Why Has SmackDown Fallen?

[jsnsince89]

For a number of years now, WWE's B show has struggled with TV ratings and been criticised for boring matches and angles. I wanted to ask on this thread to why that is and why WWE Officials see it as a B show.
I was watching old episodes of the show back in 99-00' when it really created its own identity from RAW.
Let's not forgot, this show once featured a 'Buried Alive Match' as well as a forgotten great in a TLC match w/ Chris Benoit & Chris Jericho as Tag Champions. How about Lesnar v Angle in a 60-minute IronMan Match. Great times!

So why the below-par show?

Is it the fact it's taped and doesn't have the energy of a LIVE event?

Is there a business flaw with airing it on Friday's on Syfy for you guys across the pond?

Is it edited too much in pre-production I.e. Crowd Edit input?

Is their a lack of depth to the current WWE roster to build multiple storylines and feuds?

Or is their not enough good writers in the company at the minute to create engaging material?

I grew up watching the attitude era and always felt that SD' took off where RAW finished. Angles and feuds that played out on Monday's RAW resulted in matches on SD with Thursday Nights being the show more likely to announce matches for the upcoming PPV.

If WWE ever decided to return SD to its former glory, surely it would be #bestforbusiness. Rivalries going into today's PPV would have more backstory and create a better basis for solid matches. Arena fans would be potentially more hyped up and interested in mid card matches, making for a better atmosphere for the overall event.

WWE...SMACKDOWN NEEDS TO KNOW ITS ROLE!!!

Debate?

 

[laodaron]

Three reasons:

Fully acknowledged as the "B" show.

Taped and pre-empted.

On SyFy (not that it's a bad channel, just that many people don't tune in to SyFy).

 

[JohnJohnson]

Three reasons:

Fully acknowledged as the "B" show.

Taped and pre-empted.

On SyFy (not that it's a bad channel, just that many people don't tune in to SyFy).

It was the "B" Show back then and was still awesome. Even Sunday Night Heat was awesome and featured main eventers.

It was taped then as well, as were half of the Raws before late 1999. They were still all great.

I don't recall UPN being a very popular channel either, although I could be wrong since I watch cartoons when not watching wrestling.


The reasons why Smackdown has fallen so much, is because they just gave up on it. It's a show they push out and is basically a rehash of Raw. When I go back and watch older Raws from 2000 or so, if I go immediately to the very next Raw, I often find that I missed a lot and have to go back to the Smackdown to get caught up on the story. Today, there aren't any major plot developments on Smackdown. Anything that happens to advance a feud is very minimal and usually either happened the week prior on Raw already or will happen on the next Raw(like Kane attacking DB). If they want the show to be taken seriously, then they need to feature Cena and other's that they usually only have on Raw(like the part timers), and have actualy plot development. I'm not talking about, a simple run in after a match, or a generic monologue about how much more awesome one wrestler is than another. I mean actual plot developments, like Wyatts kidnapping a Shield member and have the whole night revolving around finding and rescuing them, or even that whole Orton attacking Cena's dad thing.

 

[Torgo]

Why has smack down fallen?

- On a less watched network

- not too many huge names appear regularly (cena Batista ect)

- taped beforehand

- too many raw recaps and commercials

- the internet now that we know what's going to happen why watch it?

- finally, the same old same old. For weeks I remember that the show ended with a 6 man tag match.

- no more brand split

These all add to a lesser watched show. I will say that the Wwe has done a better job.

 

[lil steroid meat]

Nothing important ever happens there. You have some great matches but that's it.

It's basically diet Raw. HHH/Punk/Bryan/Orton/Cena/Shield/Wyatts open the show. Same six man Shield/Wyatt vs. Face Team matches. And then a bunch of random matches that have no real significance. Not to mention, there are never any real plot developments.

So when you combine all that with the fact that it's taped and once you read the results, unless something you are interested in happens, it's really not worth tuning in.

