Im sure this thread has already been made but maybe not. I have been a long time fan of the WWE and plan to be the rest of my life, but some things have got to change! I think they should just have Monday Night Raw and thats it. Make the show about 3 hours and the ratings would be amazing. Have all the super stars on one show and it could never get boring. I know that people say you can have to many superstars on one show but not having that is whats killing wrestling. Its soooo damn boring now, with people like the spirit squad, eugene, and stuff like that. COME ON VINCE PLEASE DO SOMETHING!!!!
Bring it all together
- Thread starter derik911
- Start date
If they only had Raw and made it 3 hour's would it really be any different from a P.P.V? It's ok to occasionally have an extended edition of Raw, but it end's up getting boring. Nitro used to be 3 hour's and P.P.V.'s did'nt feel special. I also dont know why you would want to get rid of Smackdown. At the moment it is by far the superior brand. People who say Smackdown is shit obviously dont watch it. If you get past all the Boogeyman/Vito bollock's there is quality wrestling and very few lame backstage skit's.
Skullz Crack'Em
Lord of the Skulls
If RAW was the only show a lot of talented/untalented superstars will get released. I wouldn't argue against the idea of just getting rid of ECW(Or at least change its name so ECW's rep doesn't get dragged in sh*t anymore as discussed in another thread). SD is good, Batista is improving as a main eventer, B.O.D. is reunited, and the matches have more quality than RAW's. WWE has at least 50 superstars/extremists plus potential wrestlers from OVW and DSW that will also be apart of the main roster in the near future. With these many superstars only 30% or less will get to show their ability on just one show IMO.
3 hour specials is nice to watch a few times a year but every week would be exhausting for me especially b/c in my area RAW starts 11:30pm and ends1:30am(2:30am if it would be 3 hours).
3 hour specials is nice to watch a few times a year but every week would be exhausting for me especially b/c in my area RAW starts 11:30pm and ends1:30am(2:30am if it would be 3 hours).
Kasey
Connoiseur of the MILF
I'm with you on this. The three hour switch is just usually filled with more mic time and lame commercials I can't stand, anyway. Two hours is the perfect recipe. If a company can't get the job done in that time, they need to rethink the execution of the product. Extending drudgery doesn't make it any more tolerable. I understand your views on Smackdown, but it's still not running on its full capacity and potential. Neither show is. It's like comparing two turds in each of your hands. No matter which one seems to look better...they're both still $hit.
I don't think getting rid of SmackDown! is a good idea because, WWE will lose money just by getting rid of it, the only solution in my opinion, would be to get rid of the roster split, and release the "untalented" superstars, and stick to one roster, however, I don't see that happening anytime soon.
I_Heart_Princess_P
Pre-Show Stalwart
I think they should do another draft lottery and actually make the brands equal as far as talent wise, and go back to like it was back in the day, like RAW being the entertainment show and Smackdown being the "wrestling" show. GET RID OF ECW and make another show for rising talent like how Thunder used to be.
I'm with you on this. The three hour switch is just usually filled with more mic time and lame commercials I can't stand, anyway. Two hours is the perfect recipe. If a company can't get the job done in that time, they need to rethink they're execution of the product. Extending drudgery doesn't make it any more tolerable. I understand your views on Smackdown, but it's still not running on its full capacity and potential. Neither show is. It's like comparing two turds in each of your hands. No matter which one seems to look better...they're both still $hit.
yes, because making a show an extra hour gets rid of commercials...?
did I miss something? The longer the show, the more commercials, someone has to pay for it...3 hours of wrestling isn't going to make things better... it'll bring down the value of PPV's a little (although PPVs are 3 hours of no commercials) and I can only watch wrestling for so long before I get bored and have to do something else (like sleep) but it would give TNA a better run at becoming something better after having to lay off all those Smackdown and ECW wrestlers who don't make the cut... man, imagine that taping... I'd fly to Orlando to see that show... WWE stars just over running the show... that would be great...
