Smackdown as the inferior show

The Volt

I'm starting to get fed up with how Smackdown is suffering at the hands of Raw. Not because of superstars whatever, that comes in phases I think. Every week there's a Raw rebound and a match from The Vault that takes away from the airtime. The show is put together in a way that suggests they know it's inferior to Raw and they want us to feel it too.

Do you feel like this was the aim from the start? Or was there something along the way that made Raw so much more important to the production team?

sky88

Voltwad wrote: »

I'm starting to get fed up with how Smackdown is suffering at the hands of Raw. Not because of superstars whatever, that comes in phases I think. Every week there's a Raw rebound and a match from The Vault that takes away from the airtime. The show is put together in a way that suggests they know it's inferior to Raw and they want us to feel it too.

Do you feel like this was the aim from the start? Or was there something along the way that made Raw so much more important to the production team?

i agree about the raw rebound but i think the vault only happens on sky sports

krudler

Voltwad wrote: »

I'm starting to get fed up with how Smackdown is suffering at the hands of Raw. Not because of superstars whatever, that comes in phases I think. Every week there's a Raw rebound and a match from The Vault that takes away from the airtime. The show is put together in a way that suggests they know it's inferior to Raw and they want us to feel it too.

Do you feel like this was the aim from the start? Or was there something along the way that made Raw so much more important to the production team?

Not really , the raw rebound is for people in america who dont have cable, Raw is on a premium channel Smackdown isnt (afaik), the vault match is to boost the running time as with the amount of ads on American tv we'd be getting an ad break every 5-7 mins instead of every 15 like on Sky

Also SD won the Bragging Rights tournament, so how is it shown as the inferior brand? if anything Smackdown is and has been much better than Raw for months

The Volt

krudler wrote: »

Not really , the raw rebound is for people in america who dont have cable, Raw is on a premium channel Smackdown isnt (afaik), the vault match is to boost the running time as with the amount of ads on American tv we'd be getting an ad break every 5-7 mins instead of every 15 like on Sky

Also SD won the Bragging Rights tournament, so how is it shown as the inferior brand? if anything Smackdown is and has been much better than Raw for months

Thanks for the info re: American ad's. Forgot about that. But if it's to increase the running time, how come Raw doesn't need a vault section?

Rjd2

Voltwad wrote: »

I'm starting to get fed up with how Smackdown is suffering at the hands of Raw. Not because of superstars whatever, that comes in phases I think. Every week there's a Raw rebound and a match from The Vault that takes away from the airtime. The show is put together in a way that suggests they know it's inferior to Raw and they want us to feel it too.

Do you feel like this was the aim from the start? Or was there something along the way that made Raw so much more important to the production team?

The FTV stuff never bothers me, I prefer that to advertisements which the poor yanks have to put up with.

I prefer SD really,no midget, Hunter, Cole or King, plus sensible booking and lots of smartly booked matches get the essential RJD2 thumbs up.

davrho

Voltwad wrote: »

I'm starting to get fed up with how Smackdown is suffering at the hands of Raw.

Its not exactly new. All promotions in all industries will give their flagship product better treatment.

Penn

Lets face it, one show has to be the inferior show, and they'll do everything in their power to make sure it's not the flagship show. Smackdown had a great run after Wrestlemania, now they're trying to take what made Smackdown great and use it on Raw

glenjamin

Raw is suposed to be the WWE's main show that's why so much more time and attention is pumped into it. Raw is dirt at the moment. I hate the guest host thing they do every week, I hate the way matches are rushed, I hate the way it's the same sh!t over and over and I fcuking hate that little bolox Hornswoggle and his gay little segments which only Vince, Hunter and HBK find funny.

Paulegend

Voltwad wrote: »

Thanks for the info re: American ad's. Forgot about that. But if it's to increase the running time, how come Raw doesn't need a vault section?

when raw is onm live its 2 hours and 15 mins approx. when they show the repeat its only 2 hours so they dont need the vault match.

Tricity Bendix

Rjd2 wrote: »

The FTV stuff never bothers me, I prefer that to advertisements which the poor yanks have to put up with.

