Good to see you using articles or posts from Wrestlezone to make your point.
I don't post at or write for either site, just on Wrestlezone, and I honestly couldn't care less of the opinions
online of people outside this site.
Further, you didn't show threads from those sites, you merely showed a whopping
three articles from
two websites to make your argument that people are "fickle" with regards to the Brand Split. A good sample size it is not. Moreover, it makes for a good discussion topic every now and then, at least if one can understand what the OP is trying to say.
The biggest argument against the brand split is that WWE doesn't have the talent to run two separate shows. I would guide said person arguing this to watch NXT online. NXT has an over-abundance of talent that the same wrestlers don't make it on the show every week, hence they have a glut in talent that are more then equipped to at least work the "B show" aka Smackdown. Sami Zahn, Kassius Ohno(when he gets in shape), Leo Kruger, Paige, Enzo Amore, Adrian Neville, and Corey Graves are all ready, or close to it, now. Further, there are talents who were once relevant when the Brand Split was enforced that are hardly used now, such as Miz and Wade Barrett.
Bringing back the Brand Split would do three major things for the product, and, more specifically, the fans.
1. Makes room for more talent: Some time back, there was a rumor that Smackdown was going to three hours. I don't know what became of it, but the premise is simple. Most wrestlers appear on both shows, leaving less time for even the mid-card. One of my biggest complaints regarding Battleground was that
half the matches were given a week or less of build. Having a Brand Split allows for longer builds, and thus, matches that mean more and fans are invested in on PPV. There's no reason to go back to single-brand PPV's, but this will allow the matches on PPV to mean more.
2. Increase The Value of The Titles: I'm one of several people I know who have grown frustrated with the devaluation of many of the titles, especially the World Heavyweight Championship. There was a time when almost every title had a feud heading into their PPV matches, last night, only one title match in Bryan vs. Orton had a true story. Because one storyline has been essentially dominating both shows, that storyline could encompass one show, allowing separate feuds to exist for the World Title and more. I remember a time when the World Title was frequently
main eventing PPV's, including Wrestlemania 24, for example. Now, we're lucky if we get a semblance of a feud for said title, let alone one that could main event a PPV.
3. Fresh matchups, fresh ideas: Instead of feuds for two or three matches on a PPV, imagine a show that develops five to six? Because of there being no brand split, we often see the same match-ups time and time together that are thrown together. The Brand Split allows the opportunity for fresh match-ups, especially special match-ups if crossover shows are done a few times a year. Further, the yearly draft allows for the creation of balance so that there isn't that rut of seeing the same wrestlers face one another time and again. Logic dictates then that new matchups will lead to new, fresh storylines, not one that dominates both shows.
With fresh matchups, feuds and a renewed focus on the titles, there's a good bit of upside in bringing back the Brand Split. As for the negatives, you may get an adjustment period with marginalized wrestlers getting more air time, but over time, those marginalized wrestlers have a greater chance of becoming stars then they do now.
Yeah, I'm in favor of the return of the brand split.
. I await the upcoming threads on how Kane should take the mask off.