RAW Going to 3 Hours???

[Shocky]

USA Network has talked of wanting Raw to increase to three hours in the fall. The belief is that is guarantees the network one extra hour of very high ratings every week, thus enabling them to maintain their status of being the most watched network on cable television. The thought process being the move is that if Raw starts at 8 p.m. more often, people will get used to tuning into Raw at that time, and it will lead to higher ratings in the second hour in particular.

They also made the suggestion of Steve Austin and Undertaker being regulars on the show, even if they can't wrestle. On the WWE front, they aren't too keen on making Raw a three hour show, every single week. They think this is the last thing they need. Although, if they go through with the move, they'll likely get a rate increase from USA.

I'm up in the air on this one. I think there is way too many hours of wrestling per week right now. It's tough to figure out though. I felt the Nitro move to 3 hour screwed that show. It was doing killer ratings, but then too much time just killed it.

I would vote no for now, unless either the brand extension was dropped and more talent was on Raw to pull this off. I for one would probably like to see Smackdown go away. If this were to happen, then I would be very happy with a 3 hour raw.

 

[Moon Knight]

They don't have the talent to pull this off, but too much wrestling? Back in the day I watched 12 hours of wrestling a week, so to me there is not enough to satisfy the thirst for it, it just needs to be done better.


But 3 hours drags on too much and with the brand split it is too long, Vince even said he wanted 90 mintues...USA just wants higher ratings, but the WWE couldn't even make 3 hours work back in the austin era, but if they end the roster split, bring in taker and austin each week like the piece said and increase match times with attitude era storylines, I am all for it.

 

[Shocky]

12 hours is fun, if the product is good. The WWE has been far from good for several years now. It's passable, but not good.

I think a ton has to happen in order for this to go through. I would love to see better storylines and longer, better matches. I would actually love to see the cruiserweights on Raw, but the big problem is the damn banned moves list.

WWE has the star power to do this, but it's separated over 3 brands. Like I said, Smackdown has become so stale because of the annual raping of the product due to the draft. If you merge the roster with three hours of Raw, you have on helluva talent pull each week. You still keep ECW as the new "heat".

 

[DerekMay]

Honestly, I would enjoy a 3 hour RAW simply because there might actually be either Better Wrestling or more wrestling. But, knowing the WWE, they might ixnay both and go more storylines.

 

[Moon Knight]

12 hours is fun, if the product is good. The WWE has been far from good for several years now. It's passable, but not good.

I think a ton has to happen in order for this to go through. I would love to see better storylines and longer, better matches. I would actually love to see the cruiserweights on Raw, but the big problem is the damn banned moves list.

WWE has the star power to do this, but it's separated over 3 brands. Like I said, Smackdown has become so stale because of the annual raping of the product due to the draft. If you merge the roster with three hours of Raw, you have on helluva talent pull each week. You still keep ECW as the new "heat".

The only problem is 1 main event title and less people getting the chance to hold it, with that edge may never get another title run and we would be stuck with Cena no matter what. The benefit of 3 brands was not having to be bored by Batista if you watch raw or annoyed by cena if you watch ecw..merge them into one 3 hour show and we get bored by both all the time with no escape.

 

[kennyg9]

I am on the fence about this move.

Negatives:
-I think with the current roster it would be hard to do cause not enough talent.
-Keeping people tuned in for 3 hours.
-Creative team has to come up with more for each show which may make some segments appear bad and not properly thought of.

Positives:
-Longer matches which i think i remember seeing somewhere that Vince wants. Have maybe 2-3 matches a show that go a solid 15-20 min.
-I think this would onl work though with merging Smackdown along cause this gives you far more to work with.
-New feuds can be created.
-A feud can have longer tv time not just a small 5 minute segment.
-More talent gets on the show yet your main stars also get more tv time which is good.

I would welcome this only if they use Smackdowns roster as well cause that gives you guys like Edge, MVP, Undertaker, batista to name just a few.
Also if they cuopld get Austin on for regular appears thta would be awesome.

 

[A.J.]

I have to vote no on this right now as basically all the talent that WWE deems as good will be on RAW. If they did this they need to eliminate ECW and have all those wrestlers go to Smackdown. Then it could work but 3 hours each week be like have a PPV just with commericals. I doubt they will do this thought what i can see happening is maybe moving RAW from 9-11 to 8-10. But this is a bad idea as what will WWE do when ratings go down some and just too much BS storylines will evolve. Not worth it.

