USA Network wants Raw at 3 hours to combat iMPACT!

[Ambiguous Turd]

Partial source: F4Wonline.com

- As noted before, WWE star Curt Hawkins worked as a color commentator at the recent WWE developmental TV tapings. Hawkins said on Twitter that it wasn't a tryout but just a one time deal.

- Dave Meltzer reports that there is talk within WWE of making RAW three-hours each week if TNA moves to Monday nights for good. There has also been talk of keeping the guest host storyline booked if TNA goes to Mondays.

Apparently the USA Network is high on RAW going to three-hours but Vince and Stephanie McMahon are both said to be against it. Word is that this is something being talked about a lot among some in the company.

I can frankly agree with Vince and Stephanie in not wanting to take Raw to 3 hours. You see that everyone? Yet one more example to show where Sidious can agree with Vince on something.

We've seen this movie before when Nitro went to 3 hours, and it is a huge blow to Creative.

Creative has to struggle enough to come up with material on a weekly basis and it is obvious to pretty much all but the diehard WWE Universe Fans that WWE has been on Cruise Control with an extremely stale product for ages now. Vince and Stephanie are smart enough to realize that going 3 hours to combat Impact is going to be extremely difficult to pull off on a weekly basis.

I'm not sure what WWE's contract with the network specifically states, obviously, in whether USA can order Raw to go to 3 hours or not, but obviously USA wouldn't want to lose WWE from their network if they threaten WWE with this. So maybe Vince may have some bargaining power in the move after all.

If they are forced to do this, they will obviously go from 8-11 PM while Impact runs from 9-11 PM and therefore, WWE would have the advantage going into the 8-9 PM hour unopposed with a big angle. Of course, it's quite obvious that WWE is a little empty on the "Compelling Television" tank so we'll have to see what they can bring to the table in that regard.

Firstly, do you want to personally see Raw go to 3 hours? Not for "business" reasons, but "personally" ... would you be interested in seeing Raw being a 3 hour show each week?

Secondly, business-wise, do you think it is a good idea or not for WWE?

And finally, if WWE does this, do you think it will help or hurt TNA in the short-term? How about the long-term?

 

[HBK-aholic]

Yay, I'm a die-hard WWE Universe fan Anyway, personally, I love watching Raw - an extra hour would entertain me all the same, I'm sure. I'd also mean more Shawn, which can never be a bad thing.

On a business level, absolutely not. I in no way think the WWE is a bad product now, but creative will need to come up with 50% more new material for every show - that is bound to show some cracks. That isn't a wrestling thing, it's just common sense. If you work people too hard, or expect too much, soon things will begin to fall. Also, if Raw went to 3 hours, and finished at 5am, I'd never stay up to watch it live. If it started an hour earlier, I'd enjoy that, but the timing would need to be more clear - I can't see many UK fans watching until 5am - 4 is enough of a stretch.

 

[Mr. TM]

I wonder if this means that the WWE will get a higher pay for their show, only makes sense that they would, as they are adding 50% more content on Monday nights. That being said, they would have to get more writers, which could either be positive or negative. Fresh ideas versus too many writers.

I wouldn't personally at this time like Raw to be three hours. I find it hard sometimes to sit through the last half an hour of a show. When Raw does have a 3 hour night, I usually try and have an enjoyable night watching it, but if it is nightly, then I don't think I would enjoy it.

 

[INDYjon22]

I have no interest in seeing Raw go to three hours. It did not exactly work out for WCW when they tried it and I don't see it working for the WWE now. It just makes the program stale with the same matches being done over and over again. The idea in theory is interesting and three hour shows do work, but only occasionally when the WWE has something special planed. They obviously are not going to have something special planed for each show every week. They are much better off with the two hour show right now and occasional three hour shows.

 

[ZeroVX]

Bad ideas all across the board. Like you said, going to three hours severely hurt Nitro, and it could hurt RAW as well. Especially with the product they've been putting on lately. I usually find myself bored at what's happening even at two hours.

Also, it's equally a bad idea to keep the guest host idea going. That has done more harm than good and needs to end posthaste.

 

[Coco]

This won't work unless WWE actually learns how to be creative or at least put together an interesting wrestling show on a weekly basis. As thing are now, 95% of their Raw roster is stale as fuck or as far from interesting as can be. The booking ranges from reaching to lazy to mind-numbing. They prove on a weekly basis that Raw is on life support, a brand living off of former glory and the spin they sell to the marks about controversy, excitement, unpredictability, entertainment, and long-standing excellence. One could only hope TNA becomes a serious threat to make them get out of this funk. I'm not sure I could stand three hours of the current version of Raw, the Raw that doesn't even attempt to produce quality television becasue evidently people are such helpless saps that they'll watch whatever the WWE stamps its logo on. I've got to hope that if this does happen, the extra hour gives people an even greater chance of getting tired of Vince's shit and changing the channel. No, I don't like TNA any more than I like the WWE. But for goodness sake, I find it hard to watch more than twenty minutes of Raw a week and have since the summer. Something needs to change for me. I don't care what they draw and how many people find it easy to just accept Santinoswoggle X comedy bits, I can't stand it. Three hours does nothing but make me groan longer and harder at Raw than I already do.

