Teamleader

[jafox]

:guffaw:This thread cracks me up.

Oh, and Nick. Obvious/only choice. Not that I'll be watching, cause when Marg exits, Stage Left, I'll be going with her.

Honestly, I think that none of those named in the poll would want the job, so I went with a newbie.

Asst Supervisor fits Nick well because he can go out in the field and be in charge of an investigation and delegate when necessary, yet avoid the true headaches of the job, the paperwork and politics.
I'm pretty sure Sara has absolutely no interest in the job; she still is pretty much a loner and likes to just do her job and avoid authority.
And Greg? Well, he's Greg. I can see him directing an investigation, but not directing people.
The smart thing would be for tptb to keep Marg as a recurring character and let her remain the supervisor. Anyone else who signs up for next season would remain as CSI's, which is what the show is suppose to be about. Maybe bring in a new level 1 (female!) to mix it up a bit.

 

[PerfectAnomaly]

For some reason I just can't see any of the existing characters (except for Brass who was the supervisor at the beginning of the series) as a replacement for Catherine. I just don't see any of them as supervisor material even though I may like them as characters. I can't really put my finger on why, I just see them as CSIs and not as a boss. That's why I lean toward someone new joining the team. It would infuse some new blood into the team since it's been a couple of years since Langston joined and I think it would spice up the dynamic more than just promoting someone would.

 

[Speedystokesgirl]

I was talking about both, one the actor, and one the character, when they were raving about him, they were thrilled that he was coming on as Dr. Langston. I meant that if he became the supervisor DR. RAY they would be as happy as clams in sea water. I highly doubt this will happen but with CSI, one never knows~

No, I'm pretty sure they would not be happy. And no matter what they say, the actors left would not be happy if Langston was made supervisor. George Eads himself has said he would not have liked it if Langston 'leaped frogged' over their characters and became the man in charge of the team.

So no, none of them would be happy and I am sure they would all have something to say about it.

I don't doubt they all like Fishburne, but that wouldn't stop them from voicing their opinion if tptb decide to put Langston in charge. Also, what they say and what they actually think could be two completely different things.

 

[ComicCollect_NL]

I thought the response was about who someone wanted to see as a the new team leader and not about who was the "top choice" to replace WP.

I'm not surprised to see comparisons made with Gil Grissom (WP), since he had been the team leader for a long long while. However, the main focus is indeed about the most ideal supervisor, and not the top choice to replace either Gil Grissom or Catherine Willows.

I can live with it, if you all want to support Nick Stokes as a teamleader, since he's the one, who appeared the longest in the show. However, I strongly disagree with the rejection of Ray Langston, actually, Larwance Fishburne. No matter what argument I believe the mystical word is Matrix that causes the rejection of him as a teamleader. It's all still fresh in the mind of many people.

You all forget Raymond Langston. He's a teacher in crimology. He's that specialised that much that he wrote a book about. As a criminologist, he knows hell a lot about crime, at least in order to write a book out of it. To me, it's no surprise that Ray would surpass any other existing team members to become a teamleader. He may not be that good as Nick Stokes, Sara Sidle and Greg Sanders, but I'm pretty sure that Ray has full understanding in what they're doing. With his experience as a teacher at a university, and his knowledge in crime, I'm pretty sure, it wouldn't be a problem for him to run a CSI team.

I don't mind to see a rejection of Raymond Langston, but I do hesitate a rejection, which is based on Morpheus. Please, do think twice before you argument your rejection.

 

[hiphugger17]

My "rejection" to Ray being supervisor has nothing to do with Matrix it has all to do with Ray. Even with his background, which does help him in criminal knowledge, he still had to go through all the steps to become a criminal investigator. It's one thing to study criminals it's another to be a criminal scene investigator which deals with forensics. Knowledge and experience are both important in becoming a supervisor in this area. Even if he was an all knowing genius who already adquired all the knowledge he needs to be a forensics expert there's still the fact that he has very little experience in comparison to the rest who all have seniority over him. Almost two years as a CSI in no way compares in experience to more than 10 that Nick possesses. Or for that matter someone that comes from another lab with years under his/her belt. It's a time issue which involves being exposed to certain experiences in the field which enrich the knowledge one can adquire only through books and in-lab experiments.

 

[Raynn]

I agree with hiphugger - it's the character Ray Langston, not the actor or any of his other roles, that make him unsuitable to be a supervisor at this time.

Ray's book was about his personal experience with one case, as a pathologist - NOT a CSI. From what we've heard of it, it was as much about examining his own failings as it was about the science.

As Catherine pointed out to Kepler, CSIs are not just profilers - they deal with evidence. Ray only has 2 years of experience with evidence collection and examination, compared to over a decade for Nick and Sara (and the previous supervisors).

Also, about Ray's previous experience and job position (pathologist and college professor/lecturer; neither supervisory roles) - he was explicitly hired by Grissom in "an entry-level position." He started at the bottom of the CSI hierarchy, and has to work his way up like anyone else.

 

[CgrGrl]

I find myself confused again. What does the Matrix have to do with any of this? All of the actors have had other roles, and those roles aren't influencing the question here. This is about the CSI characters they play.

 

[Speedystokesgirl]

My "rejection" to Ray being supervisor has nothing to do with Matrix it has all to do with Ray. Even with his background, which does help him in criminal knowledge, he still had to go through all the steps to become a criminal investigator. It's one thing to study criminals it's another to be a criminal scene investigator which deals with forensics. Knowledge and experience are both important in becoming a supervisor in this area. Even if he was an all knowing genius who already adquired all the knowledge he needs to be a forensics expert there's still the fact that he has very little experience in comparison to the rest who all have seniority over him. Almost two years as a CSI in no way compares in experience to more than 10 that Nick possesses. Or for that matter someone that comes from another lab with years under his/her belt. It's a time issue which involves being exposed to certain experiences in the field which enrich the knowledge one can adquire only through books and in-lab experiments.