 

[Don Killuminati]

I wouldn't like it. They'd have a hard time keeping fan's attention for 3 hours. If they got rid of Smackdown then this could work but I think the WWE would suffer more from getting rid of Smackdown then not taking the 3 hours for Raw. And 3 hours is supposed to be like a special event now. If they went to 3 hours all the time then they'd probably come up with 4 hour events that would end up being like a poor quality PPV. And I think the storylines would really suck. And every member of the roster would then get fed to Cena. I think they should just stick with what they got now.

 

[Memory Horizon]

In all honesty I would like a wrestler show every night, be it WWE, be it TNA, be it ROH, whatever. However, for one show to go that long on one night is too much. It would become a supershow...an hour for each show or some shit. I've got to disagree with USA, I agree with the above posters; they want ratings, but I can't see how they'd get ratings if the show was going stale, which it probably would; even if it didn't, the other shows would not be watched because they saw everything the previous Monday.

Of course, that's just a possibility. But my primary message is that it's too much time for one night, but not for the week.

 

[justinsayne]

NO!!!, Raw should definetly not go three hours, Raw should stick with the current 2 hours they got now, the past three hour Raw, wasn't that great, not the Benoit tribute edition, but the Draft/ McMahon Appreciation Night edition, the big problem is the quality of matches lacks, and all the great talent is spread over the three brands, WWE is right in there thinking that this is the last thing they need right now because it is, and Taker on Raw every week, hell Raw just took all the top guys on SD! already, with the exceptions of Mysterio, Edge, Taker and Kane, and Batista too I guess (he is a main eventer like it or not), and too me another hour of WWE programing a week would just be overkill, WWE already has five hours and ten mins. a week not counting Raw A.M., so I gotta go witha big N-O with this one, bad Idea and I hope it doesn't happen, I don't think it will

 

[Mexican Geek]

Originally posted by kennyg9
Negatives:
-I think with the current roster it would be hard to do cause not enough talent.
-Keeping people tuned in for 3 hours.
-Creative team has to come up with more for each show which may make some segments appear bad and not properly thought of.

Totally agreed, i cant imagine so much people tuning RAW for 3 HOURS! (besides us, the smark community..) and about creative...shit, these poor people cant make their minds up with a fucking ECW show!! Obviously, if they needed to write a 3 hour show, we would see a massive disfigured horse shit
monster show.

Positives:
-Longer matches which i think i remember seeing somewhere that Vince wants. Have maybe 2-3 matches a show that go a solid 15-20 min.
-I think this would onl work though with merging Smackdown along cause this gives you far more to work with.
-New feuds can be created.
-A feud can have longer tv time not just a small 5 minute segment.
-More talent gets on the show yet your main stars also get more tv time which is good.

Mhhmm, i could be agree on the 15 to 20 minutes matches, but also is kind of risky biz, i cant imagine a 20 minutes Carlito match, i'll just turn off the TV. Needless to say about a 20 minutes John Cena match EVERY FUCKING WEEK, i would probably throw up over the TV... And i dont have to mention the injury risk when you have someone working 5 days a week plus a PPV every month...
Obviously you should have enough time to build up new feuds and show new talent, but eventually, you wont have anything else worthy to offer, no matter if you hire 10 new wrestlers...
It would be insane to have Stone Cold and Taker in the show every week, but only for a month or two, after that, would be completely pointless and i think that would only damage both men legacy.

So, no, i have enough RAW. sometimes more than i really need.

 

[.MCH]

It doesn't matter to me as I am all for longer matches but at the same time I would get bored during the second hour, like I usually do when there is a three hour show!

Also, 2-3 matches would be boring. I liked Cena vs. Michaels for an hour but only once in awhile. 15 to 20 minutes? No way! Maybe 8 to 1o minutes, excluding main events, but no more then that.

 

[Mexican Geek]

It doesn't matter to me as I am all for longer matches but at the same time I would get bored during the second hour, like I usually do when there is a three hour show!

Sounds weird, coming from the RAW fan nation

Another DONT is: a 3 hours show allows Vince to appear again and throw an shitty angle about how magnificent he is and became the new undisputed champion. That would suck balls!!

 

[Ticked Off Texan]

NO!! RAW should stay with there current 2 hour time slot, most of their storyline arn't great and they won't be able to extend them over a 3 hour show not to mention they have a lack of quality in there matches they should stick to 2 hour and bring a 3 hour show every couple of months (or once a year) if that.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

3 Hours of Raw? Fuck no. Two hours of Raw as it is, is torture. The same thing happened to Nitro. The quality of the show was bad, so what did they do? Made more of it. Sure the build towards each PPV should be excellent. But It wont be. WWE will completley bypass all that extra booking and have worthless matches and promos.

