|
Post by T R W on Jun 29, 2017 18:43:46 GMT -5
If it were up to me, I would end the brand split, cut a lot of the dead weight mid carders, axe Smackdown, use enhancement talent again on TV and save the top guys fighting each other for the PPV instead of these terrible tag and six man tags every week.
But it ain't up top me
|
|
Dr. Mantis Toboggan MD
Main Eventer
I need a monster condom for my magnum sized dong.
Joined on: Nov 25, 2011 16:25:54 GMT -5
Posts: 4,713
|
Post by Dr. Mantis Toboggan MD on Jun 29, 2017 19:28:06 GMT -5
This isn't WWE and WCW it's WWE Red and Blue and quite frankly it sucks. WWE is a wrestling company so having it split in half is dumb and something I have never supported. Having 2 of each title devalues them and the amount of PPV's is exhausting so I would prefer one strong brand instead of a 3 hour Raw that's half empty and a 2 hour Smackdown that can barely feature it's stars. From 1997/2002 the WWE only had a 2 hour show and it still managed to feature the entire roster so there is no reason why it couldn't be done with a 3 hour Raw. Wrong. Counting the programming that had wasn't entirely lower card, they had more than 2 hours of programming a week throughout the Attitude era. In 1998 they introduced Heat (which was competing with Nitro in ratings from 1999 onward), making it 3 hours a week. In 1999 they introduced Smackdown, making it 5 hours a week. The problem is WWE realized people were liking Smackdown a lot more than Raw and started pushing their agenda there more. They also only have one face champion (Naomi) in the entire company.
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Jun 29, 2017 19:38:10 GMT -5
The idea of the brand split was to give more development to characters and more time on tv...However it still feels cluttered to me. I wouldnt be opposed to actually having a 3rd brand. Scrap the 3rd hour of Raw, scrap 205 live. Spread the roster out more. Have 1 world champion, 2 mid card champions, 1 tag champion, 1 womens champion and none of the championships are exclusive to any brand.
|
|
|
Post by BSR on Jun 29, 2017 19:51:42 GMT -5
I have no thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by blissfan4life on Jun 29, 2017 19:57:45 GMT -5
Is all that you do on here post clickbait crap??
Not so serious answer, will the brand extension be the jerk of the month?
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Jun 29, 2017 19:58:13 GMT -5
This isn't WWE and WCW it's WWE Red and Blue and quite frankly it sucks. WWE is a wrestling company so having it split in half is dumb and something I have never supported. Having 2 of each title devalues them and the amount of PPV's is exhausting so I would prefer one strong brand instead of a 3 hour Raw that's half empty and a 2 hour Smackdown that can barely feature it's stars. From 1997/2002 the WWE only had a 2 hour show and it still managed to feature the entire roster so there is no reason why it couldn't be done with a 3 hour Raw. Wrong. Counting the programming that had wasn't entirely lower card, they had more than 2 hours of programming a week throughout the Attitude era. In 1998 they introduced Heat (which was competing with Nitro in ratings from 1999 onward), making it 3 hours a week. In 1999 they introduced Smackdown, making it 5 hours a week. The problem is WWE realized people were liking Smackdown a lot more than Raw and started pushing their agenda there more. They also only have one face champion (Naomi) in the entire company. I was talking about the single shows. In 1998 you could watch a 2 hour Raw and it was filled with the companies top Superstars and storylines. Imagine how epic a 3 hour Raw would be if it was strongly booked with less fillers and PPV teasers.
|
|
|
Post by hCo.Bro™ [brandon_lee] on Jun 29, 2017 20:06:11 GMT -5
I enjoyed it up until the pointless post mania shuffle. So many of the moves made zero sense and both shows have noticeably struggled to get back to form.
|
|
Plastic Cowboy
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 19, 2011 15:59:19 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by Plastic Cowboy on Jun 29, 2017 20:25:12 GMT -5
You guys complaint about a three hour are nuts. Three hours is fine. They need to follow the nitro three hour formula. First 15 minutes pushes main event feud/ sets up main event for Raw. The next forty five minutes focuses on lower card and tag teams or women, hour two focuses on tag teams, and lower card and upper card talent, last hour should focus on upper mid card and main eventers...and I agree more generic guys vs stars, and lower card guys vs upper card guys save matches for ppv, too. Also stop with the freaking constant recaps.
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jun 29, 2017 20:38:02 GMT -5
I think the brand split has done well.
|
|
|
Post by IRS on Jun 29, 2017 21:13:21 GMT -5
Well, for one, Forbes is about as reliable as a wet sack of crap.
