WWE, more like a TV series

[NegativeFeedback]

A lot of people today are critical of WWE's weekly product. A lot of episodes seem like filler with almost nothing being done to truly advance the stories. Obviously, they can't give away a jaw-dropping twist moment every week, but let's get real, TV series everywhere have had to deal with that problem.

You don't see other shows wasting episodes on bullshit and defending that by saying they're building up to a better episode. The only show I ever remember to do that was Dragon Ball Z. Three episodes of Goku cutting a promo before throwing a Spirit Bomb.

But I think WWE should aspire to be more like a TV series and have stories set-in-stone. They put on 52 episodes of Raw every year. That's 4 sets of 13-episode seasons where they can plan ahead and write it up for each season.

I think that post-WrestleMania, they should have stories set in stone with good story progression, character development, good twists and turns, and depth to keep the audience engaged. NO REWRITES. If they want to bury someone, or change something up, they have to wait until their 13-episode stories are finished airing.

They can put on 4 seasons of stories a year and focus on different characters each time. One of those seasons can be focused on the King of the Ring Tournament or some other season-long arc that can culminate with the crowning of the winner.

Imagine how much more excited we will be if we were actually able to look forward to the writing?? We just saw the season finale with a huge plot development and know that a completely different chapter full of intense twists and turns will begin next week?

I wonder why after so many years on television, WWE has never decided to go this route. It seems like the most logical way to keep their viewers interested and use their talent to their best potential. What do you guys think?

 

[Coco]

I think that post-WrestleMania, they should have stories set in stone with good story progression, character development, good twists and turns, and depth to keep the audience engaged. NO REWRITES. If they want to bury someone, or change something up, they have to wait until their 13-episode stories are finished airing.

I agree that WWE could do a whole lot more to make their writing interesting. But your "NO REWRITES" policy is moronic. Scripted television shows change things up all the time when they realize what the audience is responding to, what's not working as well as it did on the page, which performers really can't be relied on, etc. Sometimes an audible needs to be called.

This is especially true in the WWE, where you don't have months of television in the can before you find out how the audience will respond to your program. WWE gets instantaneous feedback every Monday night. A lot of the feedback they get is obviously the usual overly-critical internet douchebaggery. But that doesn't mean there aren't important audience responses out there which need to be taken into account.

Sorry, but good shows know how to course-correct when the plan isn't working. The notion that WWE shouldn't do that is asinine. And that's without taking into account things like injuries and disciplinary issues.

Your idea sucks. Have a nice day.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

I agree that WWE could do a whole lot more to make their writing interesting. But your "NO REWRITES" policy is moronic. Scripted television shows change things up all the time when they realize what the audience is responding to, what's not working as well as it did on the page, which performers really can't be relied on, etc. Sometimes an audible needs to be called.

This is especially true in the WWE, where you don't have months of television in the can before you find out how the audience will respond to your program. WWE gets instantaneous feedback every Monday night. A lot of the feedback they get is obviously the usual overly-critical internet douchebaggery. But that doesn't mean there aren't important audience responses out there which need to be taken into account.

Sorry, but good shows know how to course-correct when the plan isn't working. The notion that WWE shouldn't do that is asinine. And that's without taking into account things like injuries and disciplinary issues.

Your idea sucks. Have a nice day.

Re-writes will only cause continuity issues and inconsistencies. They can do course correction, but the writing for this season is set in stone.

Let's say it's Extreme Rules, and one of WWE's big stories was a slow face turn for CM Punk against Paul Heyman, culminating in Heyman betraying him in the season finale at Money in the Bank. WWE feels the audience isn't responding to the face turn, but tough tits, they have to keep at it, because if they don't, it will affect EVERYTHING. The point of writing a cohesive season before is that each story is intertwined. Punk's face push would have already sent ripples throughout the other stories. He would have already reacted with Shield and their feud with Hell No, and he would have been involved in tense segments with Cena. Rewriting would just crap on the whole season.

But they CAN do course correction as long as they follow it up with the next season. While these 13 episodes are airing, the creative team will be hard at work on the next season that begins with MitB. If Punk's face turn isn't working, they will know and will be able to course correct by having him turn back heel at the big show and start the new story for the next 13 chapters.

I'm not saying they shouldn't change their plans, I'm just saying they shouldn't do immediate rewrites. We end up with crap like Miz's random heel turn, then face turn, then heel again. Or Sandow's random face turn on Smackdown to act as a heel on Raw right after. It's bogus, they need to be sure of the product they have on the page 13 weeks before it airs.

