DISCUSSION - Could a 2.5 hour show work for RAW/Smackdown? (roster re-unification)

[Heyman]

Originally Posted by Funky Fly I haven't read any of what you said, but RAW is already 2 hours and 10 minutes.

Well if you haven't read any of what I said, then kindly fuck off (smile). onlykidding.

So? Make it 2:40 (the "extra minutes" still stay in-tact).

If that's not possible, then cut down the length of matches (as we saw during the days of the "attitude era).



So - instead of having a 2:10 show with longer matches, have 2:30 with shorter matches.

-No wrestler gets a significant loss of TV time.
-Matches are shorter and more "result" oriented (smarks will hate it, but the marks will love it. Marks compose of 90-95% of the fanbase anyways).

[Mr. Nerfect]

You bring up a good point as to why I'd like to see it kept in tact.

I can't explain it, you've got me. Guys like Eddie Guerrero and Chris Jericho can do with a bit of time on RAW and SmackDown!, and occassionally Heat & Velocity (as referees or special appearances or something). You bring up some good points, and the only way I can even defend mine is by using the old "talent gone to waste" idea, which I think is stupid anyway

One benefit of bringing the brands back together is PPVs. No more of those awkward brand exclusive PPVs, and each one can tell a story successfully. Royal Rumble, No Way Out, WrestleMania, Backlash, Judgment Day, Fully Loaded, The Great American Bash, Summerslam, Unforgiven, No Mercy, Survivor Series, Armageddon. Or something to the like (I've always liked the name "Fully Loaded" for some reason). You could even slip in a few special holiday themed PPVs as well. A Christmas themed one with proceeds going to charity (to an extent), and maybe an annual New Year's Revolution event.

You've won me over to your side, but I feel given the effort (which you so won't happen, but I still say COULD if the WWE WANTED to do it) RAW & SmackDown! can carry themselves as seperate brands. Add 30 minutes on to every major show, have Heat, Velocity, Afterburn & Bottom Line feature matches, and use Experience as the sole recap show.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Heyman -No wrestler gets a significant loss of TV time. -Matches are shorter and more "result" oriented (smarks will hate it, but the marks will love it. Marks compose of 90-95% of the fanbase anyways).

It's nice in theory, but do you thin kthat they'd reallystick to the formula?

We'd get an extra hour of JBL/HHH a week total, and we'd end up with as few superstars featured.

[Heyman]

Originally Posted by Kane Knight It's nice in theory, but do you thin kthat they'd reallystick to the formula? We'd get an extra hour of JBL/HHH a week total, and we'd end up with as few superstars featured.

In my opinion - it wouldn't be THAT detrimental if a few extra superstars lost too much TV time. So? We see less Charlie Hass, Kenzo Suzuki, Tyson Tomko, and Hurricane?...........big deal! Even IF Triple H and JBL got twice as much TV as everyone else, we'd STILL see Jericho, Guerrero, Benoit, Edge, Cena, Taker, HBK, etc. ALL on television.

No matter who gets TV time (and who doesn't get as much that week), it will be someone of QUALITY. Someone who is 'over'.


In JBL's case for instance - the WWE may actually succeed in making him look like a credible main-eventer (if he was made to look superior to ALL of Triple H, Jericho, Guerrero, Cena, Benoit, etc.etc.etc.).



Here's the way I see it:

Like I said already, a POTENTIAL negative of the rosters being brought back together, is that guys like Guerrero, Cena, and.....Edge? may be somewhat "buried" initially (in light of guys like Triple H, HBK, and Taker all being on the same show). Remember - that's just the WORST CASE SCENERIO however.


Right now on RAW for instance - A guy like Chris Jericho should arguably be a main-eventer, but he's been relegated to the midcards (thanks to the "depth" of RAW).

However - I don't think that ANYONE will dispute the fact that Jericho is one of the "bright spots" of RAW...........and everyone gets "interested" whenever he's on air.

Even if fans no longer see him as a main-event calibre superstar, people still LOVE to see him on their TV sets. People would MUCH rather see a "Chris Jericho" than a Orlando Jordan. The same can be said for Rob Van Dam.


I guess what it would boil down to, is what's more important?

A) Creating more main-eventers? (on a sub-par show)

B) Creating LESS main-eventers (and possibly de-pushing a few wrestlers such as Guerrero, etc.), but having a higher quality show?





Some questions to ponder:



1) If you were an athlete, would you rather be an average football player on a PROFESSIONAL team, or would you rather be a star football player in the "minor leagues" (lots of players of which, are "nobodies")

2) Who would be classified as a "bigger star"? The "star" in the professional leagues (where there is more depth........and due to the perceived "more depth", the #1 star looks even bigger)..............OR the "star" in the minor leagues.


