Alright, this is probably really stupid

[Mr. Nerfect]

But it's been on my mind for a while. Maybe there's something really obvious I am missing. I get that the WWE is marketing itself towards a younger crowd. But they still have elements to appeal to that older demographic, right? And why not? That allows them to maximise their profits and such. Now, a former member of the WWE creative team recently went on the record and said that the writers thought that John Cena would be "the guy" for the kids, while Orton would be "the guy" for older audiences.

In the recent draft, Orton was moved to SmackDown!. Now, I know that he is not as big a star as Cena (which I expect will be many people's answer to this question) -- but wouldn't Cena, a guy who is obviously marketed towards younger audiences -- be more beneficial on a show that airs on a Friday night? Older audiences would be out partying, etc. Children, however, would be home and ready to watch SmackDown! -- which has got some popular acts, but doesn't have that "kiddie attraction," like a John Cena or a Rey Mysterio.

Basically, my question is: Do you think that maybe the WWE should present SmackDown! as the younger show, and use RAW for more mature storylines? Would there have been more to gain if the biggest star in the WWE went to the Friday night show, while Randy Orton became the Apex Predator on Monday nights? They could still have moved over Rey Mysterio as a "kiddie attraction," on RAW, also to keep him on opposing brands to Sin Cara, who needs the edited environment.