 

[Coco]

Re-writes will only cause continuity issues and inconsistencies. They can do course correction, but the writing for this season is set in stone.

Let's say it's Extreme Rules, and one of WWE's big stories was a slow face turn for CM Punk against Paul Heyman, culminating in Heyman betraying him in the season finale at Money in the Bank. WWE feels the audience isn't responding to the face turn, but tough tits, they have to keep at it, because if they don't, it will affect EVERYTHING. The point of writing a cohesive season before is that each story is intertwined. Punk's face push would have already sent ripples throughout the other stories. He would have already reacted with Shield and their feud with Hell No, and he would have been involved in tense segments with Cena. Rewriting would just crap on the whole season.

But they CAN do course correction as long as they follow it up with the next season. While these 13 episodes are airing, the creative team will be hard at work on the next season that begins with MitB. If Punk's face turn isn't working, they will know and will be able to course correct by having him turn back heel at the big show and start the new story for the next 13 chapters.

I'm not saying they shouldn't change their plans, I'm just saying they shouldn't do immediate rewrites. We end up with crap like Miz's random heel turn, then face turn, then heel again. Or Sandow's random face turn on Smackdown to act as a heel on Raw right after. It's bogus, they need to be sure of the product they have on the page 13 weeks before it airs.

If you haven't seen The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Lost, or Community, this post isn't for you.

Spoiler

The Twins were originally intended to be Walt's main foil for the entirety of season three of BB. When it was determined that the show would be better served with Gus as Walt's main adversary, an audible was called. What resulted was on of the tensest action sequences in recent dramatic television history. The other stories and characters all reacted organically and the show continued to be great.

The actress who played Lydia died near the beginning of The Sopranos' third season. She had to be written out. Doing that on the fly, even with their tight production schedule, didn't hurt the show at all.

After a particularly shitty FlashJack episode early in Lost's third season pissed off network executives and fans alike, the entire direction of the show changed direction. The rest of the season broke from the original plan as the show began to enter its endgame.

The Ben Linus character was a response to a guest actor nailing the episodes he was originally contracted for, leading to him being reintroduced a few episodes later in the finale as the leader of The Others.

Troy and Pierce were originally meant to be one another's main comic partner in Community. After a few episodes, an audible was called when it became apparent how great Troy and Abed were together.

Can the WWE's writing be much, much better than it is right now? Yes. But needlessly staying the course with long term plans in the face of complications or evidence that they aren't working is moronic. Even the great ones have changed course at a moment's notice.

Heck, don't get me started on how notoriously last minute David Milch's scripts were. His flip-flopping is the stuff of legend. Pages of dialogue would sometimes be hot out of the printer when his actors were minutes away from shooting a scene. And Milch is widely regarded as one of the best writers in the history of television.

Please stop talking about things you know nothing about.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

If you haven't seen The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Lost, or Community, this post isn't for you.

Spoiler

The Twins were originally intended to be Walt's main foil for the entirety of season three of BB. When it was determined that the show would be better served with Gus as Walt's main adversary, an audible was called. What resulted was on of the tensest action sequences in recent dramatic television history. The other stories and characters all reacted organically and the show continued to be great.

The actress who played Lydia died near the beginning of The Sopranos' third season. She had to be written out. Doing that on the fly, even with their tight production schedule, didn't hurt the show at all.

After a particularly shitty FlashJack episode early in Lost's third season pissed off network executives and fans alike, the entire direction of the show changed direction. The rest of the season broke from the original plan as the show began to enter its endgame.

The Ben Linus character was a response to a guest actor nailing the episodes he was originally contracted for, leading to him being reintroduced a few episodes later in the finale as the leader of The Others.

Troy and Pierce were originally meant to be one another's main comic partner in Community. After a few episodes, an audible was called when it became apparent how great Troy and Abed were together.

Can the WWE's writing be much, much better than it is right now? Yes. But needlessly staying the course with long term plans in the face of complications or evidence that they aren't working is moronic. Even the great ones have changed course at a moment's notice.

Heck, don't get me started on how notoriously last minute David Milch's scripts were. His flip-flopping is the stuff of legend. Pages of dialogue would sometimes be hot out of the printer when his actors were minutes away from shooting a scene. And Milch is widely regarded as one of the best writers in the history of television.

Please stop talking about things you know nothing about.

