Creative Changes Coming to Raw?

[Big Nick Dudley]

The USA Network is the only thing that could ever make WWE change its course. I think WWE understands they have a pretty good thing there, especially with NBC's involvement. If USA tells WWE to freshen things up, they will react. I don't know how far they will go, but I'm guessing they'll do just about whatever the network wants. I don't think Vince will take specific creative direction from them, but I guarantee he takes the input seriously.

 

[Navi]

Show me where it says that RAW ratings are bad. Everyone says it, but I want to see a ratings sheet that actually says it.

Or is this just another fib from the catalogue of lies from Dave Meltzer, whose credibility should be questioned many times over, considering how much he has got wrong over the years. Meltzer is a known hater of WWE, so he will say anything that makes them look bad.

I am pretty confident that the "show that just won't die" and has been horrible for years, the Simpsons, will end before "Raw" does, which is sure to disappoint a lot of you.

It's been all over the internet the last few weeks, and a Google search would have showed you that. It's not hater's that are saying this it's everyone. Go and look for yourself.

The WWE themselves sent out a survey to their Fan Council asking them to rate RAW and what they like and don't like. The USA network isn't happy either. RAW has lost 25% of their viewers this year. No one is making this up, it's a fact.

Why does the buck stop at the top only when it comes to what goes wrong?

If Vince McMahon is 100% responsible for all that is wrong in WWE, then is he not also 100% the reason that the Attitude Era succeeded. You can't have it both ways.

So either you apportion success or blame, or put it on one person, but if one person is totally at fault, does that mean that they get ALL the credit if it works?

Wasn't Vince also over the creative team who wrote the Attitude Era? So, does he get the praise for that then?

It stops at the top because Vince McMahon has the final say. Who else is going to shoulder the blame for issues within their flagship show? If he can accept the praise when it comes his way, then he should be more than able to take the shit as well.

I have no idea why you defend him to your last breath, is it really worth it? Yes he succeeded with the AE, and he is failing now. You also have to take into account that times have changed, he has changed and fans have changed.

I do find it interesting that you praise him for the AE and then respond to another poster with the following comments regarding it. You seem to be the one who wants it both ways.

So you can only enjoy a show that is full of smut, then.

I hope that you don't watch TV with your children, then. The things that you would deem "appropriate viewing" for them scares me, if you are unable to enjoy a show without swearing, excessive violence and sex.

You're probably the type who refuses to put the parental lock on WWE Network.

Someone like "Stone Cold" Steve Austin is the last person I would ever want as my kids' role model. His onscreen behaviour was appalling, and his actions (especially towards women) off-screen are even worse. If my child ever ended like SCSA, I would be very disappointed. And if you as a parent have such poor values that you think it is normal to act that way, then you're not far behind in the "poor parenting" stakes.

Maybe it says more about you than the wrestling industry.

 

[noTORRIEus]

I for one really hope they change things up and first order of business would be to stop listening to Kevin Dunn. That guys seems out of touch, more so than Vince.

Secondly, can we make up our mind if they are going to be PG or not. Last night ending segment was already painful to watch when you knew watch each were going to say next and what they were setting up for but then you add in the fact that your chosen superstar, Reigns, is desperately trying to be like his "cousin" using non funny catchphrases and cursing left and right.

Lastly, I know it's a different product but I think that what Raw and Smackdown should be is a larger scale version of NXT. I mean, isn't that what they were telling us NXT was suppose to be, Raw but on a smaller scale? NXT is family friendly aka PG and yet it feels way more entertaining than Raw. So just use the same formula, break down each hour of Raw as almost a different show. Have 3 or 4 matches each hour, highlighting different superstars, while having most of them building towards feuds for the PPV and others showing what they can do that way nobody is tolling around doing nothing. The one's that don't have feuds for the PPV are at least starting to gain a following and become an eventual upper mid carder or main eventer in a few years.

Just my 0.02

 

[OYDK]

Well, whatever 'it' was, it didn't happen last night.

Fair enough. If we're talking about changing the direction of the entire company, it's something that probably couldn't be implemented in one ordinary Raw.....more likely, we'd see it at the next PPV.....or maybe even the Royal Rumble. That is, if there's anything at all to what was being reported on the main site.

To be fair, I will say I thought they tried something different with the first hour. Was it a perfect segment? No, but I found it reminiscent of earlier times. Much more chaotic than first hours usually go, and though the 16 man was overbooked to the ninth, it was an entertaining match (questionable booking decisions aside). They also dedicated the entire first hour to one segment which I actually didn't mind. You had the 20 minute opening promo segment between the 4 teams which led to a 25 minute match between said 4 teams. Probably would have worked better had they just stuck to a Reigns' team vs LON program though because the last 2 hours were totally lacking star power.

Consistency was the problem. The first hour was great in my opinion. The last 2 were God awful.

 

[d_henderson1810]

That is not at all what I'm saying. Its called raising your kids right. And I'm not some sick porn watching pervert. I never said i wanted sex on tv, i said i want entertainment and beatdowns. What I'm saying is let your kids watch the show. But if they don't have the maturity to handle the content then they shouldn't be watching. For Christ sakes how can anyone who beats people up for a living be considered a role modek, by your logic.

Majority of this site including myself grew up in the Attitude/Ruthless Aggression Era and turned out just fine.

So you think that watching a show where Sable parades around with hands painted onto her breasts, a guy committing necrophilia, a beer-drinking, swearing, bird-flipping disrespecter of authority etc, is okay for children?

So why not offer your kids drugs while you are at it. If you raised them right, then they will say no? Yeah, because children aren't influenced by what they see or hear?

