Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Alienoid06
While that all sounds rosy, and it makes a lot of sense, I'd rather they stick out the roster split.
|
That's cool, and a lot of wrestling "pundits" would tend to lean that way as well.
My question, is why?
Other than the fact that the WWE can create more House Shows with a split roster (and more International events I guess), can you REALLY see the roster split panning out?
It's been what?.....almost THREE years now?
While new stars such as Lesnar, Cena, Guerrero, JBL, Edge, Orton, etc. were created (or elevated), it had MUCH more to do with their gimmicks (as opposed to getting more television time).
It's been THREE years, and I still stand by my original comment on that. Do you REALLY think that it would make THAT much difference if Carlitto Carribbean Cool (or anyone else with a good gimmick in your opinion) got 3 minutes of TV time instead of 5-6?
Your scenerio of having the WWE create a NEW draft/split is good..........but only in theory.
Based on the way that the WWE has conducted itself in the past, can you honestly see the WWE trying to move "established stars" to Smackdown?
I mean - people (me included) talk a LOT about how *insert upper-card RAW wrestler here* should move to Smackdown to "balance things out."
IT WILL NEVER EVVVVVVVVVVVVVER HAPPEN!
Even if Smackdown gets decent ratings and somewhat respectable attendance, etc.......
Why settle for mediocrity?
If Smackdown (or RAW) scores a 3.9 in ratings, gets 7,000 people at their televised show, and gets 4,000 at their House Show.............is this a "success"?.........or is it just "getting by"?
Fuck that!
Why just "get by", when your show can be the greatest fucking thing since sliced bread?
I apologize for having to talk about the subject of the roster split about 55,545,654,767,243,543,765 times, but c'mon already. :foc:
To quote one of my favorite sports-entertainers of all-time (and god bless his soul),
"Enough is enough, and its time for a change".