Every Breaking Bad season has been in the can before they air their first episode. When Vince has said that he changed up the villains in S3, he says he changed it up in the writing room when he felt he painted himself into a corner with their one-note agenda. It's true that he had already filmed a couple episodes by that point, but unlike WWE, those aren't live. He wasn't "reacting" to the audience, he was reacting to his own writing, which WWE can certainly do at any point in their writing process.

You're talking about 2 different things without even knowing it. I feel WWE shouldn't rewrite a story that has already been initiated on TV, and Vince Gilligan would agree with me. Every episode of Season 2 was written down before they even produced the first episode, let alone aired it. Same for the last 2 "seasons". Now that's the type of efficiency WWE should be aspiring for.

EDIT: As for the Dan Harmon and David Milch comparisons, both have been criticized for their late rewrites, but both are creative geniuses, and can get away with much more than the average writer. If WWE had guys like them on their teams, we will be able to "trust" them with ignoring conventional professional writing standards. But I definitely don't trust them to pull off a rewrite without screwing up the whole story. Look at Nexus, Bryan, Summer of Punk... All good stories, screwed up by the writers. Comparing Milch and Harmon to these guys is a grave insult to both men.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Except that Raw is live made up of people who can get hurt and is continuous all year around. In other words, writing for Raw is a lot harder. 3 hours 52 weeks a year. That's e equivalent of what? 6 years of a normal show? And you have to deal with injuries and suspensions? Of course it could be better but their job is incredibly tough and it's a unique form of entertainment.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

Except that Raw is live made up of people who can get hurt and is continuous all year around. In other words, writing for Raw is a lot harder. 3 hours 52 weeks a year. That's e equivalent of what? 6 years of a normal show? And you have to deal with injuries and suspensions? Of course it could be better but their job is incredibly tough and it's a unique form of entertainment.

Well, Days of Our Lives aired 252 episodes last year so writing so much content a year is not completely unheard of. I admit it is very difficult, especially when you can be blind-sighted by suspensions and injuries, but it can be handled much better than it is now.

They write their scripts on Word and rewrite them every day without even considering what happened in the last few weeks. Their current system is completely idiotic. You can have different writers on each team, with the same head writers and continuity experts supervising them all. Name each Season and advertise their big season finales.

WWE's TOP priority should be the writing. TOP. PPV dates, venues, wrestlers, everyone should be moved around to accommodate the writing.

Suspensions and injuries are unfortunate, but Plan B's should be set as well. If next season's top contender just got injured in the season finale, a plan B should have been either set or at least talked about beforehand. They are going to have to re-write these episode as they go, but they will have to keep two big things in mind:

1. The current season's story arcs and big moments should be changed the least possible. They cannot afford to rewrite the whole show. Focus on what the top contender's segments were and try to fit someone else into his shoes while molding that story to the new guy's personality

2. Writing for the next season cannot be delayed. They will need to rewrite this season and write the next one simultaneously. With different writing teams, it won't be much of a problem. The latter writing team will have to adapt to every change in the current season. It will be a headache, but it's doable.

The quality of that season will probably be lamer than the rest of them, but shit happens sometimes. For the time being, you can do some kick-ass standalone segments to shy away from the fact the story isn't as sturdy as hoped. But they will need to focus on next season's writing going back to being top-notch.

They can't do this EVERY SEASON, because it will destroy the system of plot developments and foreshadowing from season to season. That's why they need to stick with the writing whenever they can. But realistically, they will need to adjust for any big injuries or suspensions like they did with Fandango/Axel earlier in the year.

 

[Eyebrows]

It simply isn't practical. Like TWJC said, injuries can happen at any time. What happens if you've written a season out and the person you were basing it around got injured? What about new signings and releases? What happens if a contract negotiation breaks down half-way through? If there's trouble with networks and PPV providers? Snowstorms?

The crux of your argument is valid. WWE needs more long-term planning. But setting your script in stone is asking for trouble.

The difference between WWE and shows like Breaking Bad and The Sopranos is that despite the fall of kayfabe the WWE still asks you to suspend your disbelief and present it as real whereas BB and The Sopranos are presenting a fictional story whereby characters have clearly defined arcs and personality development. Wrestlers evolve definitely but dropping a gimmick and changing heel immediately isn't the same as Walter White's slow evolution into a kingpin because wrestling does not approach change in alignment or character in a subtle manner.

1. Because wrestling at it's best simplifies its narrative into a simple dichotomy between good guy and bad guy with little grey area.
2. Because a large part of the current audience, kids, doesn't have the capacity for that sort of subtle character development.

