Jump to content

Brand Split, Good or Bad for business?


Spiritchaser
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey :xyx

 

I goota go the logical route here, business is bad in WWE at present for a number of reasons, but the biggest one has to be the brand split.

 

The monotonous matches on PPV over and over again, with JBL and HCubed winning time and again is just becoming tedious, if the brands again merged would it make business better or worse?

 

For me it can only make it better, but please try not to give mights or maybes in this thread.

 

There are many reasons why RAW and Smackdown should remain as individual entities, but there should be interaction between the shows, as for too much talent, well it just gives the performers more time to recover from any niggling injuries and to be with their families a bit more, I mean The Dudleys have been gone for a while now and even when they come back there is no guarantee they will enliven things.

 

Where there is a will there is a way.

 

Spiritchaser

Against the Split!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No mights or maybes but they cant put them back together because of the amount of superstars, but they could join the shows back up and let some perform on SD and some on Raw and let them perform on each show different weeks.

 

But I cant see it happenining because it will be alot harder for the superstars to travel, plus other reasons but my answer to your question in my opinion is it would be better for us the fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am sick of the "fans" saying that the roster split sucks if it was ended every fued will be done to death and the WWE will be stuck like they were after the invasion angle.

 

This isnt even close to being true. The WWF boomed from 1984 - 1991 and survived from 1992 - 1996 before booming again in 1997 - 2001...throughout ALL those years, there was no stupid roster split. So you're saying that the WWE would be crap without the roster split when, infact, it was a much more profitable and more enjoyable company when there was no such thing.

 

No other wrestling company has a roster split either, or ever has...WCW never did, are you saying they were stuck? Nope...ECW, TNA...no roster split....

 

People are acting as if if WWE dropped the roster split, the company would go under or something rediculous like that, or that the company would grow stale...thats not true at all! The company worked fine running without any stupid roster split until late 2002, and it did great...it could easily revert back, drop all the dead weight and combine the big stars again...lets be honest, SmackDown! is a load of ****, its pitiful, its PATHETIC...if that show disappeared I doubt many people would give a rats ass, why? Because they have only half the stars they could have....as a matter of fact, their roster overall is a farce, and will never EVER be sucessful with the talent they have.

 

Roster split = slow death of WWE.

 

Dont believe me? We'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen when the roster split originally happened there was a need for a roster split as there were too many wrestlers after merging with wcw and ecw

 

But now after the many firings wwe do not have the depth of quality performers to have a roster split anymore

 

 

Look at the names that have gone

 

The Rock

Stone Cold

Goldberg

Brock Lesnar

Ernest "The Cat" Miller lol

 

Thats put a big dint in the roster that ending the roster split could help fix

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all due respect to Spiritchaser-This is beating a dead horse over and over again-Ive had and read this discussion so many times that it totally annoys me nowadays. But to answer your question I think the roster split is a good thing as it allows more WWE talent air time and gives the talent less dates which makes them more fresher to compete. I personally would love to see the split continue.

 

But most WWE fans dont (or wont) see the benefits of a split (and never will) and maybe its time for WWE to at least seriously consider giving the majority of fans what they want by bringing the roster back together.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason everybody is hating the WWE at the moment is because of long title reigns by heels. I enjoy that but the majority dont.

 

The reason everyone hates the WWE right now is because of terrible booking. How many times do you want to see h3 with the title? I'm not trying to try and turn this into a h3 bashing thread, but come on. They should have a system set up where there is interaction between shows. We're getting tired of the same old fueds over and over. And switching 6 wrestlers or so a year really doesn't help either.

 

As for the split I'm undecided. It gets tedious seeing the same fueds repeatedly, but they have pushed some new talent since they don't have huge stars taking up all the tv time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am sick of the "fans" saying that the roster split sucks if it was ended every fued will be done to death and the WWE will be stuck like they were after the invasion angle.

 

Please don't use quote marks around the word fans we are all fans of wrestling for whatever our personal reasons are, it is very insulting when someone does that.

