Is Monday Night Raw killing SmackDown?

[Hard Hit Prince]

This is not about merging brands or do some shitty idea with one single title or whatever. It's a legit question since Raw moved up to three hours, and maybe even before that when HHH declared that Raw would be from now forward a "Supershow" with the brands being mixed up in the Monday Night Shows. Some loved the idea, others hated it but the fact of the matter is that the idea is still being used, and now even more with the third hour added to Raw.

As many of you may have seen SmackDown scored last Tuesday a 1.54 television rating, and that is one of their lowest in a long time. I know that Tuesday was election day and everybody was paying attention to Obama and Romney but we can't just forget that SmackDown is losing a lot of viewers per week, it has been a downhill spiral since Raw moved up to three hours and the SmackDown quality as really reached to the bottom of the pit, I mean they give us good pro-wrestling shows but the storylines are very very weak, with them being more built at Raw than on SmackDown.

So is the B-Show dying? I still watch it, but a lot of people just stopped to watch it because they can see what is really going on by watching only Raw and I kinda start to agree with them. SmackDown has four matches, maybe five if you put a squash in the middle, and two/three backstage segments and that's it, the same formula over and over again. The title isn't even defended in their show, Raw does not even hypes it anymore so, once again is SmackDown dying?

Please feel free to give your opinion and answer to the poll. If you don't watch SmackDown say the reasons and if you do, say what moves you to watch it.

 

[XXJJ]

The 1.54 rating is a little better than their last Live Smackdown. I thought it would of been a lot worse considering it was election night. The Orton/Christian cage match and the Henry/Bryan title match were the two times where live smackdown drew better ratings. The rest of the Live Smackdown shows drew lower ratings than what they usually do on Friday nights. They seemed to have built an audience that is used to watching Smackdown on Friday.

I still watch both, but yes the 3 hour Raw's are killing Smackdown. They are not doing much from a storyline standpoint on SD lately. They keep repeating matches and ideas too. Depite being good matches, I have no interest in seeing Barrett vs Orton or Sheamus at a PPV. I have seen it plenty of times on tv lately. They just repeated the same thing that PTP/Sin Cara & Mysterio did on SD with The Rhodes Scholars and Team Hell No on Raw. It does make it tough to watch if you watch both shows.

It will make both shows better if Raw goes back to 2 hours. Hopefully, they will give Smackdown some fresh new angles.

 

[RD_21]

I don't watch Smackdown most of the time. In fact I can barely watch Raw and Impact as it is because there's just too much (dull) wrestling on TV and so little time.

They need to become interesting again and they need to drop the number of shows they have per week and I'm not even talking about dropping Raw back to 2 hours.

Even if the wrestling is good on Smackdown (don't know if it is) I can't get myself to watch it most of the time because it's either a reharsh or Raw or it will be reharsh on the next Raw.

If they want people to watch Smackdown they need to enforce the split and make it so that you see certain wrestler ONLY if you watch the show they are on. They should also think about switching Cena to Smackdown so I will not have to see him and the people who really want to see him will switch to Smackdown! and it would increase the rating of Smackdown.

 

[Pink Hole Slam]

The problem with SmackDown! is that the focal point of the show is the World Heavyweight Title. There is dwindling interest in Randy Orton's shtick, seeing Alberto Del Rio come up short, and seeing Big Show act as a monster heel for the millionth time. What else is there to be interested in on SmackDown? A RAW recap?

Shrinking SD! ratings also give you a glimpse into where the WWE would be without CM Punk or John Cena at this point.

 

[AttitudeChild]

Monday Night Raw is basically just SmackDown right now. Besides the CM Punk, John Cena and Brad Maddox stuff everything else is a SmackDown storyline. Team Rhodes Scholars, PTP, Rey & Cara, Team Hell, 3MB and all the other tag teams are made up of SmackDown Superstars. The Intercontinental title is a SmackDown championship and the US title is held by a SmackDown Superstar. The Divas title storyline belongs to SmackDown(As well do most of the Divas). Orton, Berrate, Sheamus, Show and Del Rio? I mean come on. If anything, Raw isn't killing SmackDown, SmackDown is saving Raw.

 

[Redemption-2012]

Firstly, yes I watch both weekly. Secondly, I like to watch smackdown because it can actually be entertaining and it kills a good 2 hours, which you have nothing else to do with. The problem for smackdown is that it's the B show nowadays. It's been that way since 2006 to now and it isnt good for smackdown. If they continue to bury smackdown and its title, then smackdown is going to die a slow death.