I prefer SD really,no midget, Hunter, Cole or King, plus sensible booking and lots of smartly booked matches get the essential RJD2 thumbs up.

My problem with the FTV stuff is that they often cut out matches and segments in order to fit it in. If I wanted to watch midcard matches from the 00's I'd look them up on YouTube.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

krudler wrote: »

if anything Smackdown is and has been much better than Raw for months

Smackdown is the main "wrestling" show, raw is the main "child friendly" show. too many gimics of raw, hornswoggle, DX, guest host.......

Headshot

Rjd2 wrote: »

T

I prefer SD really,no midget, Hunter, Cole or King, plus sensible booking and lots of smartly booked matches get the essential RJD2 thumbs up.

headshot vote too

I hate Hunter and midget so any show that doesnt have them on it is ok by me, just a pity they have those bloody unified belts atm

Bounty Hunter

Headshot wrote: »

headshot vote too

I hate Hunter and midget so any show that doesnt have them on it is ok by me, just a pity they have those bloody unified belts atm

have DX even been on SD since they one the belts? not much if they have which is odd with HBK going on about wanting to face Taker at mania again (I know mania is ages away but he is talking about it and the are the tag champs)

Ridley

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

have DX even been on SD since they one the belts? not much if they have which is odd with HBK going on about wanting to face Taker at mania again (I know mania is ages away but he is talking about it and the are the tag champs)

Once, the last Smackdown of 2009 defending the belts in a winning effort against the Hart Dynasty.

davrho

Ernest Defeated Jeep wrote: »

Smackdown is the main "wrestling" show, raw is the main "child friendly" show. too many gimics of raw, hornswoggle, DX, guest host.......

If you time how much "wrestling" is on each show and compare it over a few weeks its roughly the same.

I dont see any difference on the child friendly part. Well maybe one, hornswoggle. Pretty sure he must have folk buying merchandise or he would not be there.

Rjd2

davrho wrote: »

If you time how much "wrestling" is on each show and compare it over a few weeks its roughly the same.

I dont see any difference on the child friendly part. Well maybe one, hornswoggle. Pretty sure he must have folk buying merchandise or he would not be there.

Nobody knows how much merch of Hornswoggle he is selling, personally I assume its a bit but I doubt its anything to substantial, until I see him in charts their is no reason for me to think otherwise.
SD after a brutal few months after Jeff left has improved so much and yep it may not have as much more wrestling as Raw, their seems to be much more focus on the whole show.

are you honestly going to tell me that Raw is a more enjoyable show right now?

davrho

Rjd2 wrote: »

are you honestly going to tell me that Raw is a more enjoyable show right now?

Where did I say that? I only said there is as much "wrestling" on Raw as there is on Smackdown.
I judge the shows on a week to week basis and not as a whole package as the quality of both shows can swing from good to bad weekly. I though Smackdown before Taker and Tista was miles ahead of Raw every week but not anymore.

glenjamin

davrho wrote: »

Where did I say that? I only said there is as much "wrestling" on Raw as there is on Smackdown.
I judge the shows on a week to week basis and not as a whole package as the quality of both shows can swing from good to bad weekly. I though Smackdown before Taker and Tista was miles ahead of Raw every week but not anymore.

Smackdown still gets more in ring time than raw and they don't do stupid gimmicks like having a midget beat the crap out of veteran wrestler every week nor do they have their top up and coming superstars go from future world champions to jobbers in a matter of weeks like MVP, Swagger and Bourne. Raw is too predictable and stale. Smackdown is miles ahead is terms of actual wrestling, feuds and quality wrestlers. Remember Jericho is a Smackdown superstar and without him on Raw they would lose any 'class' that they had left.

davrho

glenjamin wrote: »

Smackdown still gets more in ring time than raw and they don't do stupid gimmicks like having a midget beat the crap out of veteran wrestler every week nor do they have their top up and coming superstars go from future world champions to jobbers in a matter of weeks like MVP, Swagger and Bourne. Raw is too predictable and stale. Smackdown is miles ahead is terms of actual wrestling, feuds and quality wrestlers. Remember Jericho is a Smackdown superstar and without him on Raw they would lose any 'class' that they had left.