John Cena beats people up and is a great role model, because he caters to children, so parents and sponsors don't mind children being influenced by him. It can be done.

I would question that most of you who grew up in the Attitude Era grew up fine. If you were older, you would know that one of the WWE's most prosperous eras (where ratings counted) was during the Hulkamania Era, which, by the way was MORE PG than today's WWE. Hulk Hogan told children to say their prayers and eat their vitamins, and there wasn't blood or anything "hardcore" or non-PG, yet it made WWE huge and set them up for years. If you were older and cared about wrestling history, instead of just what wrestlezone tells you, you would know that.

 

[whoopin' ass]

If Meltzer is saying it, i would take it with a grain of salt as he frequently tells things are going to happen and they don't -report a possibility as truth. But I wouldn't be surprised if they did make some changes but unfortunately they are not going to work. The problem isn't something that can be easily fixed - wwe tried that by bring Taker back early, bringing in Flair, Austin, etc - the ratings still dropped. Why? Because the product has no real direction. Vince may think he is just another scripted tv show but wrestling has never fallen into that category - it isn't a soap opera with action. They key to wrestling has always been treat it as if it were real. We all know it is"fake", we all know Cena really doesn't hate Owens and vice versa but it has to be treated as if it were a real competition, as if everyone is fighting to be the top guy and then you add to that angles based off of pride, jealousy, etc. wwe abandoned that years ago for dumb soap opera storylines like the Ziggler/Rusev angle. Any wonder why it is failing? If people want to see that, there are other shows that do it much better. But there is the problem - that is what Vince wants to do and therefore you need to totally change the mindset of him and everyone involved in the creative side and it won't happen easily.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

Show me where it says that RAW ratings are bad. Everyone says it, but I want to see a ratings sheet that actually says it.

The last RAW rating was 2.15
The last three months of WCW Nitro was raging from 2.0 to 2.6

I say ratings for RAW are bad

Unfortunately I think WWE is contented with keeping the Wrestling product as lifeless as it is.

Dave Metlzer said it best, WWE is at a position to do a lot of "stupid" things in their creative direction because USA/WWE has a long term guaranteed deal for RAW (with USA keeping the AD revenues), no one's really going unsubscribe the Network, and while RAW ratings are are low and while it might upset McMahon there really isn't a lot of urgency to fix the situation since the WWE has established other revenue streams beyond RAW and the actual Wrestling shows.

Note: I know Metlzer predictions aren't always right. But I still see him as a guy that understands Wrestling as an Industry and Business, so on that level his views has some validity.

 

[MERPER]

The last RAW rating was 2.15
The last three months of WCW Nitro was raging from 2.0 to 2.6

I say ratings for RAW are bad

Unfortunately I think WWE is contented with keeping the Wrestling product as lifeless as it is.

Dave Metlzer said it best, WWE is at a position to do a lot of "stupid" things in their creative direction because USA/WWE has a long term guaranteed deal for RAW (with USA keeping the AD revenues), no one's really going unsubscribe the Network, and while RAW ratings are are low and while it might upset McMahon there really isn't a lot of urgency to fix the situation since the WWE has established other revenue streams beyond RAW and the actual Wrestling shows.

Note: I know Metlzer predictions aren't always right. But I still see him as a guy that understands Wrestling as an Industry and Business, so on that level his views has some validity.

This goes back to my main concern with why we may never truly see the product improve... what is the incentive to make it better? What is the incentive to either pay better writers or spend more time developing storylines and characters?

They have no true competition in the mainstream industry, especially not one competing against them for a TV audience.

Regardless of how bad the product, they sell out every televised show and do quite well for house shows because people want to see the stars live and only have, what, 1-4 chances per year to do this.

The merchandise makes a ton and that isn't going away when they market to kids. Kids want the T-shirt, action figure, DVD and their parents will buy it.

And, at $9.99 a month for the Network, not many will get so angry with the product enough to cancel. (I admit, I did and don't regret it yet, but I'll probably buy it again for Royal Rumble and WrestleMania).

So, where is the drive and the force that will make anyone say: "Wow, this is a sinking ship and if we don't do something quick, we could be in trouble?" It isn't there because barring an unbelievable situation occurring, there's no fear of the company folding or the money stopping.

 

[Navi]

The main problem with RAW is that there is not interesting story lines to get behind. Everything feels forced and quite frankly unattractive, it's not drawing in the viewers. They might sell out the arena, but the main page has a story showing all the empty seats at the arena this Monday. Someone who was there posted it and said that people began filing out before the main event between Reigns and Sheamus.

That should tell the WWE that Reigns isn't holding the crowd as the top babyface, and Sheamus isn't working as the top heel. Also they are so focused on pushing their top guys, that they have almost completely forgot about the midcard. This week we got a good first match, and then the rest of sort of been there done that.

When RAW can't beat the Bill O'Reilly factor they have a huge problem. According to the ratings, Bill O'Reilly's show beat them, RAW came in fourth for the night.

I've read a lot of people say that ratings don't matter, they do to an extent, for advertisers who pay millions of dollars to advertise their product on RAW. It doesn't matter if people DVR the show and watch it later, they are fast forwarding through the ads, and that's not what advertisers want. They want eyes on the product and their ads.

This is not something that you can put a band aid on or a come up with a quick fix for. This is a problem that has been over a year in the making. When Vince and Co. are only focused on pushing a certain group of people and forgetting others, this is what you end up with. Yes injuries have hurt, but with the depth of the roster they should be able to make up for it. They can't because none of them are involved in anything viewers want to see.