Should RAW Only Be Held In Select Cities?

[Mark Henry's Beard]

A great crowd can turn a poor RAW into an average RAW, an average RAW into a good RAW, and a good RAW into a RAW that's remembered for years. Likewise, a poor crowd can send it in the opposite direction, which is what happened last night for me. Last night's show was decent enough, but the crowd sucked all the life out of the show. About halfway through, I went to sleep and just DVR'd the rest. After two weeks of hot crowds and the best back to back RAWs I can remember in years, this week was a massive letdown.

The solution? Get a rotating mix of cities to host RAW. Good crowds only. And it doesn't have to be a short list, either. Just take out the Sioux Citys, the Omahas, the Lafayette, Louisianas. This is the flagship show of the WWE. It should come across on television as something exciting, something revolutionary, something groundbreaking. When it comes across as 10,000 people sitting on their hands at a funeral, it's a major distraction to the product being presented. A great crowd greatly enhances the product. A terrible crowd drags it down. There are plenty of cities that are hot for wrestling. Stick to them for the flagship show. The less enthusiastic crowds can be used for SmackDown, since none of the crowd reaction on that show is organic, anyway.

While some may say that the crowds will be hot if the product is hot, like say, during the Attitude Era when every crowd was raucous, I present to you last night's show. That opening promo, which featured the two most over guys in the company, not to mention four other major stars was absolutely shit on by the dead, apathetic crowd. The product was fine last night. The crowd was not.

So, what say you? Good idea or bad idea? Leave the hot crowds for RAW, and banish the second rate crowds to the second rate show where they can pipe in noise to make it sound like they gave a shit.

 

[toon126]

I would. Some crowds suck. Be fair to give cities a chance to prove themselves, and if they are flat the ditch them. Over the course of a year or so the WWE will have a good idea of where they should only host RAW and PPV's.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

At the end of the day, money is money. Some fans are a lot more passionate than other fans, we see that when it comes to the fans of certain sports teams all the time. For some sporting events, you'll have some immensely hot crowds that can sometimes just change the whole atmosphere and sometimes you won't. Sometimes, crowds will cheer or respond to anything they see with enthusiasm and some won't respond all that much. Some fans enjoy what they're seeing more than others sometimes as well. It happens, there's no way around it.

Bottom line is, however, that those fans at Raw last night, all in all, enjoy what WWE is doing. In spite of whatever sort of drivel you might hear from some of the trolls who frequent the forums, people aren't going to pay, potentially, hundreds of dollars to watch something they don't enjoy. You'll hear some nonsensical bullshit about people doing it "out of habit", which makes no sense whatsoever. If you're willing to spend money on something you don't really like but do so out of "habit", it sounds like you have issues in regards to drugs or alcohol. I don't think it applies to wrestling.

WWE books venues here and there and, frankly, people come in droves to spend money & watch the show. They do so because they want to and because they like it. When it's all said and done, that's what it's all about.

 

[Redemption-2012]

I agree, the crowd was god awful last night as was last weeks. The problem is that some are fans are different than others, some feel passionate about the product whilst others are just there to watch and enjoy. Vince is not going to stop holding shows in certain cities just because the crowd is dead like last nights. At the end of the day, they are making MONEY and that is what they want. Those fans paid as much as any other crowd to attend the show.

I dislike dead crowds, hopefully Baltimore is a good crowd because I found myself going to bed and setting the show to DVR last night.

 

[Mustang Sally]

It's an interesting idea, but one that's hard to gauge because there's no way to know in advance which city's crowd will be noisy and passionate. Plus, the quiet crowd last night might turn out to be the noisiest next time around. I would imagine WWE has done plenty of research as to which venues to play, yet trying to figure out which ones will provide the loudest feedback is an exercise in futility.

Sprinkling "claques" amongst the audience is one way entertainment companies have of getting crowds to chant and yell at the appropriate points: These are big-mouthed people instructed by the company to start chants and cheers; they're planted at strategic places in the audience. Given that many people like to be told what to do and when to do it, this is an effective way of keeping things lively. Don't think WWE hasn't employed this tactic in the past.....yet, attempting to guide the response of 10,000 people sitting in an arena is an iffy endeavor, at best.