Would a guy like Dave Batista be more "over" if he was the World Champion, or UNDISPUTED champion?

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by Heyman In my opinion - it wouldn't be THAT detrimental if a few extra superstars lost too much TV time. So? We see less Charlie Hass, Kenzo Suzuki, Tyson Tomko, and Hurricane?...........big deal! Even IF Triple H and JBL got twice as much TV as everyone else, we'd STILL see Jericho, Guerrero, Benoit, Edge, Cena, Taker, HBK, etc. ALL on television. No matter who gets TV time (and who doesn't get as much that week), it will be someone of QUALITY. Someone who is 'over'. In JBL's case for instance - the WWE may actually succeed in making him look like a credible main-eventer (if he was made to look superior to ALL of Triple H, Jericho, Guerrero, Cena, Benoit, etc.etc.etc.). Here's the way I see it: Like I said already, a POTENTIAL negative of the rosters being brought back together, is that guys like Guerrero, Cena, and.....Edge? may be somewhat "buried" initially (in light of guys like Triple H, HBK, and Taker all being on the same show). Remember - that's just the WORST CASE SCENERIO however. Right now on RAW for instance - A guy like Chris Jericho should arguably be a main-eventer, but he's been relegated to the midcards (thanks to the "depth" of RAW). However - I don't think that ANYONE will dispute the fact that Jericho is one of the "bright spots" of RAW...........and everyone gets "interested" whenever he's on air. Even if fans no longer see him as a main-event calibre superstar, people still LOVE to see him on their TV sets. People would MUCH rather see a "Chris Jericho" than a Orlando Jordan. The same can be said for Rob Van Dam. I guess what it would boil down to, is what's more important? A) Creating more main-eventers? (on a sub-par show) B) Creating LESS main-eventers (and possibly de-pushing a few wrestlers such as Guerrero, etc.), but having a higher quality show? Some questions to ponder: 1) If you were an athlete, would you rather be an average football player on a PROFESSIONAL team, or would you rather be a star football player in the "minor leagues" (lots of players of which, are "nobodies") 2) Who would be classified as a "bigger star"? The "star" in the professional leagues (where there is more depth........and due to the perceived "more depth", the #1 star looks even bigger)..............OR the "star" in the minor leagues. Would a guy like Dave Batista be more "over" if he was the World Champion, or UNDISPUTED champion?

They're all good points, but with JBL, The Undertaker, Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho, Eddie Guerrero, Booker T, Rob Van Dam, Randy Orton and Triple H all on one brand, would someone like Batista ever get a chance. We're either going to see rapid title changes, or less usperstars getting the title Although this boosts credibility, it could also get more people who think RVD should be champion upset.

BTW, Heyman, I am interested to hear your insight into the current PPV scene. That could make a good discussion sometime (if you haven't already done it).

[Heyman]

Originally Posted by Alienoid06 They're all good points, but with JBL, The Undertaker, Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho, Eddie Guerrero, Booker T, Rob Van Dam, Randy Orton and Triple H all on one brand, would someone like Batista ever get a chance.

Things would definitely be HARDER for a guy like Batista (or any other up and coming superstar). Would the glass ceiling be stronger than ever? Yes. Would less main-event stars be created? Yes. For those "rare" stars that DO 'make it' through the glass ceiling, will they be BIGGER and BRIGHTER than ever? You're damn right.

So basically (in terms of "main-eventers" being potentially created), the QUANTITY will be lower, but the QUALITY will be higher. Quality always beats quantity.

In Batista's case, if management felt that he was working hard behind the scenes, etc. and the FANS really started buying into Batista's character, then I truly believe that he'd be pushed accordingly (LOTS of smarks will disagree with me on this. LOTS of posters tend to believe that there would too much backstage politics, etc., but I remain optimistic).

In the end, a "main-event" Batista (with no roster split) would be far more 'over' and 'respected' than a "main-event" Batista (with a roster split), due to the overall depth of the show.


Speaking of "depth", do you ever wonder why RAW has been more successful in creating 'credible' stars of late than Smackdown? Depth. RAW has guys like Jericho, HBK, Benoit, Kane, and........Triple H who gives other guys credibility. All of these guys have great track records (which allows them to give the 'rub' to others).

Jericho --> Has helped Benjamin, Edge, Christian, Batista, and Orton gain credibility.

Triple H --> helped Benjamin, Orton, and Batista. Helped Benoit earn "main-event" status. Even if Benoit goes to the mid-cards now, a victory over Benoit will mean a lot to that particular wrestler (which will give him credibility amongst the fans). See the rippling effect?

HBK --> Helped Orton, Christian, (helped RVD when he was on RAW).

