Should Smackdown stay pre taped or go live?

[Jstrike]

There's always 1 topic that gets people talking about smackdown,
Smackdown should go LIVE!
but if smackdown did go live every week would these be best for business?
There's no doubt live shows brings in more ratings then pre taped shows, that most people don't watch cause we can see the spoiler's so easily.
now if smackdown went live there would be no spoiler's and the spoiler readers would be more likely to tune in, not to mention the title changes, championship matches are always nice to see but when its pre taped it seems unlikely to ever change the champions on a pre tape show and if the championships are defended and we do get a new winner we already see the new champion before the show is even showed to the public!
So there's many reasons to make smackdown live, but what about keeping smackdown pre taped? whats good about pre taped shows?
With smackdown going live it could make it come on tuesdays!
thats the taping date, and i don't think wwe would ever change it to friday, so if smackdown went live it would come on tuesday's one day after monday night raw which is something that may get boring, imagine a back to back wwe tv show's now these sounds amazing! but same for 3 hour raw but now it seems like raw is way to over stretched we get bored easily! not to mention a monday and then a tuesday show. this would leave friday empty.
by the end of the week we would forget more and more of whats happening on the show. so with looking at this a live smackdown is bad for business?
there's many reasons to make it live? or keep it pre taped? so i made this thread! discuss should smackdown go live or pre taped?

 

[BrutalBarrett]

Yes.

I never watch smackdown on a friday night, no point in wasting 2 hours when i can find out about the whole show in 2 minutes on a wednesday morning.

But when Smackdown is live on a tuesday night, even though its 1am (I'm from the UK) I always watch it live, even though it finishes at 4am and I have work the next day.

The same goes for RAW.

 

[DetectiveZelix]

Yes it should go live. Bring in more viewers, no fake cheers and boos. I can't see anything bad about making it live

 

[Jack-Hammer]

WWE was considering making SmackDown! live rather than taped a while back. The live SD! episodes that aired on Tuesdays every so often, Super SmackDown! Live I think they called them, were a means of testing the waters as to how viewership is affected. With the exception of 1 or 2 times, the live episodes drew less viewers than the taped shows on Friday nights. As a result, WWE decided to keep SmackDown! taped because not only did it generally outdraw the live airings, but it was also cheaper.

Generally speaking, WWE has been putting a good deal more emphasis on SD! for the past 5 or 6 weeks than they have in the past. For instance, there've been instances of relevant happenings taking place on SD! that would usually be saved for Raw. This past Friday, for instance, saw what looks to be the first steps toward a babyface turn for Damien Sandow in which he confronted Del Rio at the top of the show and later had a great match with him during which fans started rallying around him. A couple of months ago, this scenario would have taken place on Raw with some degree of follow up on SD!, maybe in the form of Sandow coming out to attack Del Rio in the middle of a match or if Del Rio put the Cross Armbreaker back onto his opponent after already having won the match and that probably would have been the extent of the follow up.

Earlier this year, there was talk of elevating SmackDown! to the point where it was no longer thought of as the "B Show", putting it on the level of Raw. There was also talk of expanding SD! to three hours as well at some point. If WWE is able to ultimately elevate SD! in terms of prominence and general perception when compared to Raw, then maybe they could consider going live once again. That's especially true if they ever decide to make it 3 hours. I think they should continue to air SD! on Friday if they go live rather than on Tuesdays. I'm sure that some people who watch WWE have certain programs on Tuesday nights that they've watched for a very long time. As a result, there might be some genuine reluctance to change up their viewing habits. There's usually not as much competition on Fridays either, networks adjust their programming on Fridays. Statistically, more people go out on Fridays than any other night of the week. It's paid off for SD! as it's usually among the, if not the single, most watched program on cable television on Fridays.

So IF WWE genuinely has plans to make SD! as important as Raw in the future, and extends it to 3 hours, then I think they'll need to go live. Where WWE ultimately is with those plans or if there are really even any plans at all should be seen during WrestleMania season. Unfortunately, SD! becomes something of a clip show that replays the big segments from the top WM feuds in their entirety from Raw during WM season. If that's the case this time around for WM XXX, then WWE should just keep things as they currently are.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

If you want more viewers, make SD not suck. I have never been properly informed as to what making it non-taped would improve so much about it. Its the same show either way...."its new to me"

 

[salopstick]

I'm sure I read somewhere that having it pre taped means they can put on a house show on a Friday or if no house shows it's easier to give talent a free weekend prior to raw

 

[darbare]

Why not live on Thursdays? You space it out from Raw because Tuesday is right after Monday, and then you get Fridays to do other stuff...but i guess they wouldnt even want to consider going up against Big Bang Theory, so nevermind lol

 

[willross]

The simple reason why they don't do Smackdown live is more money purposes. Filming on Tuesday allows them to film Main Event and the remainder of Superstars before hand and still run their circuit of house shows leading into the Monday and Tuesday tapings.

It also costs more to do a live broadcast.

Moving it to Tuesday night permanently would also greatly affect the network. Its an easy sell to networks to put a notoriously B show on a Friday where they usually don't have on something that is highly promoted instead of putting it on a day that has a much larger viewing audience.

Smackdown out draws anything on a Friday night other than a sporting event. Putting Smackdown on any other day wouldn't be the greatest idea. Giving a network a primetime Friday night show that draws 2mill plus viewers in the US is a HUGE SELLING POINT

 

[CM Steel]

Yeah I feel that it's about that time for WWE Smackdown to head to the show and be on live like RAW is on monday nights. Smackdown is just now getting it's respect as in being a show that gets strong ratings much like RAW since Smackdown has been getting compared to RAW for over 10 years now. Just give Smackdown a night & slot to really showcase talent on a live wrestling show each week.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

It's about cost. It costs a lot more money to produce a live show. Would a live show boost ratings? Maybe, but probably not enough to justify the added cost of going live. If it would, wwe would have smack down live. This is a real company with real business people running it.

