Future Endeavors : The Superstars That Are On Superstars

[CanYouDigIt98]

To Be Hosent I Really Hate Superstars Theres No Point In It In My Eyes ... But We See The Superstars Like Tyler Reks , Trent Barreta , Michael Tarver ,The Uso's And Tyson Kidd Who Hardly Have A Future In WWE . They Will Hardly Make It And In My Eyes Have The Quilatys In Them To Become Great Superstars But We Have Seen It Before With Shelton Benjiman And Shad

And I Also Think JTG And Once The Nexus Spilt There Will Be Husky , McGillycutty And Maybe Mayson Ryan And Now Skip Sheffield ...

IN MY HEAD I THINK ALL THE CREATIVE TEAM SHOULD HAVE FUTURE ENDEAVORS ... HAHA !

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking It To The Very End .... DEADMANWALKING

 

[whoopin' ass]

i believe that is part of the reason their tv contract was not renewed - no ratings because it was treated as a C-show and no major stars appeared. maybe it is me but wwe seems to have things backwards. they have these opening and mid-carders but instead of using them on raw and smackdown in that function they use the top guys in all segments, put them on superstars and it make it looks like a crap show. hell, do a big star segment at the start of the show, the middle and then the end and fill the inbetween with the opening and mid-carders. why couldn't the upcoming del rio/big show feud be a part of superstars? it is only considered a step-down to be on that show because wwe treats it that way. make your main event be a couple of your top tier guys and the rest can be opening card guys and the show will look more important right away.

 

[trashboy]

everyone says TNA has a stacked roster, but so does WWE.. they just keep hiring all these jobbers and then doing nothing with them.. they NXT and now Tough Enough, there's more guys coming in because of those shows.. and with Smackdown and Raw, alot of them don't get used.. and yes, i don't watch Superstars.. so i don't care about it.. I say, if none of these jobbers have been on Raw or Smackdown within a few months.. release them.. WWE only focuses on a select few guys anyway

 

[aussiewwefan]

when superstar first started the wwe advertist that it would be any superstar vs any superstar but wwe treated it like a show were the future endeavor list not only that nobody ever says anything about it in any programing

 

[Aotearoa (Bushwacker)]

I thought the original concept of the show was that they were just completely random wrestlers facing each other. No story lines, no feuds, just random guys. An upper carder could fight a lower carder etc. But that does not seem to be the case anymore. I loved the concept. An actual, just pure wrestling show, no storyline, with a winner and a loser decided. The storylines etc. would be kept for Smackdown and Raw and superstars would be like a night off from that where wrestlers could just wrestler anybody.

 

[DML960]

I never watched it once, never got it in Canada anyways. When it first started they had Orton, Jericho, and more good wrestlers on it.And its not like they ever mention Superstars on Raw or Smackdown to make the wrestlers look like there anything. Thats why they got dumped from there contract, and will eventually stop showing it on the web.

 

[nxtgeneration]

i love the concept of it being just matches, i am getting sick of the raw and smackdown footage. maybe have a 4th match each week. would the show work with feuds/titles etc like another smackdown but with the lower card/mid card

 

[GrandSword]

The Masters/Reks series was brilliant, I loved those matches and Masters is super over on Superstars. I wish they would push him, his certainly paid his dues and is probably one of the hardest working guys in the ring right now. I was disapointed with all the good stuff he was doing on Superstars he was jobbed out so quickly to Jack Swagger who is a bit of a jobber at the moment.

Regal/Goldust was another great set of matches. These two veterans just lit up the ring. Awesome stuff. Superstars has some gems on there from time to time. Bryan vs. Kidd, or Melina vs. Gail Kim...

 

[Ares405]

WWE is a business, they had signed these people to a contract, in hopes, that maybe they would be a good investment, until the contracts expire, WWE cant release them, so if they dont produce in ratings, then they get put on Superstars to spend the remainder of their contract. Sure WWE could release them, but would be risking lawsuits, and having to pay out the contract, so these guys will be getting paid for nothing, and WWE again wont just let them sit because they will again be paid for nothing. A lot of these guys are/were on the brink of something big, but fell short because WWE has an issue with constantly pushing the top dogs. I like what they are doing with Riley, he is going to be a big name shortly, but look at him, unlike Kidd, Reks, and the other ones, he has potential, he has, i know its been thrown around a lot but, the "IT" factor, he went from annoying heel sidekick, to a recognizable face. Benjamin had his chance, but lost everyones interest, face it, we WWE fans are a little biased, we like to see the big built "WHITE" guys, nobody cares too much of the black guys, hence the reason Truth, Henry, Jackson, Benjamin, and Kingston would/will never be pushed as WWE or World Heavyweight Champion. Point is, its a business, and like every other business, if you don't produce, you get to the end of the line and stay there until you're gone, or you make a statement.

