girl in the Cafe" - Boedeker, Zurawik
"Mrs. Harris" - Ryan, Werts
"Yesterday" - Roush

BEST VARIETY, MUSIC OR COMEDY SERIES
"The Colbert Report" - Werts
"The Daily Show With Jon Stewart" - Bianco
"Late Night With Conan O'Brien" - Roush
"Late Show With David Letterman" - Boedeker, O'Neil, Richmond, Ryan, Zurawik

BEST REALITY COMPETITION PROGRAM
"The Amazing Race" - O'Neil, Werts
"American Idol" - Bianco, Richmond, Zurawik
"Project Runway" - Boedeker, Ryan
"Survivor" - Roush

BEST DRAMA ACTOR
Denis Leary, "Rescue Me" - Boedeker, Lisotta, O'Neil, Richmond, Roush, Zurawik
Martin Sheen, "The West Wing" - Bianco, Ryan, Werts

BEST DRAMA ACTRESS
Kyra Sedgwick, "The Closer" - Ryan, Werts, Zurawik
Geena Davis, "Commander in Chief" - Bianco
Allison Janney, "The West Wing" - Boedeker, O'Neil, Richmond, Ryan

BEST COMEDY ACTOR
Tony Shalhoub, "Monk" - Boedeker, Zurawik
Steve Carell, "The Office" - Bianco, Lisotta, O'Neil, Richmond, Roush, Ryan
Charlie Sheen, "Two and a Half Men" - Werts

BEST COMEDY ACTRESS
Lisa Kudrow, "The Comeback" - Lisotta, O'Neil, Roush
Jane Kaczmarek, "Malcolm in the Middle" - Boedeker, Werts, Zurawik
Julia Louis-Dreyfus, "The New Adventures of Old Christine" - Bianco, Richmond
Debra Messing, "Will & Grace" - Ryan

BEST ACTOR IN A MOVIE OR MINISERIES
Ben Kingsley, "Mrs. Harris" - Bianco, O'Neil, Richmond, Roush, Werts
Donald Sutherland, "Human Trafficking" - Ryan
Charles Dance, "Bleak House (Masterpiece Theatre)" - Boedeker, Zurawik

BEST ACTRESS IN A MOVIE OR MINISERIES
Helen Mirren, "Elizabeth I" - Bianco, Boedeker, O'Neil, Richmond, Roush, Ryan, Werts, Zurawik

Photo: Seven out of our 8 gurus say "The Office" will be promoted in the race for best comedy series.
(NBC)

Fighting with Ray Richmond about the Emmys is one of my favorite things to do. I clash with top Emmy journos all of the time, but it's usually a painful ordeal because only about 6 or 7 of them in all of the U.S. actually know what the heck they're screaming about.

Ray, hallelujah, is one of them.

And Ray sure gives good fight. What I really dig about that Hollywood Reporter rascal is that he knows how important showmanship, however campy, is when covering showbiz awards. Think about it: what fun would a spectator sport like pro wrestling be if its gladiators didn't get all huffy, mug for applause, bellow like bad Shakespearean actors and wear pink and green tights? Ray and I spare you the tights, (hallelujah again), but we do not cheat you one bit out of P.T. Barnum bluster and broadsides.

And, let's be honest, fighting with Ray is easy because his predix are so ridiculous. "24" for best drama series? "American Idol" for best reality show? I don't even have to take him down and he ends up with mouthfuls of dirt. CLICK HERE to hear our matchup!

When "The West Wing" won an Emmy last weekend for best muti-camera sound mixing, that brought its series tally to 25, which is just 1 shy of tying the record for most Emmy victories by a drama series ("Hill Street Blues"). Three comedy series have won more trophies over all — "Cheers" (28), "The Mary Tyler Moore Show" (29) and "Frasier" (37) — but, hey, we're only talking drama skeins here, OK?!

"West Wing" has several chances to break through, even in the top contest: best drama series. Not only did the show rally creatively this year, but Emmy voters seem especially fond of it. Indeed, they seem to think it's real and that its dramatic resolutions decide the fate of the whole Free World. Therefore, voters may find it hard to vote against. Already it's tied with "Hill Street Blues" and "L.A. Law" for winning the most times as best drama series (4), so one more victory doesn't seem preposterous. However, it would be unprecedented in another way, too. Our forums moderator "Boomer" (Chris Beachum) points out, "Never in the history of the Emmys has a departing drama series won that category. Of course, 'Everybody Loves Raymond' won for comedy series last year, but it had been 25 years since 'Barney Miller' had won in its final season."

One Emmy that "The West Wing" is favored to win this Sunday is best drama actress, thus putting Allison Janney in a select group of actors who won 5 Emmys for portraying one role: also Candice Bergen, Art Carney, Don Knotts, Peter Falk and Ed Asner in two series ("Lou Grant" and "The Mary Tyler Moore Show"). Her episode entry, "Institutional Memory" is that much of a doozy.

