ok how about 2006 Tony for Best Replacement?!

what do you guys think? its a new category..
sure does make one not question whether or not replacing is a good idea...you COULD be up for a Tony!
who would you guys pick so far?

No, I don't believe she is. I think part of the rule is that you have to be in the show 6 months.

Well, to stick to the topic...
It's gonna go to Harvey. These Tony people love him. I also thought he was a pretty damn good Tevye.

I think part of the rule was also that someone had to have won a Tony for the role already.

The rules are a tad sketchy....

The show has to be open during Tony time.
The actor has to be in the show for at least 6 months.
It cannot be a 'return engagement.' Likewise, the actor must not have won a Tony for the role. (i.e. Nathan Lanewouldn't be elligible should he go back into The Producers.)

It's not going to be an 'announced' category. Producers submit who they believe to be worthy candidates, and the winner is announced at the ceremony. It's almost like the Honorary best regional theater award.

maybe this will help....from Playbill online:


According to a statement released by the committee, those actors eligible for this category "must not have appeared in the role when the production opened on Broadway. They must also be contracted in the role for a minimum of six months of public performances. Additionally, the producers may not submit more than two candidates per 'Long-Running' Show for the Award (including both Actor and Actress) for any such season."

The new Tony is, in one sense, a Godsend for producers. Whereas in the past, the only carrots they possessed to lure name performers into established productions were promises of money (checks which could never compare to those offered by Hollywood anyway) and the dream of legitimacy-confirming, ego-boosting rave reviews. Now they can dangle the prospect of a shiny mantlepiece ornament. Few actors out there have met an award they didn't covet.

However, the category could also easily prove a nettlesome source of controversy and grievance. After all, which two of a show's eligible candidates will the producers' put forth? How do they avoid offending the unnominated? And then there's the potential for hypocrisy. Certainly starry names like Fierstein, Reba McIntyre (Annie Get Your Gun), Brooke Shields (Wonderful Town) and Bruce Vilanch (Hairspray) would have had a very good chance at getting nominated. But will producers extend the same courtesy to lesser known but respected theatre journeymen? Certainly, for talented, uber replacement actors like Charlotte D'Amboise and Brent Barrett, the new prize represents a golden opportunity. But they are to be forgiven if they are cynical about the probability of being remembered by their employers come Tony time.

My question is, is Eden now eligible? And could she win!?!?

---

i think we ALL know should she grace the stage, it would go to britney in charity. oh yeah. oh no... lol

what about show like phantom and ave q can they submit?

---

I think I read somewhere when this was first announced that it had to be a LEADING role that was nominated for a Tony previously. So if that is the case, someone like Lauren Kennedy couldn't be considered for the award, but someone like Megan Hilty could.

---

I can imagine that Espinosa will at least get a nomination, same for John Treacy Egan and perhaps Justin Johnston in RENT, if he's still there around Tony time (which I don't believe he will be).

---

Yankeefan007, are they the only people eligible for this one so far?

---

Ooh. Hm, I know who I would pick, but I may have a slight bias.

---

eden wasnt the original standby?
cause if she was that would make her ineligable beucase she was part of the originial cast.... if she wasnt though, who was?