One other problem: it's up to the company to build fan support even when the show isn't taking place in their fair city. If they skip a town they've played before, they're not drumming up business in that place, which could have a negative long-term effect. People remember.

Last night, even with a crowd that's being described as less than enthusiastic, they sure got into Daniel Bryan's schtick, right? They love the audience participation stuff and WWE should try to get these started as much as they can.

"Yes!"

 

[Mark Henry's Beard]

At the end of the day, money is money. Some fans are a lot more passionate than other fans, we see that when it comes to the fans of certain sports teams all the time. For some sporting events, you'll have some immensely hot crowds that can sometimes just change the whole atmosphere and sometimes you won't. Sometimes, crowds will cheer or respond to anything they see with enthusiasm and some won't respond all that much. Some fans enjoy what they're seeing more than others sometimes as well. It happens, there's no way around it.

Bottom line is, however, that those fans at Raw last night, all in all, enjoy what WWE is doing. In spite of whatever sort of drivel you might hear from some of the trolls who frequent the forums, people aren't going to pay, potentially, hundreds of dollars to watch something they don't enjoy. You'll hear some nonsensical bullshit about people doing it "out of habit", which makes no sense whatsoever. If you're willing to spend money on something you don't really like but do so out of "habit", it sounds like you have issues in regards to drugs or alcohol. I don't think it applies to wrestling.

WWE books venues here and there and, frankly, people come in droves to spend money & watch the show. They do so because they want to and because they like it. When it's all said and done, that's what it's all about.

To that I say, wouldn't logic dictate that a hotter product, or at least one that appears to be hotter based on crowd reaction, lead to more money? Say you're a casual fan, or someone that hasn't watched wrestling in a while. You flip on RAW last night, and what do you see? There's no buzz. There's no excitement. There's no reason to tune back in next week. You're not missing anything. The product comes across as stale and mediocre to the people in the same building it's taking place. How does it come across on television?

I'm not saying that the WWE shouldn't collect their money from cities like Sioux City. They should, but they should do it on Tuesday, Friday, or Saturday. There are plenty of cities that would love to host Monday Night RAW and have their enthusiasm come through the screen. So, let them, and leave the dead audiences to SmackDown or house shows.

 

[SydTinDad]

I'm a NY'er. We are a hot crowd. So are the Philly's, Chi-Towns, and about a dozen others. But really, that's it. The "E" fills the building with these cow town yokles but the product that comes through the television suffers.

Word of advice Vince................when your picking somewhere for a televised event, avoid city's and states where people say "I'd like you to meet my wife and sister"; and there is only 1 girl standing there.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

Yeah that's a great idea. Let's shun portions of our audience. Superb idea. Let's stay away from the upper Midwest or Northwest or anywhere else you don't approve simply because the crowds aren't crazy stupid. That's great for business. And leave it for a house show? Really? You realize a house show in Souix City last night wouldn't have drawn half the crowd it did by being live, right? House shows never draw what Raw does because nothing important ever happens and the atmosphere is entirely different.

And even if they considered your idea, you're talking about rare crowds that it would be hard to circulate through more than 10 cities. Talk about cold shouldering your fans. Not to mention how hard that would make it to do house shows in areas of the country those cities aren't located around.

Awful, awful idea.

 

[MisterFlawless]

If this could ever be a viable option, instead of hosting Raw in select cities, I'd consider hosting house shows in select cities. You want Raw and for that matter Smackdown to present the best picture of your product that you can since it is on television, and thus attract fans to come to those shows.

On the other hand, while the house show model is a staple of wrestling, I think you may be better off having the house shows in concentrated areas for periods of time. For example, let's say you decide to have four Raws in for major cities (New York, Chicago, Boston, and Miami) and four Smackdowns in relatively major cities as well (Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, and Los Angeles). I'd have Raw/Smackdown going to those cities there but only run my house shows within those areas....Raw in the North and Smackdown in the Southwest.

