So, Smackdown is leaving the CW
 

What do you think this means for the future? I'm sure another company will pick them up.

Think they will still be a Friday night show? Or move to Thursday and compete with TNA?

You know you could've at LEAST posted the news story.

and at MOST given us a free sandwich!

I'm sure another company will pick them up.

The things is, though, that not just any other network/channel/whatever you want to call it will do. They need one that has a decent amount of viewers or at least is available across most of America. Since I don't know much about America I'll almost leave it at that: getting on an NBC-owned network is probably their best hope.

And returning to Thursday would also be a lot better since that gives them a larger possible audience, not to mention I'd love to see any sort of ratings war between wrestling shows.

Edit: The news stories are everywhere, btw:
http://www.wwe.com/shows/smackdown/a...wnmovingfromcw
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/art...dustryid=47171
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...e4dc915b1479f8
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/spor...ng_the_cw.html

(etc.)

They should move to TNT and rename Smackdown to Nitro. :shifty:

There's nothing more to add, they are moving, why would I lie?

What harm would it do to actually copy and paste a news story?

When I saw this with no story or anything, my reaction was "Huh? Where the fuck did he hear about this and how did this happen?"

Untold harm, the likes of which have never been seen, it could be like 9/11 times 9864437

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:...es/teamkim.jpg

Plus I didn't feel like it ok? Jeesh!

The question is: Who will have them?

Raw used to primarily be attractive because it would draw consistently top rating numbers, and as we've seen in recent years, they've had trouble negotiating for that. Smackdown does lower numbers on broadcast, where the lowest rated "top" shows outdraw cable by like double.

NBC/Universal seems like a good match, since WWE's already got deals with them for two programs, but remember how quickly they backburnered Saturday Night's Main Event. I'm not sure we can expect them to take in Smackdown! Right now.

Comedy Central should pick them up.

I'm sure a network would take them around this point because of the writers strike.

More shit they can put on TV they dont need writers for.

I love how WWE could use its second-rate (or third-rate?) show to compete with TNA and still blow them out of the water.

Here's the article from WWE.com:

“After a successful decade of SmackDown on both UPN and The CW, World Wrestling Entertainment and The CW and have agreed to conclude our partnership. Since CW's exclusive negotiation period ran out as of last Thursday, January 31, we have been contacted and have been in negotiations with other networks. WWE SmackDown will continue to air on The CW until the conclusion of the 2007-08 broadcast season. We are grateful to Les Moonves, Dawn Ostroff, and their entire organization for bringing WWE SmackDown to millions of viewers for so many years.”

===

My guess is that they'll either go to an NBC broadcast or cable network. Cable is more likely to me.

Could be the end of the brand split come the summer, huh?

Even if SmackDown were to continue, WWE will have to really pack it with star-power to increase ratings and increase their leverage with other companies to carry it.

about time.

I think we are seeing more crossing over (like Mark Henry for no reason what so ever on Raw) so I think they will keep their established rosters, but 1 or 2 guys might show up each week

Smackdown! on Sci-Fi. Right before Flash Gordon and Stargate Atlantis.

They are thinking of moving Mark Henry permanently to Raw to feud with Cena and Umaga to Smackdown.

If no title is involved I approve

Two more hours of TV nobody'll watch.

This. Is not. The end. Of. The brand split. Period.

This much is certain. People, the brand split is very good for WWE for the most part. A unified roster has some benefits, but they don't outweigh the double dip effect WWE gets from multiple brands.

That was rumored for like the last year.

The brand split only exists if they honour it. How long before Raw, too, reaches a "talent exchange" deal with SmackDown and ECW? TV will just be a free for all, despite the brand split in theory still remaining in place.

The brand split works just fine for WWE for the most part (out on the road, keeping guys away from each other to ensure freshness when they fight later on, less pressure/dates for the top guys) but across the board it probably hurts their TV output more than it helps it. If the brand split remained, but anybody could show up on any show at any time, it may help the ratings increase across the three shows. I stress, "may". And at a time when WWE needs all the ammunition it can get to secure a decent deal for it's second most important programme, I would suggest they will be doing EVERYTHING they can to give SmackDown a boost.

The brand split with free borders works best. It allows a maximum amount of talent on a show without forcing them to actually use EVERYONE on every show (which is obviously is what they'd want to do without the split).

Example: Cena is on RAW feuding with Orton. If they wanted to push, say, No Way Out, they'd hold a special RAW match on SmackDown! one week. But the feud wouldn't jeopardize SmackDown! TV every week, only RAW's.

It also opens up more feuds. With this it would be more like the AL and NL in baseball than WWE, WCW and ECW in wrestling.

There's no real harm in doing it honestly, and I think it WOULD improve ratings.

Mark Henry crossed over purely for storyline purposes. They were debating whether Cena was fully healed or not. So they brought out Henry to prove Cena will always be superman, even with no limbs

I can't be the only person here who only watches one show. For me, I watch Raw every week, partly because it's live, and partly because it's just the most convenient show for me to catch. I record ECW and SmackDown on my Sky+ (Tivo) but usually only skip through them or sometimes delete them without ever watching them.

My main regular exposure to SmackDown and ECW's roster comes during PPV shows.

Now, if I'm enjoying a feud, and there is a chance that will carry on over on ECW or on SmackDown, I'm far more likely to actually make a point of watching it as it airs, or at the very least actually sitting and watching my recording of it.

There is no reason why WWE can't continue to promote two seperate house show tours, and make a point of promoting different guys on different shows without making them show exclusive, with only a few select guys/feuds making air more than once in a week.