WWE doesn't have the luxury of putting 12 episodes in the can because it's a live experience. And it goes on with no end goal. There is no eventual conclusion to a characters journey because that character might be within the company for ten years.

I do think they should have script outlines sorted for the month ahead and not have to scramble around on the night of the show unless it's for unforseen reasons but not allowing yourself to change anything for three months puts you in the position of fans rejecting an angle right out of the gates and not being able to alter it.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

It's time to accept WWE for what it is. A live action soap opera where a portion of the action takes place in a ring. It's no different than Days of Our Lives, Eastenders, Coronation Street any of them.

Take Eastenders, for years it was the number one soap in the UK, regularly beating out it's competition Coronation St. which has been going over 50 years. Recently ratings and "quality" of Eastenders has taken a battering, things have not gone well and successive show runners have done little to spot the rot. Mean while smaller soaps such as Hollyoaks have become critically more acclaimed despite outlandishness in their plotting. There will be those who will watch Corrie religiously 5 nights a week and those who will only watch Eastenders when a character is going to die or a big story happens. Soaps can attract that die hard element and the casual fans but are generally accepted

This is relevant to WWE in that it is competing against other episodic TV, NOT wrestling companies. When I was in a houseshare with 6 women who would complain about me watching wrestling I successfully argued that they watched their soaps for 2 hours a night on average and that wrestling was my soap - the hours were even and the differences minimal.

Soaps regularly have to "call audibles", recently Coronation Street has had several of it's cast members embroiled in scandals including one acquitted of molesting children. They had to write him out for 2 years nearly until it cleared, then give him time after to "get over" the ordeal before they can bring him back despite him being found innocent of all charges. Another member of the cast, indeed their longest serving member is now facing similar charges, after nearly 50 years on UK TV, he is missing. His bosses couldn't keep him onscreen while facing those charges, even if he is later found not guilty.

Imagine the same happening in WWE, John Cena is accused of a criminal offense considered too serious to "let go" - we're not talking a Thwagger drugs bust or a Punk style hitting of a fan but worse. However important he is, he would have to be written out of WWE until it was cleared up. Just as if he is injured.

WWE has had to call audibles for these reasons before, reacting to the Benoit situation, RVD's drugs bust and the Steroid indictment further back.

Saying that they're going to set it all in stone months ahead simply wouldn't work. The Paul Walker situation this week shows that if you put enough people working together in the same series over several years then fate intervenes. With the amount of talent and crew WWE has on retainer, accidents, legal issues, family and health problems and even deaths are going to happen over the course of 1 year. Talent alone is over 100 people.

Where it goes wrong is the rewriting for the sake of it, like just dropping the Big Show story with Triple H. When there is a context to a rewrite known outside the ring then people hear about it, they generally get it and however much we might hate that our favourite is gone for a while we know it's because of something, when it's cos Vince or whoever changes their mind on something then it shows a lack of respect to the viewership and people switch off. Famously in Eastenders there was a very popular cast member who began to attract some negative publicity for her private life and a young actor again aquitted of sexual offences on a minor. Both were written out in the same story which took several months to culminate... People knew what was going on from the press and even though it was harsh on both at the end of the saga, it made sense. Imagine how WWE would handle that kind of situation... a 6 month feud would simply disappear overnight and we'd be expected to just "buy it".

There is no right or wrong answer to this, but the biggest issue is they have to fill 8+ hours of TV a week to fulfil their contracts. Even Coronation Street only does 3.5. It's a huge amount of TV to fill every week with no changes at all. That WWE is making TV their focus trying to get big money for this deal is only going to make this worse.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

And when the audience doesn't react to your storyline, what do you do?

Keep running with it, even though it gains its participants no heat whatsoever, but you've got it in your long term script to run from WrestleMania through Survivor Series, and you'll be damned if you're going to change it?

Sorry, but this is over-thinking the problem as well as trying to force multiple weekly shows into a format built for shows that have actual seasons. Wrestling will always have unforseen events that interfere with the best laid plans, whether it be injury or just a lame storyline. It depends on taking regular pulse of its audience, which is why social media is so important to them. In other words, the WWE needs its flexibility.

That said, it can do much, much better in creating alternate plans that are thought out beyond a few beats in order to provide what still appears to be a cohesive storyline. Not every match needs to be storyline driven, and I think pulling away from the soap opera would help the WWE considerably in that regard. It should be enough to have a face and a heel open a RAW with a match without having to tell a total story of why they're in the ring. Ostensibly, it's supposed to be a competition where guys are competing for a chance to move up some sort of ladder to get a shot at titles....somewhere along the line this was forgotten and I think that's a failing and lost opportunity.

