Lol, not gonna happen

Making Smackdown live won't change anything.

Nor will moving it off Friday. Its ratings weren't significantly affected by the move to Fridays and it's completely irrational to believe that more people would watch or care simply because it was no longer on Fridays.

Needs more Christy Hemme

Wait

I know that, but it should. Remember when Trips was drafted to SmackDown and BIschoff offered T-Lo both Booker T and The Dudleyz to get him back. One Triple H is worth both Booker and two Dudleys???

Well, it sounds about right now, but this was back when Booker, Bubba and D-Von were under contract to WWE, therefore they should have been protecting their worth in the fans' eyes.

Nowadays, reckon TNA would swap their entire roster for Triple H? If anything, just so Jeff Jarrett can get his win back.

I dunno about that, man. I'm in the demographic which they are targeting, and so are you, and I don't know about you, but at 10pm on a Friday night I'm out getting drunk or doing shit, not watching TV. If it was on a Thursday, when I'm in doing nothing, I'd be more likely to watch.

But the ratings didn't change. I think that speaks more specifically than what you or I might do on a Friday night.

Note also that the shows leads in the 18-35 demographic. I know Friday's kind of a dead night, but the ratings didn't change with the change of night, so that really is saying something.

Wait, don't you see? It's genius.

Take Smackdown off of Fridays. Ratings go up.

Put it back on Fridays. Ratings don't change.

Take it back off of Fridays. Ratings go up again.

You could do this like, monthly, and ratings would exponentially increase forever

BRILLIANT! Why didn't I think of that?

To me, that worryingly suggests that there are only hardcores left watching. You would think that with a change from Thursdays, a more traditional high-ratings TV night, to a Friday you would be in danger of losing all your casual viewers, with only the die-hards sticking with it. The casual fans in the targeted demographic would be out doing their Friday night thang. That the ratings weren't affected could mean there were no casuals left to begin with.

It's speculation, but it's a possibility. A change back to a Thursday would at least leave the door open for a greater increase of new/casual viewership more than a Friday slot does.

But if there were only hardcore fans left in the first place, the odds that people would be attracted by a change to Thursdays (Or another night) is increasingly unlikely. You can't say, logically, that despite the fact (Under this speculation, of course) that they had no casual fans before the move, that they would then gain casual fans by a move back. They'd had a fairly steady ratings base for a couple of years, which would rationally indicate that if only hardcore fans were watching it, it'd been that way for a while. So why would it change now?

Nah, I'm not saying it would change if they moved. I'm saying if, and for, the product to get hot and ratings to rise, there needs to be a greater pool of potential viewers. There are most likely more potential viewers on a Thursday than a Friday. A change of day won't make a blind bit of difference to the ratings trend, a decrease is more likely than anything simply because the show goes out of everyone's viewing routine... but down the line, it could prove more beneficial, if suddenly SmackDown becomes worth watching.

SmackDown has a fever, and the only cure is more cowbell!

Bogus. The ratings hardly matter for Friday television. Shows that air during the prime time slots on Fridays and Saturdays are knowingly "tivo'd" and therefore the ratings aren't of much concern.

Triple H going to SmackDown! would also hasten its priority with the WWE. They might put some effort into making sure the show's production is as effective as possible, and they might even make the show live. This is good for all involved.

I think what would be even better, though, is the aforementioned suggestion of Shawn Michaels and John Cena heading to SmackDown!/ECW.

I kind of have to laugh at this whole "certain people won't go to Smackdown" bit, by the way. I mean, WWE made it the B-Show, so now it has a negative reputation attached to it. Of course people aren't going to want to be the second tier.

I dunno about that, aye.

Making SmackDown! live would be an added expenditure for the WWE, but it adds a sense of "urgency" to the show, I believe. With Smackers going on the air live, and Michael Hayes continuing to write the show, I think you'd have the most exciting televised wrestling show going.

Being live would just generally move SmackDown!'s stock up slightly as being less of a "B show," which could make it more of a desired place to work for guys like Shawn Michaels and Triple H.

As far as the ratings go, figures don't like, but I will say this: Just because ratings didn't go down when SmackDown! became "Friday Night SmackDown!," that doesn't necessarily mean that there won't be a change if the show changes timeslots again.

Let's say SmackDown! airs live every Tuesday: This might change ratings because everyone might still be in a "wrestling mood" from Monday. When there's a PPV on, that's 6-7 good solid hours of wrestling, which for a fan might make it a lot easier to digest (assuming the programming is good).