[/disjointed post]

Also, about this making things harder on creative... Well, duh. When you have a creative team that puts as little thought into their job as this one, anything would seem like more work.

That said, I fail to see how this would be a problem if anyone were a) inspired, or b) able to break Vince's funk.

 

[hatehabsforever]

I am still a big WWE fan and don't see many of the problems with the current product that many of our other more negative posters see. Sure it's not perfect but I still really enjoy most of it and certainly don't need to be a Chronic Complainer about it.

Having said this, I wouldn't want it to go to three hours. That's too long IMO. It's hard to maintain interest in a show for three hours whether you are enjoying it or not. Sure, the occasional three hour special, but not on a regular basis. From a business perspective it's a bad idea, just ask WCW.

And I certainly wouldn't make this change due to some perceived threat from TNA. TNA is a long way away from having the impact upon WWE whereby they have to change anything about their current product. I think TNA would probably suffer from a longer RAW, especially if RAW were to begin before TNA starts. But I think that TNA faces a big uphill battle versus WWE anyway, especially if they foolishly decide to go head to head with them on Monday nights. Once the novelty of TNA's current assault wears thin, WWE's dominance will extend over them again, whether it be 2 or 3 hours of programming.

 

[Pimpin]

Personally I don't want to see Raw go to three hours. It's hard enough to stomach the shitfest that they put on for the normal two hour show and I believe that the product would only get worse if they do go to three hours every week.

Now on a business level. Of course they shouldn't go to three hours. They would have to do more on a weekly basis and of course it's already well known that WCW tried the weekly three hour Nitro years back and that tanked badly.

It would also put more of a strain on creative as they would have to come up with even more content for the three hour shows and I don't see how the product would be more exciting if it did go to three hours.

So pretty much I say that they're better off with the two hour shows with an occasional 'special' three hour show included.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

There's no need for Raw to go to three hours to combat iMPACT! for any number of reasons. A three hour, live television program on a weekly basis is just too much overall. WCW did this, as has been mentioned, and it was a creative train wreck. Also, it doesn't make sense business wise for the show to go to three hours. In virtually every case, a three hour show tends to bring down the shows overall ratings for that particular week. The Jan 4th edition of iMPACT! did lose viewers over the course of the show. Had the show been two hours, it would have drawn a 1.6 rather than a 1.5. I know that it doesn't sound like much, but growth is growth and TNA needs every tenth of a point it can get in order to eventually reach its goal of potentially being the #1 wrestling company in the world.

Would I be ok with Raw going to three hours? Sure, no problems for me. I do think that if Raw were to go three hours, I don't believe that WWE Creative could afford to be lazy. If the audience doesn't like what you're putting on, they'll change the channel. A two hour WWE Raw is averaging 5.3-5.4 million viewers and is typically among the top drawing shows on cable. Often times, it is the single biggest drawing show on cable. I do think that two hours has something to do with it. I'd still watch Raw if it was three hours, but why fuck with something that's worked out just fine.

I doubt that USA can force Raw to go to three hours. If you think about it, that could almost be interpreted as USA forcing WWE to alter show content. Going to three hours would be a creative decision and in terms of determining show content, USA ultimately doesn't have that much of a say. They can suggest all they like but, at the end of the day, it's ultimately Vince's call.

 

[klunderbunker]

This would be bad.

There's something that people seem to be overlooking here: when they went head to head before on the biggest night in TNA history, WWE DOMINATED TNA head to head. TNA's ratings plummeted even with an hour lead in. They're not going to have Flair and Hardy and Hogan debuting every week to hold people there. They hit a 1.9 with no competition. Since then with no competition they've hit a 1.4. That tells me something: people tried TNA and didn't like it or were just killing time until Raw came on. I'll be flipping, but I'll be giving Raw first shot. The masses simply like WWE more. Kids watch it, and my guess would be a lot of parents are going to watch it with them, meaning TNA doesn't get a lot of their target audience.

What's the point of that? Simple: WWE is going to crush TNA no matter what. Why mess with what's already working and strain WWE? This could make things a lot worse.

 

[Lee]

Three hours is far too much, it's allright quarterly or whatever but every week would be hard to keep that level, something they're struggling to do at the moment (Raw recap, 20290293029320 commercials). That being said I would like to see Raw go to three hours, but on the condition that we get rid of ECW. The hour from ECW can be used for the extra hour of Raw. That would be much better as it has a better mix of talent there and ECW's ratings are abysmal at the moment. Mixing the two would be logical (Unless you're syfy!)

 

[Melina]

I sincerely hope they stick to two hours. Three hours would take away from the importance of their PPV's. That and Raw is the weakest wrestling show they offer right now, although Impact sadly is worse than Raw.

Going to be interesting to watch the two worst wrestling shows of the week going one on one (of course those two being the worst is my opinion).