I've beaten this drum before but I'll do it again: I would HATE to have to write a coherent story that revolves around having a series of feud red hot enough to sustain a Hell in the Cell in October, a Survivor Series in November, a Tables, Ladders and Chairs event in December, the Royal Rumble, and then an Elimination Chamber in February/March! Way too many specialty matches that would be better used when the story dictates their use.

 

[cm ben]

Something like this would help their product so much. Yeah, people are beating a dead horse here that wrestlers get injured, characters don't get over, etc. That's true. But sitcoms/dramas also take that into account and still churn out engaging storylines, something that WWE only pulls off once in a blue moon.

I'm a big Buffy fan. At the beginning of Season 2, a little kid vampire was supposed to be the main bad guy. Apparently he wasn't getting "over" so the character Spike was created and took his spot. Apparently Spike was supposed to die at the end of that season. He was so "over," however, that they kept him alive and brought him back later. It was a re-write, yeah, but it was a thoughtful re-write. It was a re-write that they weaved back into existing storylines.

Compare that to plot lines and re-writes that we see in WWE. Some of this is probably dirtsheet nonsense, but we hear so often about Vince calling for an entire show to be reworked hours before it airs. How does that happen? There is absolutely no reason they shouldn't have a plan (and a fallback plan) a month in advance, let alone a couple of hours in advance. And their lack of planning is so obvious. Ignoring the majority of storylines that take place, or the lack-there-of in the midcard, even their good storylines fall flat in the end: CM Punk capturing the title and quitting led to... a feud with Kevin Nash and Alberto del Rio; Daniel Bryan beating John Cena clean led to... a Big Show title shot; the Nexus taking over RAW led to... the Corre.

Stories have a beginning, middle, and end. It's not that hard. But it's something WWE forgets so much. I think the OP's idea about following other successful TV shows' formats could be a step in the right direction.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

Something like this would help their product so much. Yeah, people are beating a dead horse here that wrestlers get injured, characters don't get over, etc. That's true. But sitcoms/dramas also take that into account and still churn out engaging storylines, something that WWE only pulls off once in a blue moon.

I'm a big Buffy fan. At the beginning of Season 2, a little kid vampire was supposed to be the main bad guy. Apparently he wasn't getting "over" so the character Spike was created and took his spot. Apparently Spike was supposed to die at the end of that season. He was so "over," however, that they kept him alive and brought him back later. It was a re-write, yeah, but it was a thoughtful re-write. It was a re-write that they weaved back into existing storylines.

You're talking about 12 to 13 episodes per season versus 52 episodes of RAW alone. How can you dismiss this? The writers of regular TV and cable shows have the option of taking a step back after filming has stopped, monitor feedback, and then write new storylines months before having to actually be back in front of a camera.

Compare that to plot lines and re-writes that we see in WWE. Some of this is probably dirtsheet nonsense, but we hear so often about Vince calling for an entire show to be reworked hours before it airs. How does that happen? There is absolutely no reason they shouldn't have a plan (and a fallback plan) a month in advance, let alone a couple of hours in advance. And their lack of planning is so obvious. Ignoring the majority of storylines that take place, or the lack-there-of in the midcard, even their good storylines fall flat in the end: CM Punk capturing the title and quitting led to... a feud with Kevin Nash and Alberto del Rio; Daniel Bryan beating John Cena clean led to... a Big Show title shot; the Nexus taking over RAW led to... the Corre.

I agree with this. I think they sometimes go with what feels right in the moment without thinking of the repercussions or long term goals. I also believe this is where Vince McMahon's "genius" falls apart. The live changes to a show by senior management are the epitome of stupidity. It's just pure arrogance and typically leads to piss poor programming.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

And when the audience doesn't react to your storyline, what do you do?

Keep running with it, even though it gains its participants no heat whatsoever, but you've got it in your long term script to run from WrestleMania through Survivor Series, and you'll be damned if you're going to change it?

Sorry, but this is over-thinking the problem as well as trying to force multiple weekly shows into a format built for shows that have actual seasons. Wrestling will always have unforseen events that interfere with the best laid plans, whether it be injury or just a lame storyline. It depends on taking regular pulse of its audience, which is why social media is so important to them. In other words, the WWE needs its flexibility.