The WWE could also promote the hell out of it, and make moving back to even Thursdays a big deal. "Now you can watch SmackDown! and go out on Friday night," "Really? Wow, that sounds a little better than what it was, I might view now because I can do so consistently because my Thursdays are boring."

You are also moving to a new network, with perhaps a new marketing campaign. There is no reason to assume that there is no way anything about the way the show is perceived will change.

I don't know if I'm making a clear point, because I'm fairly intoxicated, but basically I don't believe that SmackDown! moving to Fridays is necessarily equal to SmackDown! moving to Thursdays.

Lol, Smackers

Which is exactly why people should be sent there: to shatter that stigma.

The Undertaker has worked on SmackDown! pretty consistently without complaint, as did Kurt Angle. Those two men really deserve credit for that, I think, as they didn't whine about not being on RAW, much like Triple H, Shawn Michaels and Batista apparently have.

To answer your question, though, if I were a wrestler and I wanted to prove my absolute worth to the WWE, I'd probably take a SmackDown! assignment without hesitation. Much like some actors may think they can save a crappy movie with their performance, I think there must be some wrestlers out there that thinks they could save SmackDown! with their performance.

Plus, SmackDown! has some pretty good writing, a better backstage morale (if you believe reports) and occasionally gets higher ratings. The show is completely salvageable, so if I were a guy with a massive ego, I'd probably give it a shot just to say "Hey, Vince, I'm saving this show."

It'd be less of a B show, but it still wouldn't be the A show.


Putting it on Tuesday still makes it the second wrestling show to come on that week--in other words, RAW's Thunder. You start the week with RAW. RAW's the foundation of the wrestling fan's week. RAW is the show right after a PPV.


And then later there's also Smackdown.

Smackdown might be the better option for up-and-coming guys, where they can avoid the politics and not be overshadowed... but Batista's main complaint was that he was a big fish in a small pond. You can only get so far up the ladder on the B show--to really make friends and play the game to pull the strings, all the shit's on RAW.

Also, WWE has shown many times that they intend for it to be this way. One guy wrestling really well on Smackdown isn't going to make Vince suddenly wake up and realize that there's some good shit on that program.

source: gerweck.net


SD fails at targeting young women! :n:

The CW fails at targeting people at all



All of its show suck dick

I don't disagree with you, but Vince's son-in-law "saving SmackDown!," must sound like a great angle to Triple H, Vince and Stephanie.

All the evidence says no. Reason says no. You can hope for something to the contrary, but there is no logical reason to believe any of this true.

It's a better option to a certain point.

Indeed.

People complain about the brand split, and then complain again when wrestlers get released. There'll be TONS more releases if they ever re-merged the brands, guys. Trust me on that one.

Hey, what about putting Smackdown on the Weather Channel?
A weather ticker during Smackdown! and local weather on the 8's!
Who could pass that up? :D

I bet RHS couldn't.

It would only be dead wood. I'm not one to give a shit when a guy gets released. If WWE sees potential in them, they might have a career there, if not, why keep them around to job non-stop... if they're any good and underrated by WWE, they'd never get a fair shiot anyway, they're better off elsewhere.

What evidence? I mean, sure, Thursdays to Fridays didn't have a massive negative effect, and while it seems simple enough to jump to the conclusion that a move from Thursdays to Fridays is exactly the same as a move from Friday to Tuesday, but I don't think it would be.

I wouldn't be surprised if nothing changed, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did, either.

I never got this. The WWE would have the exact same amount of time each week. Sure, some guys would probably appear on all-three shows, which might make a few releases here and there, but I trust they would be the "makeshift" main events used to fill cracks where the brands don't have enough main event guys.

For example, I can see Snitsky, Mike Knox, Mark Henry and Big Daddy V all being released, because the WWE would now be able to shift a few generic big men between the brands, and there would be consistency throughout the main event.

If mid-card guys were to be released, it provides more ammo for promotions like TNA and ROH. It gives a slightly increased chance of legitimate competition (still as small as the percentage may be) to the WWE.

Hardcore Holly and Tommy Dreamer would probably take backstage roles, as might someone like Val Venis (unless they wanted him to keep jobbing). If anything, it would probably give a much needed clean to the rosters.

Perhaps the biggest casualties, would be in the referee/commentator department. Without a brand split, the WWE might have some guys pull double or even triple duty. For example, without ECW needing its own voice with the brand split not in place, Joey Styles may be released in favour of Jim Ross. I could also see Tazz moved back to SmackDown! and Jerry Lawler doing ECW with Ross, as well.

This would allow Joey Styles to sign on with either TNA or ROH, though, and provide them with an awesome voice to call their product. If anyone can make sense of TNA, it would be Joey Styles.