 

[Redemption-2012]

I would imagine that it has to do with cost. It would be awesome to see SD go live but chances are it won't happen. It would not make a difference to me anyway because I live in the UK and generally watch on Fridays. Staying up until 4AM is a No No for me because of obvious reasons.

 

[Mustang Sally]

For viewing purposes, I never felt it made that much of a difference whether a wrestling show is live or taped. The show is the show. It probably costs a lot more money to put it on live, and if it's feasible to spend the money on only one WWE show, Raw is the more likely candidate since it has a much larger audience and contains more references to events currently going on in society. On Smackdown, the announcers just call wrestling matches. It can be live or taped; it doesn't matter much.

And no, making Smackdown a live show won't boost it's viewership to Raw levels. It's Friday night.....the weekend....and they'll never get as many people watching as on Monday nights.

 

[Dagger Dias]

This again? Smackdown does not need to go live. I'm fine with it being on fridays and am also fine with it being taped. Sure, it was cool to watch live editions of it on tuesdays, but it really wasn't any different from the taped versions other than there not being any spoilers. That is the one primary difference between a live and a taped Smackdown. The results find their way out into the internet. A live show might get a small increase in ratings from the people that read the spoilers of the taped show and ultimately decide to not watch when they know the results. It would not make THAT much of a difference. No one is forcing you to read the spoilers or results. Just ignore those articles until you have watched the show, it is that simple.

It should also remain on fridays. "Tuesday Night Smackdown" does not have much of a ring to it. People will have just had Raw on monday, so permanently moving Smackdown to tuesday as a live show might actually burn out some fans to have that much WWE in so many days. Wednesday already has Main Event, so WWE is not going to go through the trouble to find Main Event a new home if we are going to get "Wednesday Night Smackdown". Then we have the possibility of "Thursday Night Smackdown". Never going to happen. They would never admit to it, but TNA is competition and their flagship show is on thursdays. Sundays is PPV night, so that's out. Then there's Saturday, which wouldn't change much. People go out on saturdays just as much if not more often than fridays. So where does that leave us? Keeping things as they are, with the weekly tradition of FRIDAY Night Smackdown. It is just fine the way it is. Those who have plans friday have the whole weekend to watch their recording.

 

[rage72]

Yes.

I never watch smackdown on a friday night, no point in wasting 2 hours when i can find out about the whole show in 2 minutes on a wednesday morning.

But when Smackdown is live on a tuesday night, even though its 1am (I'm from the UK) I always watch it live, even though it finishes at 4am and I have work the next day.

The same goes for RAW.

This is how I feel. I never watch Smackdown because I read the spoilers online so if it went live I would watch it. I also only watch the live Impact shows because I read the spoilers online for the taped shows.

 

[Dan Severn's Moustache]

Something nobody has pointed out yet surprisingly, the wrestlers have friends, family and others to visit whilst not on tour doing house shows. Filming on Tuesday is a lot more convenient for everybody involved in the fact that they can get their weekly shift finished and then wrap up for the rest of the week, unless of course there's a PPV or house show tour.

So no, Smackdown shouldn't go live, mostly for convenience.

 

[Dirk]

Generally speaking, WWE has been putting a good deal more emphasis on SD! for the past 5 or 6 weeks than they have in the past.

Yeah, they're getting there. The thing is, if you openly call Raw the flagship show and you spend so much time on the shorter show recapping the longer one... You guys see where this leads?

The way I understand the raped SD's, is so that 1) the mistakes made by wrestlers can be cut around and 2) they can add the canned pops/cheers. Here are my counterpoints to that:
1) If a guy isn't good enough for the main roster, he can fuck off back to NXT. Everybody makes mistakes and all the wrestlers screw up now and then (looking at YOU, Miz), but by the time they graduate from WWE training, they should get it right.
2) Instead of having to phone it in most weeks, give SD some exclusive content like it's starting to get now. For example, the Wyatts could've been on SD, with the Shield on Raw. It's a silly idea, but give the fans a REASON to tune in to SD. Now, if SD were live, the fans would be forced to check it out, otherwise they'd miss out.

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

Slightly surprised that this hasn't been mentioned yet but, while the brand roster split has been dropped, the WHC is still regarded as the SD Title... and who is challenging for said title?

I'm really hoping this is leading to SD getting a very much needed shot to the arm because it has been treated more and more as the poor cousin as the years have wore on. An extended John Cena title reign coupled with some live feelers really could be the adrenalin injection it needs and could possibly rekindle some of the feel of the SmackDown6 period.

 

[chicagokmc]

If it isn't broke, don't fix it. Assuming WWE's constant propaganda about dominating that time slot is correct, unless they plan on moving Smackdown to another night why change anything? Live shows are expensive and if they already dominate Friday night there is no need to spend major money. If they were going to move Smackdown to a night during the week then they would definitely have to consider making the show live.

Smackdown is never going to be Raw. But it can still be better. For example they could use Smackdown to actively defend the ignored belts like the Intercontinental and US Belts (key word - "defend")

 

[LoudClearVoice]

From a quality standpoint, I don't think it really makes a difference. If they keep it on Friday night, then I don't really think it matters if it's live or taped since most people are going to watch it on their DVR anyway, on Saturday or whenever. If it was on Monday, Tues, Wed, or Thurs, then I think making it live would make a difference in terms of viewership because people would actually watch when it aired, or at least more people would.

As for the whole spoiler thing, my point above kinda addresses it. If it's on Friday night, most fans aren't going to watch it then anyway, which means that even if it were live on Friday night, you could just read the results the next day before you watched it, which is the same as reading a spoiler.