The problem isnt the lack of TV Time, or even needing to cut it down, its simply the fact that the WWE dont use their TV time in the right way. Think about it, the WWE have five hours of TV a week to build storylines and what not, but they always seem to put together half assed Pay Per Views. This could be attributed to the sheer amount of PPV’s they actually run these days; I honestly can’t keep up with how many they do. It all boils down, in my opinion to the amount of PPV’s they have, they cant seriously expect us to buy two or three Pay Per Views a month, everyone would be damn near broke. What they need to do is either cut down the number of PPV’s they are running OR give the one’s they are running more build.
Its going to hinder their build-up to WrestleMania, in that where the WWE think the fans are too stupid to follow two or three different brands storylines at the same time, they hold off on booking for the events, so think about it, they have No Way Out a month before Mania and they are going to have to build completely different storylines going into that Event in order to not “confuse” the fans and not give away their Mania Matches a month early.
Honestly the only way I can see this sort of stuff being fixed is too ultimately end the roster split, that way they’ll make the shows they have count and they wont have to think about how “stupid” the fans are.
Its going to hinder their build-up to WrestleMania, in that where the WWE think the fans are too stupid to follow two or three different brands storylines at the same time, they hold off on booking for the events, so think about it, they have No Way Out a month before Mania and they are going to have to build completely different storylines going into that Event in order to not “confuse” the fans and not give away their Mania Matches a month early.
Honestly the only way I can see this sort of stuff being fixed is too ultimately end the roster split, that way they’ll make the shows they have count and they wont have to think about how “stupid” the fans are.
PlatynumX420
Forever Hardcore
yes thats a brilliant idea. lose the 'brands' and cut down on the overall roster. Then rename Ecw to heat or something and dedicate 5 hours of wrestling each week to better storylines and build ups for ppvs. how many ppv's does wwe have now a month? That divides up the writing staffs and if there was one writing team with the better of the 3 writing teams you wouldnt have flop ppv's like the last ecw one.Storylines would be better. Feuds that havent been done yet could be done under one roster..etc..
then let tna pickup some of the better talent wwe lets go and i think that would be all around win win situation imo.
Kasey
Connoiseur of the MILF
Just re-read my post and the one I replied to. I'm AGAINST going to three hours for a wrestling show. I think it's stupid and Monday Nitro was the bloated proof.yes, because making a show an extra hour gets rid of commercials...?
3 hours of wrestling isn't going to make things better... it'll bring down the value of PPV's a little (although PPVs are 3 hours of no commercials) and I can only watch wrestling for so long before I get bored and have to do something else (like sleep) but it would give TNA a better run at becoming something better after having to lay off all those Smackdown and ECW wrestlers who don't make the cut... man, imagine that taping... I'd fly to Orlando to see that show... WWE stars just over running the show... that would be great...
cmiller9291
Getting Noticed By Management
I'm with you on this. The three hour switch is just usually filled with more mic time and lame commercials I can't stand, anyway. Two hours is the perfect recipe. If a company can't get the job done in that time, they need to rethink the execution of the product. Extending drudgery doesn't make it any more tolerable. I understand your views on Smackdown, but it's still not running on its full capacity and potential. Neither show is. It's like comparing two turds in each of your hands. No matter which one seems to look better...they're both still $hit.
wwe didnt want to make it 3 hours USA just wanted them to. now about. both shows being shit is dead wrong. i'd understand about ecw, but smackdown has been great latley. theres barley anything wrong with it. all the fueds have good wrestling with the exception of miz/boogeyman which is strictly a filler. maybe batista being champ is bad, but his when he fueds with good wrestlers, he can still put on a quality match and if u pay attention he is improving. i think raw having more skits and promos is good because it makes it different from smackdown instead of them being exaclty the same. if cryme time making me laugh is sometimes refreshing then just watching another wrestling match(same goes for dx skits). but either show is not shit. smackdown is supported by an extremely good mid and lower card. raw on the other hand provides great main events from cena, edge, trips, orton and hbk and good ic title feuds.