They treat the world title as it were the b title, which isn't good because it makes stars like Sheamus, big show and orton look weak. They need to keep pushing the Sheamus/big show storyline. The world title picture should be going strong in early 2013, with Dolph Ziggler cashing In the mitb briefcase soon enough. Also orton and Sheamus, wade Barrett winning the world title.

The smackdown picture should be heating up soon enough.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

It sounds as though you don't really follow the ratings SD! usually does and just happened to really pay attention this one particular time because of a bad rating.

On Friday nights, SmackDown! always averages in the high 1s and low 2s for ratings. the SD! for this past Friday drew a 1.94 Nielsen Rating with 2,878,000 viewers according to tvbythenumbers.com. The previous SD! drew a 1.96 Nielsen Rating with 2,820,000 viewers. The one before that drew a 2.04 and over 2,900,000 viewers.

SmackDown! is doing just fine. Even on what could be considered "slow night" in terms of ratings for the show, it draws around 2.7 million viewers.

I very much expected SD! this Tuesday to draw a poor rating. Election Night is the reason why. According to the same site, the broadcast networks of NBC, ABC, CBS & Fox drew a combined total of roughly 34,260,000 viewers. When you factor in all the numbers the various cable news channels did on the same night, you come up with about the same number, maybe a bit more and maybe a bit less. So, all in all, that's somewhere around 70,000,000 people watching election coverage. Even Tuesday night powerhouse shows like Sons of Anarchy took a pretty solid hit in the ratings department.

With the exception of the first Super SmackDown! specials on Tuesday, the showings on Friday have always equaled or exceeded the other specials of the show. That's why SD! hasn't gone live on Tuesdays. About this time a year ago, there was major talk of taking the blue brand live every Tuesday, those live SD! specials were a test to see how the show did on Friday. Since the show has better results being shown on Fridays, and taped for that matter, the WWE has kept it on Fridays and kept it taped. It's cheaper than running a live show.

Why Vince wanted to have a SD! this past Tuesday, I'll never know. He had to know the show would get creamed in the ratings. On top of it all, this Super SmackDown! wasn't even live as it'd been taped in Birmingham, England.

These numbers aren't anything to worry about. If the show had been pulling this numbers for a while on Friday while taped, then it'd be something for WWE to worry about.

I watch both shows each week. The fact that not as many people don't watch SD! of Friday as Raw on Monday doesn't surprise me. Friday is the end of the work week for tons of people and Friday is statistically the night when more people go out than any other night of the week. On cable televsion, SD! is pretty frequently the #1 show on cable television on Friday nights. Even on the nights it isn't, it's almost always at least in the top 3 or 4.

 

[Slash-LN]

I don't think it's killing Smackdown. Smackdown has always been the b show and will be treated as such. Smackdown being more wrestling based isn't really anything new. Over the history of Smackdown it has seemingly had better wrestling than Raw tends to have. Raw tends to be the more storyline driven show.

I wouldn't look too much into the Tuesday rating. People were likely watching the election coverage, didn't remember that there was a live special or will watch tonight.

I will say though I get annoyed that they have so many Raw recaps. There are times where I think about skipping Raw for the week because I know they'll show the recap on Smackdown anyway.

 

[Sexcellence of Sexecution]

One of the big problems with SmackDown is that its not positioned as an equal to RAW in any way. RAW is called the "SuperShow", its 3 hours, and its the place where all the major angles go down. In the earlier days of the brand split (2002-2004 approximately), SmackDown was pushed as more of an equal to RAW, with its own distinct feel. The brands were perceived as being on the same level. Now, SmackDown is clearly perceived as the B-Show while RAW is the "flagship" and ultimately this hurts SmackDown and further cheapens the already highly cheapened brand split concept. Basically, there's no point to watching SmackDown other than seeing some wrestling matches with lesser stars, because nothing of major importance to a main storyline is likely to occur there...and as I've said before, the angles are what draw, not the matches. If the brand split were to be ended completely, and you had stars like Cena and Punk appearing on both RAW and SmackDown, you used RAW to promote SmackDown more, and there was more of a fluent storyline connection between RAW and SmackDown overall, you would likely see a SmackDown ratings increase. Yes, the 1.5 rating from Tuesday was because of the election coverage no doubt, but the current average SmackDown ratings around 1.9 are still not that great and could realistically be increased to the lower-mid 2s on a regular basis. SmackDown will never do RAW numbers, but it can definitely do better than what it's doing currently.