I think Alan Alda has the best chance to win in the supporting race. "West Wing" is also nominated for best direction and actor (Martin Sheen).

Other Emmy records that could be broken this weekend:

Cloris Leachman could win again and thus even surpass her previous record as the all-time biggest winner among performers (currently 9).

Ellen Burstyn could win for the shortest performance in the history of showbiz awards (14 or 9 seconds, depending on how you count her face time in "Mrs. Harris"). That's tough. She's up against Cloris Leachman.

Other records could also be broken. CLICK HERE to read the input of our forum posters.

Photo: In Allison Janney's Emmy reel, she has several poignant heart-to-heart chats with lover Danny (Timothy Busfield) about the burden that her political career puts on their relationship. Since "The West Wing" debuted in 1999, Janney has won best supporting actress twice (2000, 2001), then promoted herself to the lead race, which she won two times, too ( 2002, 2004). Again, she's competing in the best-actress race, facing stiff competition from Kyra Sedgwick ("The Closer"), Geena Davis ("Commander in Chief"), Mariska Hargitay ("Law & Order: Special Victims Unit") and Frances Conroy ("Six Feet Under").
(NBC)

It's not official, but I have it on very good authority that, now that creator Amy Sherman-Palladino has exited "Gilmore Girls" to develop a new show for Fox, the WB series will no longer compete in the comedy races at the Emmys. Defining "Girls" as a laffer was always Sherman-Palladino's idea, which was pooh-poohed by many colleagues. Next year they'll place themselves in the drama lineup. Not a bad idea, unless they're doing so as a way to explain the show's failure to nab noms in the past. Come on! Those snubs had nothing to do with category classification. Prior to this year, "Girls" got shunned because those geezer Emmy voters had no idea that the WB was on their cable box. This year, Lauren Graham made the finalist list for best comedy actress, but blew it by submitting a whiny, sulking episode submission to judges. Frankly, she wouldn't have had any better luck if she'd given it to the drama actress panel. Instead, had she entered her reunion episode with Rory to either the comedy or drama panels, that would've gotten her nommed in either. Because that was her best episode.

"Desperate Housewives" and "Lost" got snubbed for the same reason: poor episode entries. "Housewives" really blew it. Producers and stars didn't submit their one brilliant whopper of an episode, the 90-minute season finale, to any Emmy panel. Bizarre, eh? But it looks like cast members are bamboozled into believing that they were snubbed because of confusion over comedy or drama placement.

James Denton, who plays Mike "the plumber," says the show got snubbed in the comedy races because it's "too dark," adding, "I don't think the show is a pure comedy or pure drama and last year, particularly, it was very dark. So, when you're nominating yourself or presenting yourself as a comedy, there's certainly funnier shows on television, as a pure comedy."

Nice try, James. Denial is always a fun game, but futile. Why not face the real reason your show got snubbed? Because none of you guys did what you're supposed to do: submit your best work to the judging panels. How long will it be before you accept responsibility for your blunder?

Ah, well, let's get back to the firm news development of "GG" switching categories. What do you think? Good move? Dumb ploy? Join the fierce discussion in our forums — CLICK HERE!

Photo: Lauren Graham's Emmy episode "Partings" was dour and glum from the very first scene, which showed a sulking Graham pretending to be asleep on the coach.
(WB)

In the contest for best comedy actress, the star of HBO's canceled "The Comeback" may make a dramatic Emmy comeback (Lisa Kudrow won in the supporting race for "Friends" in 1998) thanks to the wow-pow of her performance in the "Classic Leno" episode. That is, if she doesn't get clobbered by Emmy-overdue Jane Kaczmarek, who finally has a serious chance to win after six previous losses for "Malcolm in the Middle." Whatever happens, I'm in big trouble. If I'm right about how this race shapes up, one of these gals will have me to blame for her loss. But, hey: the other one will have me to thank!

Somehow, inadvertently, I ended up determining what episodes these stars submitted to Emmy judges.

In the next day or two I'll post a video of a recent chat I had with Lisa at the Golden Globes' installation-of-officers lunch and you can see her tell the story of how she chose her episode this year. Initially, she had planned to submit "Valerie Gets Her Own Special Episode," but she heard through the industry that I thought "Classic Leno" would make a much better choice, so she switched. Meantime, in the spirit of full disclosure, I confess that Jane Kaczmarek recently told me that she had her writers pen a special episode ("Lois Strikes Back") based specifically upon my formula for Emmy victory: range, impact, sympathy.

Oh, no! The Emmy heat is on! I've been in this spot — kind of — in the past and everything worked out fine, but I got ensnared in the candidacy of only one rival for best comedy actress.