That said, it can do much, much better in creating alternate plans that are thought out beyond a few beats in order to provide what still appears to be a cohesive storyline. Not every match needs to be storyline driven, and I think pulling away from the soap opera would help the WWE considerably in that regard. It should be enough to have a face and a heel open a RAW with a match without having to tell a total story of why they're in the ring. Ostensibly, it's supposed to be a competition where guys are competing for a chance to move up some sort of ladder to get a shot at titles....somewhere along the line this was forgotten and I think that's a failing and lost opportunity.

I've beaten this drum before but I'll do it again: I would HATE to have to write a coherent story that revolves around having a series of feud red hot enough to sustain a Hell in the Cell in October, a Survivor Series in November, a Tables, Ladders and Chairs event in December, the Royal Rumble, and then an Elimination Chamber in February/March! Way too many specialty matches that would be better used when the story dictates their use.

The problem is the sheer number of hours WWE is trying to put out.

3 Hour RAW
2-3 Hour Smackdown
1 Hour Main Event
1 Hour NXT
1 3 or 4 hour PPV per month

The other shows on TV people refer to, your Breaking Bad et al are 43 minutes x 13 in a season. That's as much TV in one year as WWE puts out most months. WWE can't work in the format that they do as it is based on live performance rather than reshoot after reshoot. Bryan Cranston gets as many takes as is needed for Walter White to chew the scenery... Punk or Cena get one shot on RAW or at most 2 on Smackdown - you saw what "calling an audible" like was the other week when the main event got screwed up.

If the audience isn't reacting mid season to a show, it either doesn't complete the season or like Hannibal or Shield is reaching the intended audience and building a following regardless. Those type shows don't get major reboots mid season because the long term plan itself is sound, just some of the execution may be tweaked. WWE however is very much the "audience of one". The reality is it doesn't matter how it goes over with the TV viewers or PPV crowd, it's whether it pleases Vince which is the ultimate issue. Showrunners get booted all the time, even George Lucas eventually found himself marginalized and selling control. Look at Frank Darabont - he had a cracking first season on Walking Dead to all who saw it but he was still removed by AMC. That the show is doing so well today somewhat vindicates that decision but the network don't interfere with WWE in that way, nor do their shareholders. The booker is basically the showrunner which is now Trips AND Vince has absolute veto so the writers and team are trying to produce 12+ hours of new material a month that satisfies both network and fans AND that Vince LIKES... while that remains the case things won't improve.

 

[cm ben]

You're talking about 12 to 13 episodes per season versus 52 episodes of RAW alone. How can you dismiss this? The writers of regular TV and cable shows have the option of taking a step back after filming has stopped, monitor feedback, and then write new storylines months before having to actually be back in front of a camera.

Well, ~26 episodes/season for Buffy. But you're right. It's still half as many and there's a break between seasons. That being said, WWE could structure their stories into concise 8 or 12 week chunks, and have storylines overlap to allow for closure once a particular storyline finishes.

Even though I think it's mostly due to a time limitation in the show, I really like the way NXT handles storylines. They focus on roughly three feuds for a few episodes at a time, and once the feud boils over, they shift the spotlight to a different group of wrestlers. There's space, and it doesn't feel so rushed.

Obviously, using examples from very different shows (Buffy and NXT) couldn't apply directly to RAW/Smackdown, but I still think there's at least something to be learned.

 

[Wald]

The crux of your argument is a good one and I do think that the WWE should have Wrestlemania to Wrestlemania planned at least in skeleton form before they ever get to the first Raw after a Wrestlemania.

People are saying the live aspect of the WWE is a hindrance to that but it can actually be a massive positive too. They can test characters, gimmick tweeks and matches at house shows on a live test audience before ever putting them anywhere near a televised show. That means that they could forward plan a lot better than they are doing, or at least seeming to do.

They knew after Wrestlemania that, built right, John Cena, the Undertaker, CM Punk, Triple H, Daniel Bryan, Randy Orton and Brock Lesner could be relied upon to draw interest. They should at least have an idea where they're going with those guys for the next year and how they're getting there. Injuries and suspensions could happen of course but the plan should still be in place. That would allow them to pick guys for that year like Ziggler, Brodus Clay, Ryback, Sheamus or whoever and say that they want them on the show. That would require them asking themselves how best it would be to build them and lay down a framework for doing that.