Also, the Friday night thing doesn't help. Make it live and move it back to Thursdays or move it to Saturdays from 6-8 or 7-9 for a more old school feel.

The show should be for midcarders and secondary feuds. Put Big E or Ryback or Ziggler or Barrett in an actual feud. Make the IC/US Title the top belts for the show, similar to how the World Heavyweight Title was.

For example, the Titus O Neal/Darren Young feud should be opening the show. Titus O Neal should be coming out to cut promos to start the show. Don't have Ryback and Sheamus be in a random match, put them in a feud. Same with Kofi and Del Rio. They want to put Ziggler and Miz in a tag team, have them come out on the next Smackdown and cut a promo on their displeasures with the WWE to open the show. Make main eventer appearances rare. Build stars on this show.

Make the show an alternative to Raw. Why do I want to watch a taped, diet Raw?

I also think it might be time for a color scheme and logo change too.

 

[The_Reptile_]

The real reason is simple. There's nothing on Smackdown you can't get on RAW. Ever since RAW and Smackdown got rid of the Brands Smackdown lost it's primary draw since the WHC and the WWE Champion were now both RAW attractions, along with a lot of wrestlers that were Smackdown specials. Eventually Smackdown just became The RAW Supplementary Show, and everything you saw on there either didn't matter, you already saw on RAW, would see on RAW, or would get brought up on RAW. Combine this with the fact that RAW got bumped up to three hours and Smackdown was given a shortage of content exclusive to it, and eventually people just started turning away from a show that basically doesn't need to exist. Simple as that.

 

[bryan vs cm punk wm30]

Ever since edge retired and the raw supershow came it has fallen. Its not interesting when a match like Orton vs bryan happens on raw then again on Smackdown. Even though the titles are unified I would like the show to separate from raw and see the champion on both shows.

 

[ADLegend21]

When they started doing bragging rights and had Smackdown! win two years in a row to be the "superior brand" they should've made it live. You don't wanna miss Raw because it's live and you at least DVR it and watch streams online if you don't have cable. you can see what happens on smackdown Wednesday morning and decide if you wanna see it or not. WWE does live shows on Fridays ANYWAY so why not make Smackdown a Live friday show, give it the same treatment as Raw with the live feel of anything can happen and the ratings would most likely be on par with Raw.

 

[The Fabulous Rougeau's]

The major reasons are the show being taped, drop off in talent and energy invested in making show, and the show being on Friday night.

You can kill two birds with one stone by making Smackdown live and airing it on Tuesday night (that's when they do the show anyways). That's the easy part. From there you need to dedicate similar time and energy in building Smackdown as you do Raw as well as making sure you have your major players present as they are for Raw.

 

[Ubermensch]

When Smackdown first came out it was intended to compete with Thunder on Thursdays. The short lived Thursday night wars. It eventually one and Thunder moved to Wednesdays. Raw has always been the flagship, but events happened on Smackdown as well. If you look back DVDs about whatever, you'll see some of the greatest works the WWF put out were on Smackdown as well. The roster split helped it, but eventually the wrestlers jumped back and forth so much that it lost it's luster.

Furthermore, Sci Fi channel has movie about Shark Tornadoes, you are going to catch very many complimentary viewers from their other programs. When Smackdown was at it's high, it was on Basic Cable UPN. If I remember right, I think UPN could even be picked up as basic cable and with an antenna (when those were still around).