Exactly! This has nothing to do with Matrix. I don't even think of LF's Morpheus character when I watch him.

Langston does not have enough experience to do the job, period. If he did he would not have been hired as a CSI LEVEL 1. He would have been brought in as a Level 3. Remember that you have to close so many cases before being promoted. (Despite Ecklie promoting Langston to Level 2, not higher).

Langston would have to have the knowledge and years behind him that Grissom, Catherine, and Nick did/does. Langston would have to be able to train and teach a new CSI, which he can't. Not at this time anyways.

Langston could lead, there's no doubt about that. He just can't lead this team of CSIs and he STILL has issues he needs to deal with to be an effective team leader.

 

[PerfectAnomaly]

I've never even watched Matrix so my not wanting Ray to be team leader has absolutely nothing to do with LF as an actor. The two aren't connected in any way and I don't really understand why they should be. Ray should be judged on his merits as a character and not on LF's resume.

 

[byline]

No matter what argument I believe the mystical word is Matrix that causes the rejection of him as a teamleader. It's all still fresh in the mind of many people.

Actually, I disagree with you and agree with others who say that "Matrix" has nothing to do with it. I have only a vague familiarity with that film and know Laurence Fishburne mainly as an actor of many roles, not just one.

My problem with Ray Langston possibly being inserted into the "leader" role is exactly what others have cited; unless it's through attrition (meaning that everyone else with more experience and a higher pay grade scale leaves), it makes no sense for Ray to have such a meteoric rise into the supervisor's position. It would feel shoehorned in for the sake of accommodating the big-name actor the powers that be hired, ostensibly with the plan of filling the supervisor character's role. If they were going to do it that way, then IMO they should have created a very different backstory for Ray that gave him an established history as a CSI.

Yes, Ray is a quick study, and yes, he has unique experiences as a medical pathologist and academian, but not as a criminal forensic investigator. He still has to climb that ladder the same way everybody else did, and that takes time.

 

[AFIS]

Langston could lead, there's no doubt about that. He just can't lead this team of CSIs and he STILL has issues he needs to deal with to be an effective team leader.

Having issues shouldn't be the issue here regarding whether someone can lead the CSI team. Every character on the show has issues. Without issues the characters would be boring and have nothing to offer the show.

Issue=Conflict=Good Thing For A Character To Have.

I think that Langston's various conflicts aka issues would make him a great supervisor. He's complex and layered as a character which gives the writers things to work with in later seasons. But on the other hand, being a supervisor is a position that's earned not given. Langston just hasn't been on the show long enough to have earned that position. Even though I would love to see him in the leadership role the writers clearly want to put him in.

 

[Desertwind]

Langston could lead, there's no doubt about that. He just can't lead this team of CSIs and he STILL has issues he needs to deal with to be an effective team leader.

Having issues shouldn't be the issue here regarding whether someone can lead the CSI team. Every character on the show has issues. Without issues the characters would be boring and have nothing to offer the show.

Issue=Conflict=Good Thing For A Character To Have.

I think that Langston's various conflicts aka issues would make him a great supervisor. He's complex and layered as a character which gives the writers things to work with in later seasons. But on the other hand, being a supervisor is a position that's earned not given. Langston just hasn't been on the show long enough to have earned that position. Even though I would love to see him in the leadership role the writers clearly want to put him in.

Nice comments AFIS and the "layered" one so true. He could do this, and I'm a hugh fan of his, not just the actor but the character. I actually voted for Kurt Russell, on the poll about ["replacing Grissom"] this board had before he came on. But, when I saw him in "19 Down" I was completely blow away. His expertise was so powerful. It would be a big burn however, to place him in a role that Nick Stokes so deservedly has earned. He's been doing this job for now 11 years, and pretty much knows everything about everything, pertaining to all things crime related. I don't even think that Ray would accept this position and being a kind considerate CSI, that he is, I think he'd say "NO, this honor belongs to Nick". When he was recovering in the hospital after being stabbed, the first thing out of his mouth was "How's Nick", I think he appreciates all the things he's learned from him. Plus it would be so tacky on the rung of the ladder of seniority~

 

[Smokey]

Great discussion going on here. Let's remember to keep it just that...a discussion. Everyone is bringing up valid points to support their opinions, but please let's remember to be respectful of those opinions. Everyone has the right to say what they think here, and opinions cannot be right or wrong, they are just opinions.

Remember, we are talking about the characters here, not the actors. And we are talking about being the team leader, not the lead actor in the show. It's fiction, right? Please try to keep everything in perspective and have a good discussion, not an argument. Thanks!

 

[GregNickRyanFan]

I just noticed the poll closing date. Wow! That's the longest time I've ever seen a poll stay open for. :lol:

 

[ComicCollect_NL]

Dear all

Thanks for your providing extra explanations to support your arguments. I'm now completely confident that you all are focused on the topic at hand. I'll value your opinions and take into account... For those, who lost the subject due to my earlier statement, sorry for the confusion caused.

So far, Nick Stokes is the most favourite team leader. A team leader he shall be. They won't loose me as a viewer. Furthermore, I've mentioned Michael T. Weiss. In a 1990's show he took a lot identities of scientific persons. Would you like to see him, introduced as the supervisor of a CSI team? If you do support what would be his background?