Mike Knox is still around?? :eek:

The only issue I could see the WWE making about a possible live SD on Tuesday move would be that it would put ECW into a kind of a stalemate. ECW would also air live on Tuesday. Even though people that are not in the IWC crowd know about the "talent exchange", they might not know nor care that the shows are both filmed from the same venue for that week, and thus get kind of iffy about what the WWE is trying to pull there (may be wanting people to THINK that they are doing SD on a 7 second delay instead of a 3 day one). Just what I would expect the WWE to try to say about that.

I read on Wiki (take it for what it's worth, then) that MyNetwork TV is also an option open to them. This would be outright horrible in my market, because we have one of those stations that have a FOX affiliation on their digital subchannel (don't even get me started on how badly they handly HD sometimes), and those kinds of FOX affiliations, I assume if they do this like this channel does, shows the MNTV feed starting at 11. This would mean that I wouldn't be able to get a chance to see it until after 11 (assuming I would want to watch it that week). Seeing as how many people in my area are HUGE marks for the WWE, this could be an issue for them.

Then again, weren't there numerous rumors every now and again in the past few years about FOX wanting it?

BTW, Noid, you sold me on everything you said EXCEPT the notion that Hayes is a good writer. Hayes has been known to do many things to piss some of the wrestlers off (he was THE reason Bobby Lashley wanted to move to another brand from SD). His ideas may not be too bad (I was enjoying the whole Palumbo/McCool/Noble thing a few weeks ago), but his "suck my dick or else" approach makes me lose respect for him.

Other than that, though, I think you have some good ideas. I've been campaigning for Shawn to go to another brand (make him do it whether he wants to or not), because he's beaten EVERYONE on RAW, and he just refuses to move for ANYTHING. It would be a fresh change of pace, and it would be VERY unpredictable (bad omen then for the WWE to do that). Triple H could be more willing to at least try it, though. Cena may actually want to go back to SmackDown (dunno for sure). The WWE REALLY needs to stop this "if you make it big on SD you MUST end up on RAW regardless" approach. Sure, they have about 4 stars that get the most draw (Taker, Batista, Rey, and Edge, but that's about it), but it is usually the midcard that is strong on SD, and they have really fucked with it recently. Why in the FUCK did they move Kennedy when he was getting good heat on SD (why the fuck is he still a heel when everyone repeats his catch phrases anyway?)? Jericho would be an AWESOME SD fit, and I read in here about the Umaga rumor, which could help. Finlay is getting some good pops ever since this whole Hornswaggle thing started happening (though does anyone really know WHAT brand he's really on anymore?). There's four already that could strengthen the midcard (which should be what sells SD).

Selfishly, I don't want the best workers going over to SmackDown, because I only watch Raw.

Jericho moving to SmackDown doesn't mean I simply see Jericho on a different day. To me, it means I only ever see him on PPVs that Raw enticed me to buy, in matches I don't give a shit about.

Well, the point of all of this is to get you to WANT to watch SD (or even ECW, for that matter). Letting some of RAW's top people move to SD, then fans would follow. Common sense would say that, if the WWE HAD any.

It would take more than just one or two guys I like moving over to SD to make me a regular viewer.

I definitely think going live will enhance SD's appeal, to me and in general.

The show is stale and overproduced. Going live might give it the edge it has lacked ever since its inception nearly a decade ago.

For instance, I was a big fan of pre-dementia Kurt Angle. But when he jumped ship to SmackDown, I didn't follow.

I still enjoy Undertaker's work, on occasion. But I won't watch SmackDown for him.

I think perception is fact... it has been firmly established as second place on the list of priorities, you have second-place announcers, second-place talent, second-place titles and second-place product quality.

I wouldn't follow Jericho over to SmackDown to watch him flounder against the likes of Khali and Viscera. I may be interested in Jericho vs Taker, Mysterio or Batista, but then they would take place on PPV anyway.

Yeah, it would take more than just that to really get SD to when they seemed to be really strong.

They had good things going for them when back in 03 during the spring and summer. They had some good storylines going (let's just pretend the Zach Gowen signing never happened). Hell, even Hogan was interesting again. Then in 04, they started to destroy it, and then it picked up again during that fall after the 5th anniversary show. They can have their strong points if the WWE doesn't insist on driving people away somehow.

Do something to make it live (having it taped loses some of its appeal, and we'll HAVE to watch to see what happens instead of just reading spoilers), put some more midcarders that we care about, get a booker whose attitude isn't shit and will actually listen to ideas from the wrestlers, and you will have the makings of the strong SD again.