 

[ultramattman]

People wondering why we only see jobbers on Superstars need to understand what exactly the show is. It's NOT a special third show that WWE is producing on its own. It's just a way to use the dark matches that open up RAW and Smackdown tapings. They film them (the video crews and Titantron are already there, after all) then toss them in with a couple of recaps and video packages and bam - an ultra-cheap hourlong TV show.

WWE Superstars is a way to maximize resources at TV tapings, and nothing more. Its ultra-cheapness is the entire reason it exists. Even if it never gets another tv deal, it's cheap enough to be worth making just for WWE.com. Plus there are international TV deals - I believe both Superstars and NXT still air in Canada and maybe Great Britain.

 

[Da Big Champ]

I am a fan of Superstars because it doesnt have the big names that take most of the time of Smackdown and Raw but thats just my opinion. There are some people i would keep from Superstars but its guys like Zack Ryder and Chris Masters and maybe Tyson Kidd because I could see these guys winning mid card titles. I am sad that we don't see certain people on Superstars such as the Miz who could cut a promo and make Superstars feel important even for one episode. WWE could do so much with Superstars but they dont want to. Why not have John Cena vs Drew Mcintyre? It wouldnt happen on Raw but could be an intresting match. WWE should experiment but instead they stick to the same matches which most people dont like.

 

[Daniel]

There are two very important reasons why these Superstars who appear on Superstars need to, should and will stay in WWE.

Reason number one: jobbers. Every company needs jobbers. You could say they're not doing anything. But you'd be inaccurate. WWE will always need people to lose and make the Superstars getting pushed look better. So more than just appearing on Raw once every one or two months, they need a place where they can get regular TV time and regular wins. It's on of my pet peeves when people think that wrestlers they class as "jobbers" should be released because they are "not doing anything".

Reason number two: some of them are very talented, and you don't release talented people because they "aren't doing anything". If you don't believe me, watch any Tyson Kidd/Trent Barreta match from Superstars. It'll be better than many of the matches you see on Raw or Smackdown.

 

[Yesiamaduck]

People wondering why we only see jobbers on Superstars need to understand what exactly the show is. It's NOT a special third show that WWE is producing on its own. It's just a way to use the dark matches that open up RAW and Smackdown tapings. They film them (the video crews and Titantron are already there, after all) then toss them in with a couple of recaps and video packages and bam - an ultra-cheap hourlong TV show.

WWE Superstars is a way to maximize resources at TV tapings, and nothing more. Its ultra-cheapness is the entire reason it exists. Even if it never gets another tv deal, it's cheap enough to be worth making just for WWE.com. Plus there are international TV deals - I believe both Superstars and NXT still air in Canada and maybe Great Britain.

Yeah both Superstars and NXT are aired in the UK, Superstars is shown on Sky 1 as opposed to Sky Sports which makes it the 'basic cable' sort of show here in the UK with Raw/Smackdown/NXT being the 'premium' options

 

[GI Cake]

The way I see it everyone on "Superstars" is the bench of the WWE. If someone is not able to show up to RAW or Smackdown because of travel or personal health they will send out the jobber to well...Job. "Superstars" is actually an okay program on WWE.com. I can keep up with it at anytime I like to on my laptop.

The one thing I dislike about Superstars is that the ring announcers don't really follow the matches. They sorta comment on each match for 20 seconds before talking about the upcoming or the following PPV. Which is good when it was on T.V because it was 30 minutes of advertising for the WWE. Now that it is online it doesn't feel needed to have Josh Matthews and Matt Striker talk about Cole eating BBQ sauce off of King's foot.

Well Superstars also provides the jobbers a chance to try things without really splashing up the big pools RAW and SmackDown. Tyson Kidd is a good example of the WWE trying to bring back managers to the WWE.