|
Post by J12 on Jul 27, 2016 16:22:54 GMT -5
I was thinking about this today, to all those that think WWE is purposely trying to make RAW look better... What would be the benefit? Why would Vince wanna make SD look inferior? WWE owns both. USA pays for both. So there is nothing gained from it. That would be like the NFL trying to make the NFC look stronger than the AFC. It's illogical thinking. And considering that both shows have different writing teams that are competing, it wouldn't make sense for one team to write a bad show so the other can look good. To be fair, though both shows have their own independent teams, they're only ultimately responsible for the first draft. Vince McMahon is still deciding what goes to air on both brands. The creative license is still in his hands.
|
|
|
Post by Kanenite on Jul 27, 2016 16:59:39 GMT -5
Heath Slater completely stole the show IMO. Fantastic promo. He honestly did. That was my favorite part of the show.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 24, 2024 19:35:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2016 17:20:45 GMT -5
Heath Slater completely stole the show IMO. Fantastic promo. He honestly did. That was my favorite part of the show. #SignHeathSlater
|
|
|
Post by TheLastDude on Jul 27, 2016 17:31:30 GMT -5
I was thinking about this today, to all those that think WWE is purposely trying to make RAW look better... What would be the benefit? Why would Vince wanna make SD look inferior? WWE owns both. USA pays for both. So there is nothing gained from it. That would be like the NFL trying to make the NFC look stronger than the AFC. It's illogical thinking. I don't think Vince McMahon sits down nightly and thinks of ways to sabotage Smackdown, but I think it is ingrained in his (and his inner circle's) mind(s) that Raw is the company's top asset and everything else is secondary, in the same way that they're so adamant about preaching "sports entertainment" instead of pro wrestling. Neither quirk makes a whole lot of sense, but it's the way that it is. It seems less to me about purposely making Smackdown weak and more about overcompensating for Raw to ensure it maintains its status as the flagship. It's silly behavior, obviously, especially now that both shows are live and the purpose of the split was to elevate Smackdown to a point that they could create fabricated competition between the brands. Ultimately, though, I don't really think that's going to happen. Remember, the first incarnation of the split came about because WWE had internal metrics that indicated the people watching Raw and the people watching Smackdown were largely different. Vince's theory was that, by putting Stone Cold on one show, and The Rock on the other, he could coax both audiences to watch both shows and thus, raise the ratings across the board. It worked for a very brief period of time, but once the honeymoon phase was over and the two bell-cows were either gone or working part time, Vince got complacent and we saw the split start to fall apart, with Smackdown being raided on a regular basis to ensure Raw's dominance. This time, the reason for the split is dramatically different. It was largely a ratings ploy, and a reactionary measure to USA's desire to bring Smackdown live. I think the fear is that Vince thinks giving Smackdown its own exclusive roster is enough to bring it to within striking distance of whatever figure USA put on it. If that's the case, he won't be shy about plucking talent from that side again. Whether that occurs, of course, remains to be seen. There's also the the internal politicking in the McMahon family to consider. Shane McMahon is the begrudged son who left the business that means absolutely everything to the McMahon family, now he's back in a prominent role and many feel that Vince (and to a lesser degree, Stephanie) feel the need to place in him a position of perceived inferiority as some type of punishment, while demonstrating that Stephanie is the smarter, more capable leader. It's hard to believe how much of WWE's decision making seems to stem from McMahon family dynamics, but, then again, you only need to look at the last few years of television to see how important they perceive themselves to be not only as the true leaders of the company, but as on-screen, aggressively dominant figureheads. Seriously...I don't think it could have been explained any better. I wish I could like your post more than once.
|
|
|
Post by J-MANN: Tag Team Champion on Jul 27, 2016 18:36:46 GMT -5
I popped hard for Ziggler winning. I thought AJ was 100% taking it. It's legit Ziggler's time. Turn him heel and put him over. What an awesome decision. I thought almost all of Smackdown felt pretty run of the mill but I got sucked into the main event. Floored for Ambrose vs Ziggler. I just wish they would have done this with Ziggler two years ago. I would have been all for it! But the way Dolph has been booked the last year, made last night so hard for me to believe.
|
|
|
Post by The American Daydream on Jul 27, 2016 18:41:13 GMT -5
The block feature is a wonderful thing on this site. You will learn quickly which members only have negative things to say and in turn can tune it out with the click of a button. I think his victory was great, perfectly sold and a long time coming albeit pretty late as his momentum has in fact died down but it's not too late. He still has a following and the ability to bring his career back. All in all it was a good, surprising and refreshing change of pace for me as a fan happy days ahead
|
|
|
Post by Edge618 on Jul 27, 2016 19:18:17 GMT -5
People complaining that Ziggler was a jobber 2 months ago basically admit they only like who WWE tells them to like. Ive been a Ziggler fan since day one, but im supposed to complain since he wasnt built properly to a title shot? I dont get that. What is properly. Booked to win for months and then wins a #1 contender match? Thats 90% of the reason people complain about Reigns.
Back in the day, a champion was properly built when he busted his ass for the company and paid dues, and was then rewarded for it. HBK, Guerrero, Benoit, Edge, Foley,Austin. When your booked to be THE guy, you get Roman Reigns. When you earn it through dedication, you get the greatest stars of all time.
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Jul 27, 2016 21:50:03 GMT -5
I think I need to stick to Raw. Wow...that was bad. Felt like it was a 3 hr show.