 

[HBKistheHOF]

Well not to sound like some "smart-mark" jerk but the very title is ironic & completely impossible since Smackdown wouldn't exist without RAW but I see your point. RAW was already the "flagship" program for WWE then they change it to RAW Supershow & eventually the 3-hour RAW Supershow!!

So yeah it has became a little overwhelmingly obvious that Smackdown is the ugly step-child now since ECW on SciFi is no more. But overall Smackdown could realisitcally be on par with RAW. They are known for usually having better & longer matches & I think their overall roster especially in the main event picture is much better.

I watch both RAW & Smackdown online & only watch the parts I want to, sometimes watching just as much Smackdown as RAW. I think the problem stems from 1 main reason & that is the lack of care & passion put into the Smackdown product from the likes of VKM that translates to the writers & producers of Smackdown. Because the things that they drop the ball on the most on Smackdown IMO is repeating something too much or dropping something they were running with. WWE acts like Smackdwon is just the RAW post-show & it usally features the same stories from RAW rehashed or some pointless macth or segment that has nothing to do with anything. And the only story that is almost fully Smackdowns like Show/Sheamus or Sheamus/DelRio the SD creative team either shows a huge lack of creativity & interest or RAW capitalizes on the feud.

They are heading in the right direction with the Orton/DelRIo Last Man Standing Match that was only on SD & taping it Live. Those are the things that make SD important. They need to keep up making the audience believe what happens on Smackdown matters & will impact RAW, PPV's, & the rest of the WWE product.

 

[Diet Soda]

It's threads like these that make me want the brand extension back.

Smackdown can be hit or miss, but one constant is the fact that it is diluted with recaps and replays from Raw; surely that's what Bottom Line is for? The creation of Main Event baffles me because if WWE trimmed the fat from Smackdown, the wrestling that's on Main Event would fit comfortably within the 2 hour broadcast.

 

[silrock316]

I'm sorry but this question has a fairly obvious answer.

Firstly,

- Its the secondary show: It doesn't have guys like Cena and Punk consistantly on the show building storylines.

- It is NOT live: When you can read spoilers you already know what is going to happen so you aren't going to go out of your way to watch something you already know is going to happen. Maybe if its live and you don't know, you will have a tendency to stay in and watch the show opposed to reading results and bypassing it. If you read the results of a movie are you going to sit in and watch it from start to finish? Probably not because you know the end game.

-Its day and time slot: Its on Friday nights during the 8-10 time slot. Meaning lots of people are either going out or having friends over.

To me it simply boils down to those 3 things.

 

[3drinks]

I watch all three shows, RAW, Smackdown!, iMPACT! though I feel this is mostly out of "routine". I am so used to it that I always make sure I can make time to watch my shows. While it's obvious that World Wrestling Entertainment needs to do something more to spice things up (and yes, I do believe TNA is better at the moment) nevertheless I still find myself waiting to tune in and watch.

This is probably from my watching religiously since 2000 and the "Who ran down Stone Cold" angle.

 

[TempestH]

Monday Night Raw is basically just SmackDown right now. Besides the CM Punk, John Cena and Brad Maddox stuff everything else is a SmackDown storyline. Team Rhodes Scholars, PTP, Rey & Cara, Team Hell, 3MB and all the other tag teams are made up of SmackDown Superstars. The Intercontinental title is a SmackDown championship and the US title is held by a SmackDown Superstar. The Divas title storyline belongs to SmackDown(As well do most of the Divas). Orton, Berrate, Sheamus, Show and Del Rio? I mean come on. If anything, Raw isn't killing SmackDown, SmackDown is saving Raw.

Actuually, the two midcard belts "switched" shows. The Intercontinental Title is the RAW midcard title now, and the U.S. Title was given to SmackDown's Cesaro to make up for giving the IC Title to Miz. But other than that, you're right. Most of the roster is technically on SmackDown.

Honestly I think that at this point they should just restructure the brands, and give up on the idea that they are any bit equal. I think that all of the high tier guys like Orton, Sheamus, etc. SHOULD be officially drafted to RAW, and all of the midcarders like Ryder, Santino, etc. should be officially drafted to SmackDown.