Example... a feud between, say, Shawn Michaels and Triple H may get hot and spill over across all three shows. But should Umaga be booked for Raw, he won't be on SmackDown that week. Should Kennedy be booked for SmackDown, he won't appear on Raw and so on.

The whole reason for the brand split (as well as promoting seperate PPVs, which failed, and seperate house shows) was to build new stars... there's no reason why they can't limit their guys to one show per week, without maintaining a brand split at all.

It's not going away, but I don't see why there remains a NEED for it.

Wouldn't be surprised if Smackdown ended up on USA or FX.

This could be a perfect opportunity to rebrand the show. Maybe work out a deal whereby it airs live each week. A name change and a new look wouldn't go amiss... it certainly doesn't have the sentimental value of Raw. A grittier show, much like the original switch from boring old Monday Night Raw to The War Zone, aired live each week could be a refreshing shot in the arm for WWE programming.

Have smackdown after ecw

I download Raw almost every week if I can be bothered, but I only read the results of smackdown and ECW. In fact, I've probably only watched about 3 ECW shows, and none of them since D2D.

Among other things, I think the fact that not everyone gets Cable in the US (Broadcast only) and the fact that not everyone who does gets Sci Fi (or even CW) would suggest a lot of people probably only watch one show.

But yeah, I watch 0 shows, but before I was watching no WWE, I watched Raw only. While there are a lot of people I like on Smackdown, they haven't managed to book the show in a way that has made me care about them in ages. Wasted talent. :nono:

Everyonce in a blue moon I hear about something I like happening on Smackdown!, but it hasn't really had me going since the King Booker era.

Was Smackdown wished all the best in it's future when it was released?

I agree that a complete makeover for the brand would be the best thing for it now. Let it go live, and people might actually care. Don't air it on Fridays, and people might actually watch. It may lose the "B show" stigma.

The bright side of SmackDown! now not having a guaranteed future, is that they will probably get a better deal in the rumoured post-WrestleMania draft than they would normally get. The WWE has been known to panic when they lose a TV deal, and they might just be desperate enough to send Shawn Michaels, or even *gasp* John Cena (because you know he would be willing to do it) over to SmackDown! and really help them out with the ratings and the like.

This is good, because Michael Hayes is probably the best writer the WWE has at the moment, although Dusty Rhodes is not bad. Those guys are a part of the SmackDown!/ECW talent exchange, though, so basically a move over to the B/C section might help it graduate, and would get better results out of the performer, most likely.

I've also been reading that some believe that the CW Network has been "iffy" about keepign SmackDown! around, and that this might be a power play by the WWE to get angle them better in the negotions, or something? I didn't really read the article all that intently, but I think that may have been the gist of it.

SmackDown! will unfortunately probably be fine, and still be the same (slightly) underwhelming product it's been for some time now.

It will never lose the B Show stimga as long as Cena and Trips are on RAW

Triple H should take one for the team and move to SmackDown.

Especially if he's turning heel again. They've had their battles, including a WrestleMania, but we've never seen a full-on feud between Trips and The Undertaker. Triple H vs Batista was a hugely successful feud at the box office which may have more chapters left in it. Triple H vs Finlay has potential for a couple of hard fought brawls which could see classic "Triple H 2000" emerge. Triple H vs Rey Mysterio would be fresh if nothing else.

Trips is going to be around forever, he's the only guy on the roster who will never lose his spot (barring divorce), so he should suck it up and take the transfer, and open a world of new possibilities for himself and for WWE. Plus, if he's on SmackDown, I won't have to watch him. :D

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.

That could be the whole booking issue going on. They just can't seem to get anyone to care because they book everyone wrong (this happens on RAW, too, just to be fair on that). They could have some high-profile matches on SD (they have done a semi-decent job doing that kind of thing). Like have a WHC match on SD (that title WAS on RAW until 05, so it's not really the second place title. That would've been the WWE Title, since, if we are going by your logic, was on SD before). Also, give some of these people that we don't care about right now something to do that will make us care. Make Khali do something we're not expecting the WWE to do with a man of that size (be a face, for instance. Why does every hoss of that size have to be a heel in the WWE?), or recycle the Big Show's "A to Z personality" angle that got him some good backing in the Attitude era, and have him come out in these weird-ass outfits and shit, and just show him having fun until you piss him off or something. Give us something DIFFERENT with the hosses and those that are not interesting. We might actually watch them.

By the way, since you brought it up, Cole is a better commentator than JR right now, even though I don't think him and Coach aren't clicking as well as him and JBL did or even him and Tazz. Coach seems to just be going with the motions and not really add any insights that I care to know. SD has been known for having a color guy that could give us "analysis" into what a wrestler should do against an opponent in a match. I thought some of that was lost when JBL did color because he was more of the "rooting the heel" than telling us why a wrestler did what he was doing. Now everything is lost on the Coach (who was never a good commentator anyway). But yeah, Cole is right now better than the JR of today. JR's passion for what's going on seems to not be as genuine as Cole is (even though Styles and Tazz are probably the best out of the three teams right now). Yeah, Cole has made mistakes, but if we're again going by your logic, Cole should be on RAW right now and JR would be moved to SD.

JR is still better than Cole will ever be, but he is just tired and repetitive. The problem isn't so much JR, as his comfort zone. I would definitely mix things up, and put Lawler with Cole on SmackDown. It may make for a reinvigorated Jim Ross to have to adapt and cater for a new color partner.

(By the way, my vote would be Scott Levy :D)