The next month I'd move the main shows to new areas but keep the house shows in that area for another two months. Now I have no idea how viable this would be nor do I care to determine the logistics of it, but I have a feeling that the house show model may no longer be a viable option in the near future and the industry would be wise to phase this portion out since we have more access to wrestling today than we did in the past.

 

[PaulEnglish]

The problem isn't so much with the crowd, it's the quality of what is being presented. When the product is boring, stale, repetitive and derivative, the audience comes across as disinterested as well. It's bound to happen. Some audiences (New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Detroit, Los Angeles, Chicago) overcome this just by their very nature. Same with the international audiences (Toronto, anything in the UK for example), but those are the rarities. When the show is boring, the audience isn't invested, and replays of things like last night are bound to happen.
I'm certainly not advocating returning back to the Attitude Era, for many reasons, but if the show was more involving (and while I'm on it, shorter. 3 hours is far too long to keep modern audiences engaged. Certainly not with the quality being given), then the audiences will be more involved.
So, no. Don't rotate cities between a few selected ones. Increase the quality of the show and I'd nearly guarantee that the audiences won't be as they were last evening.

 

[tgrfan]

lol you would never make it in business.you would cut off over half of your fan base from seeing your product live just because a few cities are louder on tv.going to many different places is exposure wwe couldnt care less how loud or hot the crowd is.its about putting your product out there for EVERYONE to see.not just a select people in select cities

 

[The Ram]

I live in St. Louis and I can tell you, sometimes when go the crowd is hot and then I go another time then the crowd is.... well not dead but maybe uncreative with chants and some people with a huge lack of energy. It just depends on who's there really so like someone said you can't predict whether a crowd is gonna be hot or not so skipping out on certain cities is 1. unfair and 2. not good for business. Honestly I don't think Vince cares as much on how the crowds react. I think the Wrestlers care more about that, Vince just wants to make money.

 

[chibet]

it'd be great if the fans were into it more.....no matter where they are. like the attitude era.....and like the op said, there have been some great back to back raws since they had that ratings plummet , forcing the mcmahons back on tv. they lose some points, they become less complacent, just like during the attitude era and during the monday night wars....TNA HATERS.... think about that the next time you wish ill will on the only company that COULD force creative to be, well, creative!

btw- i live in nyc- so yeah, here we don't know what a crowd sounds like thats not completely bonkers into it

 

[MCMG]

It is certainly a good point and idea. Some crowds are awful and it really does affect the product. The WWE also need to ensure the crowds are up for it so the faces and heels get the reaction they are craving. These "lesser" cities could still get Smackdown but Raw and PPV's are completely different.

I suppose a problem is that the same people would be going to each show so there wouldn't be the possibility of attracting new fans and selling merchandise.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

Honest question: Is there a correlation between hot crowd and a big ratings number? Taking out the RAW after WrestleMania as an outlier (it's always pretty big), there are others: Chicago, New York, Miami, etc.

While a hot crowd makes for an entertaining show for the viewers, it doesn't necessarily guarantee that it's going to have a great number, and in the long term, that's what really matters to the WWE at this point.

 

[Pedigree1]

Like JH said at the end of the day its all about the Benjamin's. Like when Raw is held in my town of sacramento the crowd albeit very small arena can get very loud. Really depends on what town your in i guess. Some fans are more passionate about wrestling than others. Last nights crowd was well dead for the most part. The only time they got into it was when,Daniel Bryan got the crowd into his Yes chants. Sometimes that is what it takes wrestler/crowd participation.

I dont think the 3 hour format is the problem,the crowd is either gonna be electric semi electric or really non existent. Its either gonna be hit or miss! WWE if they were to skip a town,it be purely business nothing personal towards said city

 

[Nikeo]

The worst idea, from a business standpoint, I've heard in a long, long time. I've heard some IWC ideas for a company that have been bad but this honestly takes the cake.

To say nothing of alienatin fans, as others have succiently pointed out, there's a huge problem with this woeful idea. Burning your fans out. If you've got 20 cities singled out for PPVs and Raw, those fans are going to get to see a big show at least twice a year. They're not going to react the same.