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Jul 27, 2016 21:53:01 GMT -5
People complaining that Ziggler was a jobber 2 months ago basically admit they only like who WWE tells them to like. Ive been a Ziggler fan since day one, but im supposed to complain since he wasnt built properly to a title shot? I dont get that. What is properly. Booked to win for months and then wins a #1 contender match? Thats 90% of the reason people complain about Reigns. Back in the day, a champion was properly built when he busted his ass for the company and paid dues, and was then rewarded for it. HBK, Guerrero, Benoit, Edge, Foley,Austin. When your booked to be THE guy, you get Roman Reigns. When you earn it through dedication, you get the greatest stars of all time. That's a pretty drastic conclusion to arrive at. Plenty of people have acknowledged that they are big fans of Ziggler, but don't think that his character has been handled in a way that lends itself to being a credible main event contender at this time. That's a perfectly logical, and fair assessment given the way he's been booked for the last two years. People like Zack Ryder and he's a dedicated, talented dude who has been busting his ass for years. Does that mean he should get a title shot next month? I'd argue the answer to that is no, because he's been treated like a jobber with very few exceptions since 2011-2012. Would WWE feel comfortable main eventing a Pay-Per-View with Dean Ambrose vs. Dolph Ziggler today? I don't think so. And it's highly unlikely they'll headline Summerslam. In fact, they'll probably be positioned in the 4th most prominent position on the show. That's a very quick decline for a title that's been closing almost every event since being unified. There's a lot of people, myself included, rooting for this to be the catalyst of the resurgence of Dolph Ziggler. I'd love to see him become relevant again, but that requires more than just a title shot. With regard to the past names you mentioned, none of them were treated like Dolph Ziggler prior to being hoisted into a main event position. If ever they were in the past, they were re-established before becoming a credible challenger. The sad thing is, if you remove the last two years of Dolph's career, this move would make perfect sense and everyone would be on board.
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Jul 28, 2016 11:07:51 GMT -5
According to Wade Keller, who spoke with someone on the Smackdown team, the Ziggler decision was "booked on the fly because they wanted the show to be shocking and draw headlines."
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 24, 2024 19:35:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2016 11:49:02 GMT -5
According to Wade Keller, who spoke with someone on the Smackdown team, the Ziggler decision was " booked on the fly because they wanted the show to be shocking and draw headlines." NO. This is NOT what they should be doing. SmackDown will continue to be a joke if they insist on that kind of booking.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 24, 2024 19:35:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2016 11:54:33 GMT -5
According to Wade Keller, who spoke with someone on the Smackdown team, the Ziggler decision was " booked on the fly because they wanted the show to be shocking and draw headlines." NO. This is NOT what they should be doing. SmackDown will continue to be a joke if they insist on that kind of booking. YES. It made everyone shocked and excited to see where there going with this. That's exactly what we should feel.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 24, 2024 19:35:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2016 11:58:28 GMT -5
NO. This is NOT what they should be doing. SmackDown will continue to be a joke if they insist on that kind of booking. YES. It made everyone shocked and excited to see where there going with this. That's exactly what we should feel. Booking on the fly doesn't work in the long run.
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Jul 28, 2016 12:13:47 GMT -5
YES. It made everyone shocked and excited to see where there going with this. That's exactly what we should feel. Booking on the fly doesn't work in the long run. Yep. Makes me fear that there's no long term intention of rehabbing Dolph and that this is just a hotshot. Time will tell, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by DeadlyGame on Jul 28, 2016 12:37:54 GMT -5
According to Wade Keller, who spoke with someone on the Smackdown team, the Ziggler decision was "booked on the fly because they wanted the show to be shocking and draw headlines." Is it 2000 all over again? I'm thinking of a certain promoter working for a certain promotion during that time.
|
|
|
Post by J-MANN: Tag Team Champion on Jul 28, 2016 21:53:28 GMT -5
According to Wade Keller, who spoke with someone on the Smackdown team, the Ziggler decision was "booked on the fly because they wanted the show to be shocking and draw headlines." If true this is not what I wanted to hear at all. I just wish so bad the WWE believed in long term build of their characters so wins like this actually meant something. But no, it's all about what can we do this week to draw and make headlines.
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Jul 30, 2016 8:03:57 GMT -5
People complaining that Ziggler was a jobber 2 months ago basically admit they only like who WWE tells them to like. Ive been a Ziggler fan since day one, but im supposed to complain since he wasnt built properly to a title shot? I dont get that. What is properly. Booked to win for months and then wins a #1 contender match? Thats 90% of the reason people complain about Reigns. Back in the day, a champion was properly built when he busted his ass for the company and paid dues, and was then rewarded for it. HBK, Guerrero, Benoit, Edge, Foley,Austin. When your booked to be THE guy, you get Roman Reigns. When you earn it through dedication, you get the greatest stars of all time. But the guys you listed weren't loosing pre show matches 2 months before getting a WWE Title shot at the 2nd biggest show of the year. And this is coming from a Ziggler fan.
|
|
|
Post by Rude Awakening on Jul 30, 2016 11:01:13 GMT -5
So apparently all the sudden Finn balor makes one appearance and goes to fight for the world championship. Smackdown at least felt like a show rather than raw relying on balor and Sasha.
|
|
|
Post by DeadlyGame on Jul 30, 2016 18:56:49 GMT -5
So apparently all the sudden Finn balor makes one appearance and goes to fight for the world championship. Smackdown at least felt like a show rather than raw relying on balor and Sasha. I just wished Dean had something besides the end of the show.
|
|