But as far as whether I'd want it to end... definitely not. Sure, it's far from perfect, but we got a damn good 3-4 month run out of SD from it. And that's more consistently good programming than WWE had delivered in a long time pre-split. I'd rather take a chance at getting that again than SD going back to being meaningless, and WWE still utilizing the same 7-8 guys every week on RAW.
|
|
Plastic Cowboy
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 19, 2011 15:59:19 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by Plastic Cowboy on Jun 29, 2017 21:24:07 GMT -5
Building one what I said a few post ago. I just watched this past weeks RAW, Rollins vs Hawkins was a decent tv match, that is the formula they need. Not Bray vs Rollins in a tag math, or one on one with interference every week. That makes the ppv matches not be special. But Rollins vs Hawkins lets the fans see Rollins wrestle, gets Hawkins tv time to build his character, and who knows maybe the fans get behind over time and then you have a new star built organically.
|
|
|
Post by TheLastDude on Jun 29, 2017 21:41:18 GMT -5
Honestly, I'd knock the Pay-Per-Views down to 5-6 total, being dual-branded. Then having RAW and SDL "specials" with big matches once a month/bi-monthly. It's gotten to the point of booking for ratings, that any Pay-Per-View could easily be a weekly TV show. Agreed 100%. I've been saying that for a while too. There's not enough build time to make the matches mean anything anymore. We've had eight ppvs in 2017 and it's not even July yet. That means we're going to have somewhere around 16 ppvs this year. Really? Give us the big five: Royal Rumble (co-branded battle royal where the winner gets a title shot at Mania) Wrestlemania King of the Ring (co-branded tournament where the winner gets a title shot at Summerslam) Summerslam Survivor Series (co-branded traditional survivor matches where the survivors get automatic bids for the next years Rumble) Then do three megashows each for Raw, SDL, and NXT. Make us care about the product again.
|
|
Plastic Cowboy
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 19, 2011 15:59:19 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by Plastic Cowboy on Jun 29, 2017 22:19:38 GMT -5
I agree that there should only be four ppv , but the will never go back to that, heck I'd be happy with with big four being co brand, and have three specific branded ones for each that's 10.... And not have one between royal rumble and mania.
Also the co branded need to have the old red white and blue ropes, lol. Raw red n white, Smackdown blue and white. Give us the red white n blue ropes back.
|
|
ryan93
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Nov 10, 2012 23:53:23 GMT -5
Posts: 355
|
Post by ryan93 on Jun 29, 2017 22:41:19 GMT -5
Once you do the brand split you create all these new stars and then if you go back you get people left off. WWE wants the same thing going on for Smackdown like Raw. If you look everybody can't get on when you have Reigns/Cena/Strowman/Ambrose/The Miz/Rollins/Wyatt/Orton/Styles/Owens/New Day being on both shows with lengthy segments. There is no time for others. I didn't even mention the divas, which would have Charlotte/Bayley/Alexa/Sasha hogging all the time and matches. You leave off a good majority of talent and that's the talent most of us want to see.
|
|
|
Post by jayrod2009 on Jun 29, 2017 23:00:34 GMT -5
If anything, I see WWE going back to 4 PPV's a year and possibly charging extra for them during tbose months. Network is $9.99 each month, $9.99 additional charge during January, April, August, and November for the big 4.
|
|
|
Post by dylan on Jun 30, 2017 0:26:27 GMT -5
My "Thoughts?" are why are we considering Forbes a reliable source of pro wrestling news? OP had to fill the gap somehow ever since WWE Magazine got canned. All Forbes needs now is jerk of the month posts.
|
|
|
Post by Darkhawk on Jun 30, 2017 1:58:51 GMT -5
The Brand Split hasn't been so great for Raw since it started.
|
|
|
Post by skribbel24 on Jul 1, 2017 8:45:09 GMT -5
I am enjoying the brand split. You've got two main shows that are unique, unlike before where SD was basically a show filled with Raw highlights.
|
|
|
Post by greenjack1992 on Jul 1, 2017 20:22:40 GMT -5
If a guy like Jinder Mahal can become WWE Champion, the brand split is doing its job perfectly.
|
|
|
Post by BSR on Jul 1, 2017 22:14:18 GMT -5
If a guy like Jinder Mahal can become WWE Champion, the brand split is doing its job perfectly. That could justify it as a failure as well lol
|
|