Time it over a month. Dont include the from the vault and tell me the ring time difference? How much new wrestling do we get?

Another poster who forgets the Hornswoggle/Noble weeks of bull**** on Smackdown...........


Who predicted Seamus World Champ? Taker getting the belt that was a fresh concept. Lets have Batista fighting him at all the ppv's . Your right not very predictable. Both shows suffer the same problems...

As I said for months Smackdown was better on a weekly basis. You cannot guarantee it anymore.

I am not going to get into fanboy debate as its all been done before but many posters seem to ignore mirror image issues on their preferred show.

glenjamin

davrho wrote: »

Time it over a month. Dont include the from the vault and tell me the ring time difference? How much new wrestling do we get?

Another poster who forgets the Hornswoggle/Noble weeks of bull**** on Smackdown...........

The thread is about who is the inferior show now not 2 years ago. I am just pointing out that Smackdown has overtaken Raw for the past couple of months.

Who predicted Seamus World Champ? Taker getting the belt that was a fresh concept. Lets have Batista fighting him at all the ppv's . Your right not very predictable. Both shows suffer the same problems...

I'll admit the Sheamus world champ push came out of nowhere but if you weren't to include the TLC PPV, the 9 PPVs before that for the WWE Championship had 5 different wrestlers at different times competing (countless Cena v Orton matches) whilst the World Heavyweight had 8 different wrestlers (and Batista and Taker in the same match just twice. Once a 1-on-1 and the other the fatal four way. Batista faced Orton more for the WWE Championship than in singles matches than he did Taker.).

As I said for months Smackdown was better on a weekly basis. You cannot guarantee it anymore.

I am not going to get into fanboy debate as its all been done before but many posters seem to ignore mirror image issues on their preferred show.

I still think Smackdown's more of a pull than Raw is in terms of matches. Compare Sheamus to McIntyre for example. They both arrived at virtually the same time and were both given good pushes. Sheamus by winning the WWE Championship and McIntyre the Intercontinental and also being described by Vince McMahon as a future world champion. But if you look at Sheamus' matches on Raw he's bearly given 3 minutes. I would much rather watch McIntyre than Sheamus at the moment.

That's just my opinion but from what I've read from wrestling journalists and WWE bloggers is that Smackdown is the better show in this moment in time.

davrho

glenjamin wrote: »

The thread is about who is the inferior show now not 2 years ago.

No its not. The OP was wanting to know why Smackdown gets the inferior treatment.

The answer is simple. Raw is the wwe flagship show.

All the internet debate in the world wont change this.

glenjamin

davrho wrote: »

No its not. The OP was wanting to know why Smackdown gets the inferior treatment.

The answer is simple. Raw is the wwe flagship show.

All the internet debate in the world wont change this.

Wait I already posted the reason behind this in my first post and that was down to Raw being the WWE's main show!! WTF are we arguing about then???

GarTss

personally I think that eventually it wont matter which one is better or treated better because with all these talent exchanges etc. the brand divisions aren't as strict as they were in say 2004. In a few years it will probably go back to the days were it was just one roster who appeared on both shows with perhaps more factions, I think thats what the wwe needs to be honest

davrho

GarTss wrote: »

personally I think that eventually it wont matter which one is better or treated better because with all these talent exchanges etc. the brand divisions aren't as strict as they were in say 2004. In a few years it will probably go back to the days were it was just one roster who appeared on both shows with perhaps more factions, I think thats what the wwe needs to be honest

It will matter to the corporate sponsers, advertisers and tv executives who pay top dollar to have Raw as the flagship show.

I agree its what wwe needs but the people who make these decisions put profit before entertainment.

GarTss

but they done it before, when WWF was just at its peak

davrho

GarTss wrote: »

but they done it before, when WWF was just at its peak

When wwf was at its peak ,popularity wise, the business side was still in the dark ages. They had no idea how to channel their income to maximise profit.

This does not help us who want entertained. Profit is sadly more important now