Kasey
Connoiseur of the MILF
I know. We were talking about another guy's suggestion to move it to 3 hours. Read more next time. Opinion is never "wrong" when you have the smarts to back it up. This weeks Raw wasn't that bad...aside from recycling talent over and over again within one show, and having to watch the misused talent of Umaga being portrayed as a cro-magnon ****** who doesn't even understand how to tag into a match. Cena didn't completely stink up the place, but then again, Edge could make the offense of a broom handle look convincing...so go figure. The order of the booking was dumb. The WWE Title should always be the main event. If the guy wearing can't outperform or at least equal the other performers in the show...then he has no business wearing the goddamn thing in the first place. Ever since Vince started having them book for better quarter-hour ratings instead of in a crescendo fashion, the shows have been disjointed and the pops uneven.
Smackdown is still running under the 1995 style of corny-ass storylines allowing slow wonders like Kane to stink up the airwaves in matches with greenhorns like MVP that are complete snoozers, while talented guys like Benoit languish in the midcard. Undertaker is still doing his lameass cartoony gimmick that hasn't impressed me since before my balls dropped in the mid-90's, so forgive me if I'm not chomping at the bit to support a pair of horrendously booked shows. One level up from the gutter still isn't very high...and they've got a long way to go before they get my vote. Maybe Batista being champ is bad? Who are you kidding? Adding a couple more moves to your arsenal doesn't fix bad timing and immobility in the ring as well as an overall lack of creativity. It just shows that someone in the WWE is frequenting message boards and listening to some of us smarks tear him a new one on a daily basis with regards to his limitations.
Great. Enjoy the extra and mostly useless skits all you like. The ending segment of this weeks Raw was the first one in a hell of a long time I didn't have to fast-forward through due to gagging. One man's trash is another's treasure. You keep liking it for the most part, and I'll keep loathing it for the most part. Fair enough?
cmiller9291
Getting Noticed By Management
^ i'm not saying u have to like kennedy or undertaker, but just because takers character is stale to u doesnt mean his wrestling ability cant be cheered for. i think angle acting so crazy is old too, but i'm still behind him in his matches becasue of his ability. and i stick to batista being champ not definatley being bad. he draws a lot and is about the most over guy on smackdown. hulk hogan wasnt a good wrestler and wasnt mobile in the ring but i'd say he worked out pretty well for wwe. i think cena deserves more credit than saying it was edges doing that made cena not bad. cena does very good selling as well. i'm not saying he is as good as edge, but he definatley helped make the match good.
Kasey
Connoiseur of the MILF
Actually, I think Kennedy is the future of the WWE. He's a little short on the creativity end of a match at times and I think he needs more work on his pacing, but he's got the tools to go nowhere but up if he wants. Taker still has some ability, but the bad booking hasn't allowed him to showcase the majority of his talent, and I honestly don't think he's been in the ring with a worker that could push him right since Orton at WM21. Most of the time, though Taker's ability is always given second-fiddle to the gimmickry, when it should be the other way around. It just gives me a pain in the ass everytime he shoots another guy with a lightning bolt or when Kennedy's microphone exploded on him. I'd much rather see the Undertaker with all of the physical shackles removed and placed in feuds with guys that can really work. The potential for Batista is limited and he doesn't draw that well as Smackdown isn't generating numbers like it used to, and definitely not like I think it's still capable of doing. Hulk Hogan was mobile and functional in a ring until after 1990, and could move pretty damn good for a big guy in his prime. To each his own with regards to Cena. I can't stand Cena's offense and I find him slow, and klutzy with overly telegraphed moves and the worst flying shoulder block in history. Him having one good match out of a $hitload of stinkers isn't enough to sway my opinion in his favor.
cmiller9291
Getting Noticed By Management
^to be honest for a very long time cena hasnt had many bad matches. the ratio of good matches to bad is definatley in favor of good and at ppv's hes performed very well. i'm not saying cena is very good, but he isnt bad. the reason we dont see his whole move set is because is most of his matches he gets beat up most of the time then comes back and wins. the comeback isnt given that much time and ofcourse hes gonna chain those moves together for the crowd to buy into it. and about undertaker, his gimmick although i also think is stale, is way over with the crowd. cena and batista may not be as smooth as hogan was, but they are easily much faster.