Let RAW be the flag ship show with all the high tier guys. And instead of pretending that SmackDown is RAW's "sister show" let SmackDown be the show where the midcarders are allowed to shine and get over with the fans, with 1 or 2 big names randomly showing up for a marquee match for the sake of ratings/ticket sales. Basically make it a combination of Superstars' and Main Event's concepts.

 

[Azane]

In the ratings game, Smackdown is doing well, and for being on the channel and timing, it's doing extremely well.

But as to personal feelings, It has killed Smackdown for me. I haven't watched a single Smackdown since they made Raw a supershow, I've just really lost interest as Smackdown feels like Sunday Night Heat now. Nothing important to the story happens there, and I'm not missing anything major by ignoring Smackdown. It feels like it's a waste of 2 hours with the current way the product has gone.

As much as I hated the brand split, it was much more necessary and I can see it clearly, now that the split has been blurred. Without major championship decisions and overall storyline progression being a main selling point of Smackdown, it's felt much less interesting. It's similar to why I stopped watching it a few years ago, when they showed the RAW Rewind 8 times a night, and I got more Smackdown on my Raw.

3 Hour Raws have been hit or miss for me, as sometimes they can fill those 3 hours, but that extra hour does hold my rationalization back from watching both products, I rarely watched WWE-ECW/NXT for similar reasons, as I know my limits of overdosing on wrestling that turn me off the product no matter how good (although I could watch RAW, Nitro, Thunder and Heat all together when I was younger).

I think it's fine though, as WWE pushes RAW more than Smackdown, it's not hurting Smackdown's overall appeal, and RAW is flourishing in my view, now.


As someone touched on too, Smackdown has always been a bit lighter on me, because I can't avoid spoilers no matter how careful I am. When Swagger took the title off Y2J a few years back, it made me watch a youtube video of that moment, but I felt the entire show was a wash out without paying attention, live Smackdowns use to appease me, but they don't save any surprises for them like they used to, it just conveniences their schedule. RAW still has the "anything can happen" feel every now and then.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Smackdown is simply a grander version of old back up shows like "WWE Superstars" and "Tuesday Night Titans" (which I'm old enough to just barely remember). Of course, those shows had no original match content, only recaps from RAW and a few clips from house shows, while Smackdown has original content, which is what makes it a grander version.

But Smackdown was never intended to beat or be the equal of Raw. Originally, it was just a way of giving us even more exposure to the biggest stars in the company at that time: The Rock, Stone Cold and Triple H. The Rock even called it "my show." Interestingly, with the end of the brand extension, the show has largely gone back to the star format, giving the lesser performers less exposure. If the company has Smackdown performers they want to push, they're moved to Raw: ex: 3MB. Slater, McIntyre and Jinder were all Smackdown wrestlers, but when they're given a feature segment, we see it on Raw.

No, Raw isn't killing Smackdown. The secondary show is what it's supposed to be. Some weeks, the writing for Smackdown is pretty good and the production runs slickly; at those times, it seems the show can thrive on it's own. On other weeks, the writing is uneven and I don't even care if Smackdown is on or not. After all, if we want to see Smackdown headliners like Orton and Del Rio, we can see 'em on Raw (which is probably the big reason this topic is asking whether the #1 show is killing #2).

Honestly, I never understood why the powers-that-be thought Smackdown would serve them better on Friday night after having originated the show on Thursday. Friday isn't a good TV night; it's the weekend. Of course, now that TNA operates on Thursday, the argument might be moot. But I liked Smackdown on Thursday night much better than Friday. It'd be interesting to see what would happen to TNA if Smackdown was moved. Probably we'd wind up with "TNA Impact on Wednesday Night."

 

[MWRedskins]

no, RAW isnt killing Smackdown. Smackdown isnt really a show that WWE is trying to make as great as RAW, dont get me wrong, they want Smackdown to be great, but not compared to RAW. if they wanted Smackdown to be as great as RAW, then guys like Punk and Cena would be there weekly, but they arent. my one issue with the show is there's too many matches where we usually know the winner, the World title picture isnt one i love and i admit, the spoilers do tend to not help the show, but i will usually watch it if something really interesting happens, like a new world champion, it's not killing smackdown though, RAW is the A show and Smackdown is the B show.