 

[Reflection]

I think the WWE is to be blamed for that. They simply stopped giving Smackdown the focus, attention, effort, and resources that it needed. Instead of maintaining a 60-40 or 65-35 ratio of the above factors between the two shows, right now its clearly around 80-20, and when there is such a difference in allocation, the show is bound to drop in quality. And when it drops in quality, it will soon drop in ratings as well.
There was a time when many perceived it to be on the same level as RAW. Then it went to being the show where stars that wasn't generating enough reaction on RAW, would get sent into. That was the beginning of the end, in my opinion. More often than not, it were the technical wrestlers that got demoted to Smackdown, while the Showmen got promoted to RAW. Naturally, people began viewing Smackdown as the show where actual wrestling takes place. But I knew that wouldn't last too long... As soon as someone improves, they get promoted back to RAW, many of the technicians have left, and most of the guys that appear on SD now (apart from the workhorses) are people with limited charisma, mic skills, and drawing power.
It doesn't have anything special that RAW doesn't have, and thus doesn't give viewers any special reason why they should tune in and watch, apart from because they are WWE fans.

 

[sbattsjr]

It has fallen because 1 it's pre recorded and you can get on wz about 3 days before it actually comes on to see what happened. That kills there viewers and ratings

 

[Mustang Sally]

I still enjoy Smackdown, in part because I go in not expecting it to be Raw. If you approach the program with the understanding that we won't be getting the scoops, live action and breaking news.....and just sit to enjoy the action on your TV screen.....it's actually a pleasant way to spend a couple hours (or tape it for viewing at your convenience, 'cause I ain't gonna stay home on Friday night to watch television).

For instance, last night's show was brisk and well-paced. The central theme seemed to center on the Real Americans being featured as individuals with Swagger and Cesaro emerging victorious in their efforts. Their matches were fun to watch and it was sort of nice to see Zeb Colter coming out of an evening wearing a happy face.

Meanwhile, Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton got their expected props.....with nothing really changing as a result of it, which is what Smackdown is.

In this way, it's all good. Having two shows in which groundbreaking events occur might make it more difficult for fans to follow.... and they might lose some viewers along the way. As it is, the fans just have to tune in on Monday nights to keep up with current events (which is a hell of a lot more preferable than trying to get them to follow it on the weekend) and they can continue to get enjoyment from the WWE product by watching on Friday.

Since the brand split ended, there is plenty of star power on Smackdown, so you can see your favorites on either show. I have no problems with the "secondary" show; the key is not to expect it to be "Raw II."

 

[Kool Aid Man]

I don't see how the WWE can't get SmackDown back on primary channels now that it's so PG/watered down/unentertaining. When it was on UPN it got far more exposure. If the WWE hopes to revive SmackDown it can't. At this point, the WWE would have to rename the show and revamp it.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Your problem is you are comparing it to when it was seen as, used as, and booked as Raw's equal. It is not that anymore. It's on Syfy on a shit night. WWE has every right to not make it as good as Raw. It's more experimental. Why blow your wad when no one will watch the show based on channel and timeslot alone?

I don't think it needs a major workover, I think we need to realize that things evolve. Smackdown is the B show. It's basically there because WWE is so damn popular that even their B shows are most channels number 1 show, so Vince can milk more money out of it.

 

[Randy Orton's Head Blood]

Three reasons
1) Raw is now 3 hours. More can happen on Raw, which means if we can advance almost every storyline in those 3 hours, why the hell do we need to tune into Smackdown just to see two hours of people fighting over nothing? (That's not what happens sometimes)
2) Raw is a SuperShow. There's no brand separation AT ALL, which means that all the best superstars turn up on Monday night & there's no regular John Cena appearances on Smackdown, meaning you're not going to get as many viewers.
3) It's pre-taped. People can read the spoilers & have no need to watch it at all.

 

[El Wyshu]

I lost interest in SmackDown after I came to know that it was pre-taped and the crowd reactions were edited. Crowd participation is an important element of my viewing experience. Anyway, SmackDown has been predominantly mediocre since the introduction of the SuperShow concept in 2011. It's sad, really. SmackDown was on a roll in 2009. And then the draft happened where guys like Edge and Jericho were drafted to RAW and SmackDown was stuck with the likes of Big Show, Jack Swagger and Rey Mysterio. Only CM Punk could rescue the show, but the creative failed to capitalize on his momentum.