And if a TV show is 3 hours what will be so special about PPV? All the big angles happen on the shows as it is. It will ruin the PPV market.

 

[Prax]

If they could do 2 hours of Original RAW and have the third hour with something different (a recap show, old matches, something), then it might be an interesting thing to consider.

But if it means three hours of pure RAW, with ECW the next night and Smackdown! on friday, HELL NO!!

It'll do well or at least ok for 3 or 4 weeks and the ratings will start to slide until it goes into an WCW-like tailspin. WWE doesn't need to be adding more hours to its programing, HELL NO.

 

[Moon Knight]

If they could do 2 hours of Original RAW and have the third hour with something different (a recap show, old matches, something), then it might be an interesting thing to consider.

But if it means three hours of pure RAW, with ECW the next night and Smackdown! on friday, HELL NO!!

It'll do well or at least ok for 3 or 4 weeks and the ratings will start to slide until it goes into an WCW-like tailspin. WWE doesn't need to be adding more hours to its programing, HELL NO.

I think at this point it is worth remembering that USA wants 3 hours of RAW not the wwe. In fact WWE is skeptical about it and doesn't seem to want it at all. I don't think this will ever happen as USA can't force them to do it, and I am sure they won't. This is the man who not that long ago was complaining RAW was too long and wanted to cut by half an hour...

 

[Prax]

I think at this point it is worth remembering that USA wants 3 hours of RAW not the wwe. In fact WWE is skeptical about it and doesn't seem to want it at all. I don't think this will ever happen as USA can't force them to do it, and I am sure they won't. This is the man who not that long ago was complaining RAW was too long and wanted to cut by half an hour...

Yeah but Vince changes his mind about that stuff all the time. For all we know he might've come up with an idea that suits the three hour slot the other day and now he wants to go for it.

And three hours of RAW can mean anything. We already know they're not afraid to blur the lines between brands and they could make it sweeter by offering viewers certain matches (old matches or recent PPV matches or something whatever... I'm not WWE Creative so don't look at me) within the show to make them watch it.

And if they're moving to three hours, I doubt USA cares what they do as long as it brings in ratings.

 

[TheShowzOver]

No i don't think Raw should go to 3 hours, it would just water down the show and it wouldn't be able to keep the fans attention for that long, it would make ppv's seem less important, part of ppv's is the fact that they are 3 hours making them more important. If anything i think they should make Ecw 2 hours instead, but i'd be happy if everything just stayed as is.

 

[JBBO3314]

Yeah 3 hours is too long I remember nitro and all those poor matches that just looked like filler. It is fine just the way it is but if they merged the Raw/Smackdown brands together then I think it can work.

 

[Why Always Me]

I think the WWE should meet them halfway, and go to 2 and a half hours, but also do the same for Smackdown, and then end the brand extension. Have Raw and Smackdown as equal shows, not by having Raw overshadow Smackdown.

 

[samus500]

I think that most people are missing probably the biggest point of it all being that the raw superstars would be away from their familys more than ever if raw goes to 3 hours...I mean, think about it, they are on the road 365 days a year (not counting some times they get off like christmas/extended breaks to heal up injuries), which means that about 53 mondays of a year, 1 extended hour per day, which means about an extra 2 and a half days away from their loved ones, and they already work a hectic schedule as it is, so I think you may see some more wrestlers taking time off, and being if its 3 hrs, raw is probably going to have to use up most of its active talent every week. So to me its a no.

 

[NYSandman]

It would be cool just for the fact that there would be something more on TV to watch. The problem is that it may taint the PPVs. Why should someone pay 40 bucks for a 3 hour PPV, when RAW is 3 hours? Okay, the PPVs have (usually) better matches, but I still think that might be the main problem. Also, WWE just doesn't have enough talent on RAW. Maybe they could do more brand mixing to have more guys, but in the WWEs current state, I don't think it's doable.

 

[ik3dhs]

Ok if Smackdown and Raw both combined into one program what if RAW became four hours long what would you think about that. It would be a limitless amount of wrestlers to use. And more action. Just RAW by itself for three hours is not cool!! RAW would run out of wrestlers and have to draft some from the OVW literally! LOL!

 

[Deadman4Life]

ik3dhs i agree with you just combine Raw and Smackdown and you can have 4 hours but USA network wont let them do that and then there will be 8 titles on 1 show and basically the more titles you have the less their worth anyways 3 hours is too fast go with like 2 and a half then 3 hours dont jump and hour so fast