Kasey
Connoiseur of the MILF
^Depends on what you expect out of wrestlers and their matches in terms of how good Cena does. That kind of predictability is fairly irritating to me, but I do know that it's also who is calling the shots backstage that I have to blame, but go figure. I enjoy watching a match that I can't easily find the ending of or being able to call a four or five spot sequence in advance. That's the problem I have with him chaining those moves together. It's an example of most WWE product in that nearly everything in almost every match is easily callable in advance. This mentality has turned a once semi-intelligent crowd base into clueless lapdogs that only look for a signature spot or gimmickry maneuver and rarely have the attention span to get past ten minutes in a match. I can almost smell the cheating roll-up pin, schmoz, or blatant DQ because there is almost never a clear winner unless you're watching Summerslam or Wrestlemania, and that's not that great, either because it's usually predictable when the win is clean.
The Undertaker's gimmick may be way over, but it's still dumb as all hell and doesn't do anything more than insult my intelligence. I know Callaway is a bad ass, but they need something better than him rolling his eyes back in his head and controlling the light fixtures of an arena. It's not 1990 anymore.
Cena and Batista are not half as explosive as they could be and their ring psychology isn't even in the same league as a number of their contemporaries. For proof, watch WM21. They both wrestled in amazing duds that should've been excised from the entire card. They're over because they've been rammed down the throat of the WWE fanbase for a couple of years now. They did their best at hiding the inadequacies of both, but even that didn't hold out, because sooner or later they actually had to wrestle. They're two guys that should be kept in the tag team scene because they only function well in small bursts, but can't carry a thirty minute showcase if you held them at gunpoint. I mean, looking at the entire WWE roster, do you think they should be the two guys to carry the company? I definitely don't see them in your sig or avatar, so I'd guess no. I think the WWE roster is loaded with AMAZING talent that could push the boundaries of quality American wrestling, but the WWE creative staff is worried about pushing pretty faces with minimal ability and "superstars" they can shoehorn into horrible B-movies that no one with any taste gives a $hit about and dumbing down the product when they should be doing the polar opposite and making you guess what's next.
The Undertaker's gimmick may be way over, but it's still dumb as all hell and doesn't do anything more than insult my intelligence. I know Callaway is a bad ass, but they need something better than him rolling his eyes back in his head and controlling the light fixtures of an arena. It's not 1990 anymore.
Cena and Batista are not half as explosive as they could be and their ring psychology isn't even in the same league as a number of their contemporaries. For proof, watch WM21. They both wrestled in amazing duds that should've been excised from the entire card. They're over because they've been rammed down the throat of the WWE fanbase for a couple of years now. They did their best at hiding the inadequacies of both, but even that didn't hold out, because sooner or later they actually had to wrestle. They're two guys that should be kept in the tag team scene because they only function well in small bursts, but can't carry a thirty minute showcase if you held them at gunpoint. I mean, looking at the entire WWE roster, do you think they should be the two guys to carry the company? I definitely don't see them in your sig or avatar, so I'd guess no. I think the WWE roster is loaded with AMAZING talent that could push the boundaries of quality American wrestling, but the WWE creative staff is worried about pushing pretty faces with minimal ability and "superstars" they can shoehorn into horrible B-movies that no one with any taste gives a $hit about and dumbing down the product when they should be doing the polar opposite and making you guess what's next.
cmiller9291
Getting Noticed By Management
^personally i dont like batista either, i just understand why they'd put the belt on him. smackdown is directed to kids which is why guys like batista and taker stay over. i see cena and orton to be the ones to lead the wwe for years to come on the raw side of things. on smackdown i see guys like kennedy leading that show. i understand what you mean about wrestlemania 21. while triple h vs batista wasnt bad(not up to my standards either), i agree that cena vs jbl was sad. i think its ok for wwe to have a champ that can have a quality match as long as they are facing quality wrestlers. cena does that and he has very good mic skills to go with it. sure as shown in my sig i would rather have triple h as the champ, but i still think cena is a good champ. i understand his performances on raw being annoying, but on ppv i really think he gets the job done.