Right now it seems like they just spin the wheels from Wrestlemania to Royal Rumble each year and hope that they can draw enough interest to post respectable PPV buyrates

 

[Poop Master Flex]

I think it would be a good idea for WWE to plan in advance, back in the 80's they often had things planned out well in advance (Savage vs. Hogan story was booked more than a year in advance for example). With that said WWE is not like regular weekly TV so re-writes are going to be needed.

If it was me I would have a plan of everything I'm doing at least 6 months in advance but I would just pencil it in, you never know who is going to catch fire and if someone catches fire and you don't use them then you risk them cooling off before they get used.

Take Austin for example. He came in at the end of '95 as The Ringmaster (a nothing character), 12 months later he was feuding with Bret Hart, was now called Stone Cold Steve Austin, was WWE's top heel who was quickly turning into WWE's top face because the fans took to him. Vince never would have known that would happen a year in advance but when it did happen he was smart to change course and go with the flow.

Because WWE has a roster that has numerous hiring's and firing's a year they gotta keep things liquid, don't commit to things so soon unless you know for sure its going to work, also if things they don't expect start working then its wise to change accordingly. Although its entertainment it's also sports presentation, committing to all your characters and storyline's a year in advance would be like an NFL team committing to its roster, strategy, and how it's going to play every team in the league before the first game of the season starts. It's a live medium and in a live medium things can change in the blink of an eye.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Another thing to consider is its live and people get over. WWE is completely unique. If Joey from friends was a flop they couldn't kill him off or depush him mid season. If you have this whole season written out for family guy and Meg gets over like 1998 stone cold you can't push her more and change things drastically.

Pro wrestling is fluid. You should have a rough outline and direction with maybe a month in detail ahead. No more. You make this big elaborate arc for a guy that lasts 6 months and he doesn't get over then you just screwed yourself and wasted a bunch of time writing.

I think they have 8-12 basic templates that have 3-5 different alterations and each of those 24-60 basic stories are always told differently because of the unique characters. You have your underdog babyface like DB and a few ways to handle him, monster like Ryback and your ways to handle him. The wrestlers have to make it unique. There is only so many different stories you can tell over time. Pro wrestling has never been known for its continuity.

 

[CaptainZaltan]

As others have pointed out (in some cases with unnecessary obnoxiousness), the problem with your idea is that it's just not practical. Obviously there's injuries, crowd reactions (that are ignored anyway, because IWC something something), and the usual backstage politics to consider. Another issue with long term writing is that the WWE's stories are often predictable, and waiting a long time to get to an outcome that's obvious is already one of the biggest problems with pro wrestling.

And if anything, the WWE is already guilty of sticking to their guns regardless of circumstance. They wanted Daniel Bryan out of the main event for the sake of the Big Show, and they stuck with it regardless of crowd reaction. They wanted Rock/Cena at Mania for the WWE title, and they didn't let Punk's title streak stand in the way of setting it up. They want Cena to be the top baby face, and they keep him in that position even when he gets booed out of the building night after night. They want AJ Lee to be a heel for not liking shitty reality shows or something, and they are sticking to that even when their own polls tell them the fans disagree. In fact, aside from temporarily deviating whenever the crowds reactions get too loud to ignore (usually long enough to give them a half assed version of what they were clamouring for and piss all over it), the WWE has basically been staying the course. If anything, I'd like them to be more dynamic and more reactionary to the audience. I'd like to believe that a new Steve Austin could be born from the current roster, unexpected but embraced and pushed whole-heartedly because it's what the fans asked for. That if you can get over, the WWE will push you over the top and make you a star. I haven't believed that the WWE was completely willing, or completely able, to do that for quite some time now. And that unpredictability is sorely missed.

That being said, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the WWE to at least have a general game plan in mind, and to adhere to it enough to provide a logical beginning, middle and ending to their stories. The specifics may change as circumstances dictate, but it's important to follow through on the story that's been told so far, providing viewers with reasonable conclusions and tying up loose ends, and above all else making the outcomes matter. As someone mentioned earlier, Breaking Bad changed plans for the major antagonist of season 3, but they still provided a great conclusion to the twins storyline, and even incorporated it into the revised game plan. It wasn't just dropped or ignored (as so often happens in pro wrestling). If the WWE expects us to spend money to follow their stories, they should at least treat them as if they matter within continuity, even if the original plans fall through. With good writers that have the fans confidence, the audience will roll along with story lines even in the face of unexpected twists and turns (whether planned or dictated by circumstance).