Kane --> Benoit, Snitsky, Batista, etc.

Benoit --> Helped Orton, Batista, and is in the process of adding to Edge.

On Smackdown.........There's too much distance between Angle/Taker/Show/Guerrero/Booker T............and everyone else. Cena is the only one that has "emerged".


Taker --> Put over Lesnar.........no longer in company. Jobbed to JBL, but completely dominated JBL. Limited credibility given to JBL.

Lesnar --> Put over Angle (already established). Jobbed to Guerrero, but win was made to look flukey. Limited credibility given to Guerrero. Put over Benoit, but Benoit defected to RAW.

Angle --> Jobbed to Guerrero, but win looked flukey. Limited credibility given to Guerrero. Got a convincing return victory over Guerrero at Summerslam. Angle put over Edge, but Edge defected to RAW. Put over Lesnar, but Lesnar was already established. Put over Big Show, but he's already established.

Big Show --> Put over John Cena. Lesnar and Angle were also "put over", but they were already established.

Booker T --> Helped add to Cena's track record. Helped Eddie Guerrero. Helped JBL, but still looked too dominant. Not as much credibility given to JBL.



See where I'm going with this?


If it was up to me, Booker T, Kurt Angle, and Big Show would the "equivalent" of Chris Jericho, Shawn Michaels, and Chris Benoit on Smackdown. They would be "established" past champions (who would win most of their matches), but would be used to 'put over' mid-card talent.

-Big Show should job to Luther Reigns in the future. A heel Charlie Hass would be another guy.

-Booker T should 'put over' Orlando Jordan or Carlitto Carribbean Cool (when he gets healthy). A heel RVD would be awesome as well.

-Kurt Angle should put 'over' John Cena and Eddie Guerrero again.

-Undertaker should job CLEANLY (or almost cleanly) to JBL,

Once Guerrero and/or Cena have defeated Angle, then ONE of them should defeat JBL (who because of Taker, is ESTABLISHED.......and looks almost "unbeatable" like Triple H). Anyone who is even ASSOCIATED with JBL, would be 'over' (like HHH did for Orton, Batista, etc.).


I went on a bit of a tangent there, but I hope you see my point:


RAW is creating better stars right now, because they have the APPEARANCE of depth.........since "established main-event" guys like Jericho, Kane, and Benoit are in the mid-cards......putting others over. When HBK returned at Unforgiven, he seemed like he would have played that role as well (i.e. with Christian).

Do you think its just coincidence that a guy like Shelton Benjamin has gained quite a bit of credibility of late? How about Batista? Is it just coincidence that a guy like Eddie Guerrero isn't as "credible" looking as he should be? How about JBL?

Is it just a coincidence that the Eddie Guerrero/JBL feud from this past summer looked like a COMPLETE joke? (in terms of it being "worthy" as a main-event angle).


The point I'm trying to make, is that the more DEPTH there is, the greater the up-and-coming star looks when he cracks through the proverbial "glass ceiling."


If "shit" puts over "shit", then it's still a pile of "shit" in the end.

BTW, Heyman, I am interested to hear your insight into the current PPV scene. That could make a good discussion sometime (if you haven't already done it).

What exactly would you like me to comment on? (in regards to the PPV scene).

[Mr. Nerfect]

I was just thinking some ideas to make PPVs more exciting and outstanding. I think a PPV like Unforgiven would be much more interesting if it was used as a special event. Maybe have a PPV where all the titles are contested twice? Or maybe have an annual PPV with a Round Robin Challenge style thing going on with the heavyweight title.

Anyway, you bring up an interesting point about the quality, and I really agree with you in a way. It's just a lot of people's favourite wrestlers may be disinigrated in the merging of the rosters. Maybe three main shows would be a better way to go, after a bit of warming up with just RAW & SmackDown!.

Another good point about this is how vulnerable the WWE would be during this time. I don't mean that as a con to rejoining the rosters, but as a pro. TNA have recently jumped leaps and bounds to fight for TV deals and PPV deals. This is the time TNA has to make themselves look on par with the WWE (which could be really diffilicult), but if the WWE changed enough to really change the focus of their shows, it could give TNA the chance to do something big. The WWE is fairly vulnerable now, but TNA is too different right now. The shows layouts seem so different that both appear to be aimed at different audiences.

This gives TNA some more security sure, but it doesn't really do much to compete with the WWE. If the WWE changed back to their "WWE" feel instead of "RAW & SmackDown!" feel, then it would be the same style shows, and would close a few bridges between WWE and TNA. If TNA then moved to Monday night's and had a bit of their show head into WWE RAW's, then it really could rekindle a few competitive Monday Night War flames, and that can only be a good thing.