![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
That's Not My Name
Posts: 9,086
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Ending the brand split would mean half as many live events. Not a great way to make more money.
Even if they still run B-shows instead of, say, SmackDown shows (I know, I know...) they will still be tarnished with the "lesser show" label, although the Intercontinental title used to draw well on the B-Show circuit in the 80s. Doubt it would today unless it was worn by the likes of Batista or Jericho, which I'm sure would be a move derided by fans and the wrestlers as a step-down. They've invested too heavily in the brand split for the last 7 years for it to end now, whether we like it or not. A large number of their current fans have probably never seen a WWE product that didn't have a divided roster. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Ron Paul 4 EVA
Posts: 152,467
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
And that is the only real point that matters. There are a bunch of pros to this as far as WWE is concerned. There are certainly cons, even in their minds. But being able to market "Raw" and "Smackdown" house shows is more beneficial than the "TV tapings" and "Also rans." That alone is probably going to keep things going. That and Triple H probably doesn't want to work Mondays.
|
![]() |
![]() |