As a side note, I do completely agree with you that the WWE should be judged in comparison to other scripted tv shows, because I think that casts the quality of entertainment they are providing in a much harsher and more realistic light. They need to provide story lines that can compete with the best shows on tv, not just TNA or past wrestling shows, if they want viewers to tune in.

 

[Limitless]

In my opinion WWE needs to cut down to one show. They have to much wrestling on tv, which is killing it. They are writing for 6 hours of TV or more a week, not mention Total Divas bull****. WWE needs to drop to Raw and Raw only. They have a 3 hour show every week and keep the current roster, or hell trim it down. Santino,Khali,Los Matadors, prime time players, 3mb, ect... need less time on TV.

WWE needs to bring back the hype of monday nights. Raw just seems like another show to me. The writers could focus on Raw and make it intriguing again, instead they are trying to cram all these hours of TV, without spoiling a feud. However if you can not build a feud properly or have to much time on your hands, well you need help. WWE does need long term plans, but they do need to listen to the audience.

They are marketing for kids, which my own kid goes to bed around 8-9. That leaves him with maybe 2-3 hours a week for wrestling out of the 6-7 they are trying to thrown in. Stephanie said that women are close to 40% of the demographic, and that's a good thing?

WWE needs to write for the young male demographic, they are the real reason for WWF and WCW success. Women will throw WWE a twitter follow and will go to an event if she has a kid, but a "Fan"?... come on. Out of her 40% maybe 5% are Real Fans. What does that say about wrestling, if 40 % is Women?... something is wrong.

The writing is just a small part of the problem and yes they do need to fix it soon, but WWE is sinking because of other issues. Walking dead, breaking bad, game of thrones, are successful because it is well written, but imagine if the went after kids or women, they would be mediocre at best and soon cancelled. You can not deliver a cutting edge show, and than pull safe mode on people it just doesn't work.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

That being said, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the WWE to at least have a general game plan in mind, and to adhere to it enough to provide a logical beginning, middle and ending to their stories. The specifics may change as circumstances dictate, but it's important to follow through on the story that's been told so far, providing viewers with reasonable conclusions and tying up loose ends, and above all else making the outcomes matter.

That's exactly what I meant.

As a side note, I do completely agree with you that the WWE should be judged in comparison to other scripted tv shows, because I think that casts the quality of entertainment they are providing in a much harsher and more realistic light. They need to provide story lines that can compete with the best shows on tv, not just TNA or past wrestling shows, if they want viewers to tune in.

Agreed. It's not that WWE's product is similar to other TV shows, but WWE is asking us to spend around 5-10 hours of our weeks watching WWE programming. You can watch a whole season of Game of Thrones in the time WWE wants you to spend watching their shows. If they want us to watch their show over the rest of TV, they need to step up the plate and make their show's quality on par with the rest of TV.

 

[Eyebrows]

As a side note, I do completely agree with you that the WWE should be judged in comparison to other scripted tv shows, because I think that casts the quality of entertainment they are providing in a much harsher and more realistic light. They need to provide story lines that can compete with the best shows on tv, not just TNA or past wrestling shows, if they want viewers to tune in.

While I agree with you and Feedback on most of what you're saying and concede that the WWE needs to offer a compelling show to draw people in I don't think that they do need to compete with the best shows on TV to draw people in. They've never had to do that to draw in viewers before. The ratings that they got during the Attitude Era weren't because of Emmy award winning writing. 'Chop Off Your Pee-Pee', Al Snow eating Pepper and Rock Bottoms into the Dog Poop weren't competing with the likes of The West Wing and The Sopranos.

I know I've picked some of the worst parts there and that there were also some great moments but I still think the basic principle stands. WWE's direct competition is other sports and it's other sports that tend to make a dent on their viewership rather than HBO dramas. Shows tend to compete with each other within the same-genre, like Seinfeld/Friends. WWE happens to be the only one of it's kind in it's genre outside of TNA and that almost monopoly that it has in the industry is a problem in and of itself.

I think a lot of the problem is actually too much scripting. The bullet-point formula worked because it allowed people to show their personality. On Breaking Bad and The Sopranos they're outstanding actors who can do lots of takes and add their own verbal tics and whatnot in order to make outstanding writers' words work for them. Wrestlers aren't as good actors as that and outside of a few they don't sound convincing because they're speaking the words of some guy in the back that's never been put in front of a live audience. The excess of rigidity in the product, not just in the scripts but in what is presented to us in *most* of the matches outside of the gems that we still get sometimes is what's causing it to look stale IMO.