 

[Dagger Dias]

I watch both shows, and enjoy both. I'd certainly say though that Raw entering its Supershow format last year was bad for Smackdown. The brand lines being basically done away with made it to where Smackdown guys can appear on Raw. If we can see people who were originally Smackdown exclusive on Raw then that makes watching Smackdown less of a priority. Say guys like Sheamus, Orton, Del Rio, Barrett, or Big Show were only seen on Smackdown and never on Raw. Would you watch Smackdown to see them? If you can see them on both brands, just about any fan is more likely to watch Raw over Smackdown. Raw was the "A" show and the flagship brand before the Supershow format was even in place, so fans have pretty much always viewed it as more important.

The fact that it's still in taped format does not help either. Raw is live so you do not know what to expect. I watch Smackdown because I enjoy both brands, however I will be completely honest here, I find Raw superior in nearly every category. Smackdown tends to have better matches, but that is it. Raw's Supershow and lack of brand lines have indeed done a number on Smackdown. I won't go as far as to say that it's killing the blue brand, although it's definitely not helping it. Some wrestlers and some Championships should be Smackdown exclusive if they want it to receive more attention. They seem to be content with the way things are going though and fans will continue to remain far more interested in Raw with guys who SHOULD be Smackdown exclusive appearing on both shows. I'm not complaining though, I watch both brands every week anyhow.

 

[KNPKH2ster]

SmackDown is meant to be the secondary show. The problem is over saturation of the product. Ever since Raw went 3 hours, and the addition of Main Event, there is nothing that makes SmackDown a must see show. I watch Raw live, and DVR SmackDown but I don't watch the whole SD episode since there are some things that already happened on Raw.

 

[XXJJ]

Let RAW be the flag ship show with all the high tier guys. And instead of pretending that SmackDown is RAW's "sister show" let SmackDown be the show where the midcarders are allowed to shine and get over with the fans, with 1 or 2 big names randomly showing up for a marquee match for the sake of ratings/ticket sales. Basically make it a combination of Superstars' and Main Event's concepts.

Yeah, I wouldn't be against that, but if they do that they need to unify the World and WWE title and just get rid of the brand extension. Turn Smackdown back into the 2nd tier wrestling show instead of a 2nd tier brand. The Raw's during the attitude era were great because you had Austin, DX, Rock, Undertaker,Foley, Kane etc all on one show. When you have Cena, Orton, Punk, Sheamus, Ryback, Daniel Bryan etc all chasing after 1 world title you will have a fresher world title scene. Raw wont have much filler because all your top stars storylines will all take place on Raw. They could make Raw really action packed where you feel like you cant miss an episode.

Like you said, focus more on midcard title feuds and the tag titles on Smackdown. Have longer wrestling matches on SD. Obviously your not going to turn Smackdown just into a midcard show because of ratings and attendace..Have Cena show up on SD and push whatever current angle he is involved in, next week Orton shows, then Punk etc etc.

I feel like they either need to go back to a real brand extension or just completely get rid of it. I dont like what they are doing right now... Having the World and WWE champion show up on Raw every week is just stupid. Plus, they are trying to spread out the smackdown storylines with both shows every week and they just end up repeating ideas and watering down their product.

 

[streicher187]

I was never really a fan of smackdown but watched it first several years before the "brand split" now wish they would either go back to that or just have one title like the tag team and divas.

I missed the last 2 weeks of RAW (first time I haven't watched since 1995) and it really didn't bother me. Read the results on here and seems like it saved time. There really isn't anything on either show to care about anymore. All the Heels are the same and all the "good" guys are the same

 

[Artemis Paradox]

I wouldn't say RAW is killing SD at all- it's meant to be the flagship show, of course, and so naturally it will draw better ratings, but other than the occasional slow nights, SD is doing just fine- heck, SD surpasses RAW from time to time. I think SD is going in a good direction as it stands, and will do just fine- RAW isn't killing it, nor do I think it will anytime soon.

 

[Dirk]

In my opinion, when Edge was WHChamp, SD was a better show than Raw. I also liked it better when Christian and Orton were feuding over the title.

I suppose it's personal taste, but I just think Sheamus is the corniest face we've had in ages. And he undersells way too often. I used to like ADR, but the way he was booked made him look terrible.

It's nice to see Ziggler, but he gets seen on Raw too, so I don't think that helps SD.
I also prefer Booker to AJ.

Overall, I think SD has a more colourful roster and I see no reason why it can't be fixed.