Kasey
Connoiseur of the MILF
^That's cool, I guess. I'd rather they put the belt on Taker as he's way more qualified a worker than Dianabol Dave is. You're probably right about Cena leading things. I think Randy has a good shot, if he doesn't f**k it up. I think the Triple H/Batista match was awful...and not because of Levesque's work. I think HHH is pretty solid at making a lot of guys look credible, but compare the match at WM21 to his match at WMXX and you see that the booking staff went in a completely retarted direction, if you ask me. HHH's defense at WMXX was a freaking clinic that went forty minutes and was definitely what made that PPV worth purchasing (even if the rest of it was so-so). That match was a definite example of the direction I'd like to see the WWE go. I just think that if they used the proper booking and allowed the quality in the performing to come back to the forefront, then the WWE can go to new heights that are even higher than the Rock 'n' Wrestling era or the Attitude reign. Just think about it. Great marketing and production coupled with better storylines and top-shelf wrestling that even pleases the smarks like me. It'd be bigger than anything we've ever seen. I'll have to disagree to disagree with you on Cena's performances, but it's all in what you fancy, man.
cmiller9291
Getting Noticed By Management
^ya i see what you mean about batista/hhh, but i think wwe took a step forward from that this year at wm 22 with cena/hhh and angle/orton/rey. those two matches were both really good. hhh didnt carry cena through the match and cena did some very good selling. he had some more holds and extended his move set a bit. i think cena's performances can be inconsistent but in the past(03-04) he has shown us that he is capible of putting on quality performances. with batista i think they made a good move by putting him on smackdown and now surrounding him with good workers to make him look better. i agree with you that wm xx world title match was absolutley amazing and i think guys like triple h and edge have pushed cena somewhat in that direction. with orton becoming more in the mix as years will go on i think they will have some very good wrestling with the likes of carlito, kennedy, the hardys, cm punk and so on.
justinsayne
Cody Rhodes is an excellant
I think that they should keep both Raw and SD!, what they should change is get rid of ECW and split up the talent among the two remaing shows, then every year the week after WM they shoud have a Draft Lottery, Raw would draw five names off the SD! roster and SD! would draw five names of the Raw roster, they should also put all the women that can wrestle on Raw and all the CWs on SD! to rebuild both those divisions, they should also have the fans vote on a new GM for each show every other year to add just alittle more varity, I also think that they should have both shows be live, that would mean that SD! would probably have to move to Teusday nights, I think that these changes could really improve the product, and make both shows mutch more fun and a little less predictable, they could change ECW to a interpromotional show which would show matches that were filmed at Raw and SD! but didn't make it to air cause of time constriants similiar to Velocity and Heat
eric d duszynski
Dark Match Winner
wwe is so stale! im not one bit interested in any feud going on in any of the 3 brands. there are no shocks, surprises etc. tna is a much better product at this time. wwe needs to eliminate the brands because they really dont mean squat come wrestlemania time cuz theres always at minimum of 1 raw vs sd match. they have to make it 1 brand and make the best and most interesting matches. for example- correct me if im wrong but have rvd and hbk ever fueded? dont think so. 2 of wwes best superstars since mcmahon conquered the wrestling world. what the hell r they thinking???
justinsayne
Cody Rhodes is an excellant
Rvd and HBK have never had a good feud, probably because since both have been faces since they've been in the company together, they've had matches together but nothing major, the Elimination Chamber, and the night after Survivor series when HBK won the World Heavyweight Title in the Elimination Chamber, unfortuntly Triple H interfered and fucked it up, I would love to see a one-on-one match between RVD and HBK at WM23, also RVD once said in an interveiw that he never really had any desire to wrestle HBK until he watch HBKs match with Hogan a few years back at Summerslam and seen how well HBK played off Hogans srenghts(wich there arn't many of)
Kasey
Connoiseur of the MILF
^If this match were to go down at Wrestlemania, I'd definitely book it as a ladder contest. I'd love to see a match between the two when they work their hardest. The match they had on Raw a while back was a joke and it looked like they were both yawning their way through it...I know I was. For these two to do something special in the ring wouldn't be very hard. They'd just have to show up and NOT wrestle like they have been in the last three years, but rather how they both did around 1997. Then we'd be in for one hell of a match.