Back in the last year of "Sex and the City," Sarah Jessica Parker — who still hadn't won an Emmy despite having four Golden Globe TV awards on her and Matthew's mantle — planned to submit "The Post-It Always Sticks Twice" as her Emmy episode. Tisk, tisk, tisk, I wrote online. Dumb mistake. Her character, Carrie Bradshaw, is too whiny and bitchy in it. Sarah won't win again, I claimed. She'd be far, far better off submitting part 2 of the series finale. I was just mouthing off pompously in our forums, didn't think anybody was paying attention, but Sarah got wind of it and disagreed. Soon afterward she did a live chat session with us and she and I got into a bit of a tussle. While we were on the phone (I did her typing for her during the chat session), we dished the plusses and minuses of various episode possibilities. She conceded that I might have a point about "Post-It," but she thought I was wrong about submitting part 2 of the finale because some judges may not have seen part 1. Therefore, she said, part 1 would make a much better entry, especially because it opens with a marvelous meltdown scene outside Carrie's Manhattan brownstone during which she tells Mr. Big to buzz off once and for all.

Yeah, that meltdown scene is a doozy, sure, but Carrie's a wee bit bitchy again and that was always Sarah's problem at Emmys past. Voters want to feel sympathy — or, even more important, empathy — for the characters portrayed. Not fair, but that's human nature. There are occasional exceptions to this rule. James Gandolfini won one year for beating the bejesus out of his mistress, but otherwise he triumphed in other years for episodes that included humble crying scenes and confessions of what a rotten thug Tony Soprano is.

CLICK HERE to Continue Reading!

Photo: Just because I wrote the definitive book on the Emmys doesn't mean I know for sure who'll be listed in future editions as the winners. This year it could be Lisa Kudrow? Jane Kaczmarek? My official prediction is Kudrow, but I confess to being leery of a potential upset.

"We had the movie scheduled long before the Emmy nominations were even announced," ABC Entertainment President Stephen McPherson told Hollywood Reporter scribe Ray Richmond about scheduling "Pirates of the Caribbean" against this Sunday's Emmycast. That is, McPherson insists he didn't park it there to wreak revenge against the TV awards for snubbing "Lost" and "Desperate Housewives" after ABC submitted poor episode choices to Emmy judging panels.

However, the L.A. Times reported that ABC announced the movie blockbuster's scheduling on July 21, which was more than two weeks after the Emmy nominations were unveiled on the 6th. Times scribe Greg Braxton relayed the news on July 24 thus: "ABC, which is smarting that many of its most popular shows were overlooked in the marquee categories, announced late Friday that it would broadcast the blockbuster film 'Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl' to go head to head with the Emmys.

"When asked about ABC's decision and what it could mean for the Emmys audience and NBC's ratings, Jeff Zucker, chief executive of NBC Universal Television Group, said: 'It's more formidable competition, and it's unfortunate.'

"McPherson has been one of the most vocal critics of the new Emmy procedures, telling reporters last week that the lack of major nominations for 'Desperate Housewives' and 'Lost' — both big winners last year — proved that the system this year was flawed." To read the full text of Braxton's article — CLICK HERE.

"Well, McPherson swears it ain't so," Richmond writes at his blog CLICK HERE. "In a conversation this morning, he accused NBC of spinning this in a negative way against both he and ABC (as have I, in the interest of full disclosure), maintaining that this is ABC's second airing of "Pirates" and thus isn't exactly being counted upon to be a viewer juggernaut."

What Richmond refers to above was his July 25th column in the Hollywood Reporter titled "Emmys will walk plank in ABC kudo-night plan" (CLICK HERE!) in which he says that the "Pirates" scheduling "seems to be a petulant reaction from ABC to the network's Emmy snubs this year."

Here at GoldDerby is where Emmycast host Conan O'Brien first let loose against ABC, saying in our podcast chat: "I'm just curious — what about the people at 'Grey's Anatomy'? That's a huge show for ABC. How do they feel about this? Like 'Thanks a lot!'

"I think Mr. McPherson is already regretting what he's done," Conan added. (Read more about Conan's rant — CLICK HERE.)

McPherson told Richmond that he's tried to contact Conan repeatedly, "but he won't return my calls."

So . . . hmmmm . . . what do you think?

Photo: What makes ABC's assertion of innocence so suspicious is that it's suddenly making this claim now, on the eve of the Emmycast, as industry backlash builds against its "Pirates" stab. Why wasn't this mentioned weeks ago when the "Pirates" skedding was announced publicly amidst a barrage of Emmy-bashing from the alphabet net?
(ABC)

Poor, poor Mary Tyler Moore! For many years she once reigned as dual queen of the Emmys: her self-titled 1970s TV show held the record for most victories by a series (29) and she racked up the most wins among performers (7). A few years ago "Frasier" overtook her series record, ultimately claiming 37, and her individual accomplishment got topped, too, but that defeat had to hurt the most because she was bested by her former costars. Nay, make that