People love watching television, and they love watching awards shows. So why aren’t they watching the Emmy awards show for television?

The Oscars are the biggest of big deals, pulling in over 30 million viewers. The Grammys get at least 25 million viewers. In contrast, the Emmys were watched by about 11 million people, a record low for the show – and the audience size of a successful TV show. It’s also not much more than the viewership of the Tonys (7 million), and the Tonys are awarding something that isn’t even accessible to most of the country.

This state of affairs may have made sense twenty years ago, but these days, the medium of television is in many ways more exciting than film. As movies have become an endless parade of sequels and reboots, TV shows have offered compelling storytelling and diversity. So the Emmys should be a big deal, but judging by the numbers, they aren’t. Here’s few suggestions for how the Emmys can pull in the ratings.

1) Include performances

The Oscars get a pass because they’ve somehow become a cultural institution. But why do people tune in to the Grammys, AMAs, CMAs, Billboard Awards, MTV Awards, and the Tonys? Odds are it’s not because they’re waiting with bated breath to find out who won. It’s because they want to see performances. There are Emmy Awards for Best Choreography and for Outstanding Music & Lyrics… let’s see Derek Hough’s dances and hear Crazy Ex-Girlfriend’s songs in between all the acceptance speeches.

2) Pay homage to iconic TV shows of the past

The onus should not be on Entertainment Weekly to craft reunions of TV casts years down the line, especially when half the actors are at the Emmy ceremony anyway. Get the cast and creative of iconic shows together to say a few words about the show, maybe show a clip… Imagine how quickly the Emmys would become must-watch TV if they touted a reunion of Buffy, Will & Grace, or Friends.

If the Emmys are really daring, they could create a sort of “Lifetime Achievement Award” for television shows, to honor the shows that have withstood the test of time. This could even be a way to honor those shows that never became Emmy darlings, but still deserve recognition (like Veronica Mars). It would be a surefire way of actually getting a reunion of a show to happen. Basically, find a way to entice fans of old TV shows to watch the Emmys, in addition to the people invested in the currently airing shows.

3)Move some more categories to the Creative Arts

This is always controversial, because obviously every category deserves recognition. That said, viewers care more about some categories than others. I’d argue that many of the awards for TV movies and miniseries should be moved off the Main Ceremony, especially Supporting Actor/Actress. Honestly, I don’t need to sit through twelve people winning acting awards in a single evening, especially since it’s not like movies and miniseries reach as wide an audience.

4) Move the Emmys to early summer

Sure, Emmy voters need time to watch all the excellent television they’re voting on. We get it; we’re forever behind on all our shows too. But by the time the Emmys roll around in September, a new season of television is starting. Everyone is excited about the five bajillion new shows premiering, and the forthcoming seasons of their returning favorites. The prior television season is but a distant memory, with most shows having ended four months prior. As the saying goes, the Emmys need to strike while the iron is hot, so move the awards to June or July while TV watchers are still invested in the prior season.

Airing them in the summer also makes sense, since lots of people are off (students, teachers, etc.). It’s a smaller ask for folks to stay up late on a Sunday when some of them don’t have to get up early the next day.

5) Make former winners ineligible for the same role

This is the biggest item, at least in my mind: the reason I don’t watch the Emmys is because they’re nearly identical to last year’s. The excitement of awards shows is that they’re wholly different every year (except for Meryl Streep, who is always nominated). Therefore, fans tune in hoping that this year will be the year a certain performer will finally get recognition.

As things currently stand, it’s the same people and shows year after year. Julia Louis-Dreyfus. Jim Parsons. Bryan Cranston. They are all wonderful actors delivering amazing performances. But once they have been awarded as the best performance in all of television for a given year, that should be enough recognition for a performance. Otherwise, fans have to wait for an Emmy darling show to end before any of their new favorites can even sneak in a nomination.

For example, the 2009 Emmys were an exact replica of 2008 in seven of the eight Best Show and Lead Actor categories. In the past decade, only three shows have been awarded Best Comedy, and four have been awarded Best Drama. We hardly need tell you how much amazing television this leaves out.

If the Emmys are to become must-see television for general audiences, they need to be substantially different from the prior year’s. That means things that will naturally vary year to year, like the performances, but above all it means that the winners have to be different. Otherwise, we can just tune in once every couple years and not miss much.

What ideas do you have to make the Emmys more of a must-see event? Or are you happy with them just as they are, ratings be damned?