This year has challenged my TV geek ways. I have watched shows I like get the axe. The fascination with dancing and singing competitions continue to succeed, something I just don’t get. And I have had to bid farewell to a few of my favorite shows.

One of them, “The Office,” bowed out this week. I have always felt a strong connection to the show because of its small-town roots and the fact that my wife and I met at work, just like Jim and Pam. I kind of identified with them in some ways.

After the next-to-last episode, it looked like the couple had decided to stay together in Scranton, overcoming any conflicts about a potential big business opportunity he had in Philadelphia. Unfortunately, this plot point upset a bunch of people on the Internet.

How could he let Pam hold back his dreams? Why didn’t they just pack up and move to Philly? How can they stay in (now imagine people holding their noses) Scranton?

Stupidly, I tried to engage some of these people online. I quickly retreated when I realized that these folks could not understand the main point I tried to make.  I might have well have suggested that those women on Bravo are neither real nor housewives given some of the replies I got.

Not everyone thinks running away from a regular job in a small town represents the greatest achievement in life. Some people – millions of them – put in a hard day’s work in a less-than-thrilling work environment because they can have stability, security and get to see their family on a regular basis.

Imagine my surprise when they decided to abandon the life they had laid out for them in the Electric City in the finale. In fact, it seemed like the final episode showed the happiest folks from Dunder Mifflin being the ones who had left the confines of the office. They talked about how the office – and by extension the town – made them who they are. Then they left.

Overall, I really liked the episode, but felt this part didn’t completely ring true. The show tried to give a realistic look at life outside of what television tries to show us. They tried to pull the sheet back on those regular folks who may find drudgery from 9 to 5, but still manage to have enjoyable lives. They injected some realism into a sitcom, especially with the Pam and Jim relationship.

So what’s more realistic than a couple of people who really believe they belong together choosing the life they know instead of rolling the dice and maybe jeopardizing everything they have,  including the long-term security of their two kids? Couples like Jim and Pam provide the backbone for small towns everywhere.

Sure, Jim’s new opportunity may sound more exciting, but it may also flop. Not everyone wants to take that risk. That doesn’t make those people bad. That just makes them human. That just makes them like a lot of us who choose to live in a small town because places like Scranton and Hanover can really enrich our lives outside of the office.

So as I wiped tears away during the show – yeah, sitcom series finales make me cry – some of them came because the creators took the easy path of showing an appreciation for the little things in life as a dead end.

Thankfully, the same people also created “Parks and Recreation.” I’ll always have Pawnee, Ind., I guess. Unless Leslie Knope decides to run for mayor of New York or something.