View Single Post
Old 04-18-2016, 10:10 AM   #24809
Noid
01/05/08
 
Posts: 44,509
Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Noid makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Cruz View Post
I think a brand split with the champions all being cross-branded could work just fine in theory but I doubt WWE would execute it properly. I'm imagining Reigns mostly working on Raw, feuding with say Chris Jericho. Then that feud ends and he happens to start something on SmackDown and then starts showing up there more frequently. And when Reigns isn't on Raw, they make the IC Title feud going on a focal part of that show along with focusing on non-belt related feuds.

That's actually how they ran it during the early days of the brand extension, in fact they outright said back then that Raw and SmackDown would alternate #1 contenders so it made sense that the floating champion didn't always have to be on both shows even though he technically could.

But again I have my doubts that WWE would do that. Raw would need a larger roster with the extra hour to fill and I'd bet Vince is just of the mindset that the World champion always needs to be on Raw. So that would mean re-splitting the belts which is an idea I just can't support now.
That's my thing. I totally get the idea of one World Champion, I do. The thing is, if you want them to be separate entities -- completely separate entities -- why would they recognise another's World Champion? And if you have them write separately to create the idea of competition, then how do you go about rostering champions?

You could do something where one month RAW gets the World Champ and SmackDown gets the Women's Champ -- an attempt to make them equal -- but you box yourself into month-long programs. Having two "World" Champs creates a dynamic where each show has a top guy that gets to carry house shows and such, but isn't pressured with carrying the whole company. And that worked fine until they decided to have two World Champs on one show. That's when that shit became too much.

Having two separate shows where the idea is to get hot over the other brings everybody up, and I do think that requires complete isolation. You have your guys and gals, and we have ours. May the hottest program headline. RAW can focus on the RAW stars and champs, and SmackDown can focus on SmackDown. Plus, you can then go back to having Money in the Bank feature two Ladder Matches, which means that you don't get 8 guys that are too big for it in one match. The Rumble gets some mystique back as guys that don't usually fight end up fighting. King of the Ring can not feel not like it's excluding a whole bunch of guys that should be in it, etc.
Noid is offline   Reply With Quote