|
Post by Flyrfn144 on Jul 1, 2007 21:06:47 GMT -5
3 hours because having 3 hr RAW's and 3 hr PPV's is pointless.
|
|
The Doctor
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 3, 2002 19:03:52 GMT -5
Posts: 3,446
|
Post by The Doctor on Jul 1, 2007 21:14:18 GMT -5
Having lived through the Nitro expansion, I can tell you first hand that a three hour RAW would be a monumental mistake. It would overexpose the brand and burn guys out even more. Besides that, Heat still airs on television in European markets. With ECW taking up the third available taping hour on the SmackDown! side, how do you tape that show to fulfill the overseas contracts?
Forget the logistics for a minute. In order to keep the crowd in the building interested, Creative is going to have to be firing on all eight cylinders. At this point, quite frankly, Creative isn't firing on any cylinders and before the Benoit tragedy, they hotshotted the assassination[/b] of the owner of the company.
This would turn out to be a fatal flaw for WWE. For WCW fans, this is all just a little bit of history repeating.
|
|
|
Post by rkolegendkilla on Jul 1, 2007 21:17:53 GMT -5
2 hours. As stated before, 3 hour RAW's and 3 hour PPV's would be very contradicting.
|
|
|
Post by gumdrop on Jul 1, 2007 21:22:08 GMT -5
I don't see how anyone could say that RAW is rushed. It seems rather slow to me.
|
|
Scotty Flamingo
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 7, 2005 16:40:41 GMT -5
Posts: 2,247
|
Post by Scotty Flamingo on Jul 1, 2007 21:34:55 GMT -5
Everytime they have 3 hour raws, they still have the same amount of matches and fill the rest of the time with cena talking or some other thing that wastes time. Like on Mcmahon apprecaition night they wasted all the time having them talk about Mcmahon. If they had the original planned Raw from last Monday they would have wasted all that time talking about who could have blew up the limo.
|
|
|
Post by wwe4ever on Jul 1, 2007 21:40:51 GMT -5
I'd want RAW to be 3 hours long. Of course I would want little to know talking during RAW because I hate seeing guys ramble on and take up time. I would also want it to air one hour earlier on TV.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 4, 2024 11:29:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2007 21:46:03 GMT -5
2 hours is good. I get bored around the 2nd hour. They would just do 3 cena matches a night. it would be boring
|
|
doink317
Main Eventer
Welcome Back Artie!
Joined on: Aug 22, 2006 16:19:10 GMT -5
Posts: 1,294
|
Post by doink317 on Jul 1, 2007 21:47:04 GMT -5
Two hours, they just need to keep it like it is now. Doing three hour RAWs everyweek is like overkill. I really think in the long run it would also hurt WWE. Who would want to order a 40 dollar three hour PPV, when you can watch three hours of WWE the next day for free? Plus, it didn't work when WCW took Nitro three hours, I really can't see it working if WWE took RAW three hours. I don't mind the three hour shows they do everyonce in awhile.
|
|
|
Post by King Shocker the Monumentous on Jul 1, 2007 21:49:49 GMT -5
I'd rather they gave that extra hour to ECW.
Besides, if Raw started at 8 every week, when would I watch Power Rangers?
|
|
|
Post by metallica90 on Jul 1, 2007 21:54:28 GMT -5
3 hours
|
|
|
Post by datganstawon on Jul 1, 2007 22:30:27 GMT -5
3 hours so i can see cena suck a butt
|
|
|
Post by yungking23 on Jul 1, 2007 22:42:48 GMT -5
3 hours would be cool, but for it to work they would have to put on an amazing show week after week. Its not impossible, but it would be hard to do. Raw always has some good matches, but alot of the time, the overall show isn't that great. If they would make every RAW like they made Smackdown this past week then there would be no problem, but I don't think they'll be able to pull it off with the brand extension. However, they do have alot of talent and if the writers could make some good storylines then RAW would definitley be worth watching every week.
|
|
|
Post by Barrett on Jul 1, 2007 23:11:11 GMT -5
Two hours is enough. The three hour shows can be tedious, IMO, and should be saved for special occasions a'la Homecoming or the Draft.
|
|
|
Post by Barrett on Jul 1, 2007 23:13:00 GMT -5
Besides, if Raw started at 8 every week, when would I watch Power Rangers? "Legally acquire it from the internet" you DORK!
|
|
|
Post by JCF on Jul 1, 2007 23:33:34 GMT -5
3 Hours. More RAW = Greatness
|
|
|
Post by HHH316 on Jul 1, 2007 23:38:16 GMT -5
I've been thinking about this for a while. I think that if the brand split ended, 3 hours would be perfect. The entire night would have a stacked line up. I would also dump the ECW show completely so you arent losing any TV time. There would still be 5 hours of WWE per week.
|
|
|
Post by Bartman on Jul 2, 2007 0:58:49 GMT -5
2.
Leave PPVs as 3.
|
|
|
Post by Ultimate Figure Collector on Jul 2, 2007 1:01:18 GMT -5
I say they test it out for a few weeks, if ratings are good, continue. I agree. Maybe end the brand split and and give RAW three hours. That will be plenty of time for the talent. If they some talent don't wrestle on RAW they can give that talent more time on Smackdown.
|
|
|
Post by layzie on Jul 2, 2007 1:03:43 GMT -5
depends
|
|
|
Post by layzie on Jul 2, 2007 1:05:47 GMT -5
like itd make sense if say, the brand split ended, and they did away with sd and ecw
even with cutdowns the roster would be exceptionally big, with a pretty loaded main event squad to work with.
but of course theyd lose out too much on the less programming and itll never happen.
but like honestly, could you imagine it happening with a loaded roster like that, one big show to look forward to a week, each of the 3 hour shows hyped as they currently do for 3 hour editions of RAW. ratings/production boost hmmmmm?
|
|