You look at that loud crowd after 'Mania that the IWC loves to talk about. Many of them, it's not illogical to assume, were the overseas fans that were in town for 'Mania. The Irish, Scottish, French, etc, etc, fans that don't get to see the product very often. That's why they were so loud, they were very excited to see a show like that. All we EVER get to see are house shows. Of course they're going to pop big and really get into the shows. I've never been to anything but a house show, I'd be SO excited to see an episode of Raw.

People aren't going to be excited when they constantly get to see the product. They say absense makes the heart grow stronger and it's very true in this sense.

If the company adopted your plan, apart from the terrible business ramifications, you'd find these "hot" crowds would soon become apathetic.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

It would be much better. Get it down to a list of about 40 - 50. Cities can get themselves into the rotation by being rockin' and rollin at House Shows. If anything, make sure we have ourselves at least ten thousand seat arenas. Not only was the crowd shit, but it looked so ametuer. The building looked like a fucking oversized gym.

Burning your fans out. If you've got 20 cities singled out for PPVs and Raw, those fans are going to get to see a big show at least twice a year. They're not going to react the same.

You look at that loud crowd after 'Mania that the IWC loves to talk about. Many of them, it's not illogical to assume, were the overseas fans that were in town for 'Mania. The Irish, Scottish, French, etc, etc, fans that don't get to see the product very often. That's why they were so loud, they were very excited to see a show like that. All we EVER get to see are house shows. Of course they're going to pop big and really get into the shows. I've never been to anything but a house show, I'd be SO excited to see an episode of Raw.

People aren't going to be excited when they constantly get to see the product. They say absense makes the heart grow stronger and it's very true in this sense.

If the company adopted your plan, apart from the terrible business ramifications, you'd find these "hot" crowds would soon become apathetic.

I forgot they run 13 shows a year in Sioux City, Iowa. Mustve been the deal on monday.

 

[Nikeo]

I never said it was particularly the case last week, I didn't even see the show. What I am saying is that when you only produce a show in select locations then you certainly will, not only piss off fans, but also burn out those that remain with many big shows.

You're from America, right? Odds are you've seen a Raw or a PPV in your life. Or have had the opportunity to see one. Most international fans don't get tha option. Apart from the "'Mania buzz" one of the main reasons, imo, for that hot crowd were that it was comprised of a lot fans who ONLY get to see house shows.

A city shouldn't have to earn the product. The product should work hard to engage the fans. If you think otherwise, I don't think you've grasped the concept of a business. It's not the customer's job to ensure they leave happy.

I know some crowds can be shit, but having a two-tiered system for shows is not the answer. You'd piss off an awful lot of fans.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

I grasp the concept perfectly well, thanks, by why showcase said product in a situation that makes it look shitty and uninterestng? Shit yes cities need to "earn" a raw, just as their passion, and attendance of events "earn" any other major event, or securing a major sports team for the city. Im not saying make the list of cities only about 20 long, but you should damn sure stay away from spots that have given you little to no attendance or crowd participation.

What makes your product look better.....5 thousand people sitting on their hands in iowa, or 17 thousand losing their minds in florida, or New York, or the UK?

Your going to make me have to go shower after this, since I will feel so filthy after defending the WWE, but there was NOTHING wrong with that opening segment this week. Guys who are very over, promoting a match that is very over. It had nothing to do with the product.

 

[Soulblazed]

As far as Raw being held in different cities in North America, I think of cities such as Vancouver, Detroit, NYC..The crowds there are especially smart and see through bullshit quite easily.

I think that Raw, Smackdown and PPVs should be held in more countries on a more constant basis...I know that people will bring up the time difference excuse, but nonetheless, I still think that WWE should goto Russia, South Africa, India, Nigeria, Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, China, Chile, etc

WWE should seriously change up their schedules so that they can actually hold more televised shows/PPVs on other continents regardless of time differences, since it'll open whole new markets for them to connect with different countries/fans, etc

That's a link to an article detailing WWE's interest in doing more business with China

http://ringpostsblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/09/wwe-returning-to-china/