 

[Mitch Henessey]

This would be a horrible idea. A three hour Raw would be bad in every way possible. There would have to be more matches,more segments, and more skits. I remember that commercial free Raw WWE did during the whole Donald Trump storyline. Without the commercials, that Raw felt like it was a very long show. Now imagine a three hour Raw with commercials, it would be way too long, and ratings would plummet.

I do think this would hurt TNA, but on the other hand, the 2 hour Raw show IS currently hurting TNA. There might be a lot of people out there rooting for TNA, but the facts are, WWE is still crushing them at the moment. TNA needs more fire power, and has a long way to go before they catch WWE in the ratings war.

 

[MizisAwesome]

some of the 3 hour episodes have been getting kind of boring, and could be hard for vince and the writers to think of stuff to fill the time.

They could still compete if they used some more matches, even if it is with a lot of jobbers, if they just had 2 hour shows.

what i would like to see, is have about twice as many three hour specials as normal

 

[Kenny Powers]

Maybe they could get rid of ECW and mix Raw and ECW talent in one show, but it would be overkill. 3 hour events need to be a once in a while special occasions. 3 hours every week is too much. There isn't enough talent or story lines for either company to do 3 hours every week.

WWE doesn't see TNA as competition anyway, I guess USA are worried for no reason. Whether we like the programing or not, WWE should be able to maintain their ratings if not more with or without competition. I don't want to see Raw 3 hours and I especially don't want them to continue the guest host concept. It draws ratings though, so I guess we will have to suffer through it.

 

[Maestro48239]

I truly hope they dont go to 3 hours, it is hard enough to sit through 2 hours and 11 minutes of the current RAW show, lame skits, tons of recaps, sup-par wrestling matches, Vince every week saying how Bret isnt coming back, zzzzzzzzz! now imagine 3 hours and 11 minutes. yikes, makes my brain hurt to think about it!

what they need to do is make the 2 hours more enjoyable, make them overpaid wrestlers actually wrestle more, make them work harder, the guys in TNA dont mind doing it, and even for less money.

and for God's sake,....GET RID of the FUCKING midget!

 

[y2empleh]

I'm against the concept. Yes WCW did it during their hey day but they had their ENTIRE ROSTER on the show. Right now with the roster being split among 3 brands, the Raw roster isn't deep enough to do a 3 hour show. If they did 3 hours it would just be watered down with a couple of superstars-esque matches and a 2nd divas match. Plus it eliminates the special feel of having all brands on Raw for a 3 hour show. Would they do a 4 hour show on those nights?? Wrestling needs to have the occasional free TV special show like a good SNME or the old WCW clash of the champions. Right now that is essentially a 3 hour Raw (the current SNME's haven't been good in a while) or TNA's occasional special show.

 

[Tougie]

Its completely unnessacary to have Raw be 3 hours. It already has that solid fanbase that will watch regardless, and as said creative would be in even more trouble then it already is. If anything I see TNA moving to a 3 hour slot on Mondays.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Personally I would really enjoy to see 3 hours of Raw every week because then I would get to see a whole extra hour's worth of Raw. Many fans would agree and the idea SOUNDS good.... It could mean longer matches and more tv time for guys who usually get little or none and I'd definitely be interested in seeing that happen.

From a business perspective however.... it's a terrible idea because they would quickly run out of storylines to put the wrestlers in and would get stuck repeating the same stuff with different people all the time. Why see the exact same feud between two other guys that you JUST saw a couple of months ago? Things like this would begin happening, and faster than you might think. It's tough to be original all the time, especially when you are.... as Cole calls it.... the longest weekly running episodic television show in history....

At first it would hurt TNA because 3 hours of Raw sounds so great, until the storylines begin being recycled constantly due to not having any ideas. It would benefit TNA in the long run honestly because by the time Raw is recycling old storylines constantly and never has anything fresh, then the fans who are too bored with Raw could switch over to Impact instead which could do wonders for their ratings.

 

[Tastycles]

Going to three hours is a stupid idea. Doing so would stretch the product to breaking point, and WCW has provided a cast iron example of how it doesn't really help matters. I can't imagine the USA Network will be pushing for it as hard if TNA draw the same next time around as they did the previous time, and I don't really see how it will effect anything anyway. If USA want to keep the ratings, they should put some sort of show that is aimed at the same demographic on immediately before or after. Diluting the show will have opposite of the intended effect.

 

[billm75]

I could only see this working if they tacked on a "Superstars" style hour to the current programming. Show a few of the dark matches or give some of the lesser known wrestlers a little time to shine each week.

It would definitely work out BETTER if they'd drop a few PPV's and spread them out further than 3 weeks apart for most of the year. But that's not happening, so no sense in going down that road.

Frankly, I doubt TNA moving to Monday nights is going to have a very big effect on WWE ratings after the first few weeks. Fans will choose what they want to watch, and chances are TNA will start out the first hour with low ratings but get stronger ratings for the second hour after RAW goes off the air.