 

I've been a fan for almost 30 years, so I reserve the right to feel insulted.

 

Spiritchaser

From the Dawn of Time :thumbsup

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone please give me an actual reason as to why the roster split is bad. All I see reasons for it being bad is stuff like lack of stars etc. Yeah true they aren't building any new stars, but that's the writers fault, not the brand split's fault. In theory it should work, just unfortunately there is idiots writing the shows.

 

Thus when it becomes 1 roster, it will be the same idiots writing, the same feuds between the same people, and still no new stars being created, so what would be the big difference?

 

If anyone actually believes a roster split could be the reason for killing WWE, that's just stupid and ignoring the real reasons. I.e the booking is terrible, and making no new stars= the death of WWE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the idea was good when it first happened. It gave all the talent a chance to shine. But I'm now of the opinion that if it is to continue, WWE needs more fresh faces with talent in the ring. (i.e. NOT guys like Tomko and Heidenreich). Otherwise they might just as well drop the roster split.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

See that's an ideal answer that I totally agree with, but when you look at the guys they do push (JBL, Heidenreich, Snitsky etc) compared to the guys they perhaps should like the cruisers, Jericho, Booker etc, then you see why I think having 1 roster, would mean you'd get the guys who are doing at least alright now, becoming cannon fodder to those 3 stiffs I mentioned. As I said it's the roster split thats wrong, it's the booking. And for anybody who says "the majority of fans want the roster split ended" just go have a look at how many people so far, who want it ended.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'll be brief. I used to watch Smackdown! Now I don't. I do not buy Smackdown PPVs, and think twice about watching them even when they are on for free.

The brand split means I am a loyal RAW follower only and therefore watch 1/2 as much of WWE product as I used to. This is also true for everyone I know.

So based on my personal experience, I cannot see how the split can be good for business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'll be brief. I used to watch Smackdown! Now I don't. I do not buy Smackdown PPVs, and think twice about watching them even when they are on for free.

The brand split means I am a loyal RAW follower only and therefore watch 1/2 as much of WWE product as I used to. This is also true for everyone I know.

So based on my personal experience, I cannot see how the split can be good for business.

 

EXACTLY!!! Same here and same for everybody who I know personally. The fact is, the brand split is the reason that SD! is now the drizzling shits. Not booking, because they dont have enough top shelf name talent on SD! to grab peoples attention and become a sucessful show, why? Because the brand split, thats why!

 

Like I said before, you can have the best booking in the World, but if you're using it on people who the fans dont give a toss about, it wont mean and God-damned thing!

 

Brand split = slow death of WWE.

 

Watch what will happen, eventually the brands will be reunited when Vince stops being so damn stubborn and the shows will pick up, and then everybody saying the brand split is good will have a million excuses as to why the shows have picked up, and none of them will be the admission that the brand split was the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brand split = slow death of WWE.

One of the problems is people have brand loyalty. Whether it be a favourite make of shoes, or cereal or whatever.

The WWE have created a division where people are more loyal to one side or the other of the brand extension. Thus the other brand is relegated to 2nd best, at best.

How can that be good? The question of "which brand is better" must have 1st come up 2 milliseconds after the initial draft lottery. And as soon as that question is asked (hell it's been asked at TWO enough) you have in the minds of the fans a weaker show, a second best show, an inferior brand, a brand you care less about, a brand you begin to not give a crap about and slag off on a regular basis, etc, etc.

But WWE wants us to like all of their product, surely? If so, this dual identity idea is doomed to failure (of course, many would say that it has already failed).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Watch what will happen, eventually the brands will be reunited when Vince stops being so damn stubborn and the shows will pick up, and then everybody saying the brand split is good will have a million excuses as to why the shows have picked up, and none of them will be the admission that the brand split was the problem."

 

Why will the shows pick up? If people don't care about Cena, Eddie, Undertaker, Booker etc now, why would they care about them if it was all one show? And if the booking still sucks on 1 show, then why should anyone care more?

 

If they aren't making any new stars, then it's the writers fault, not the brand split's fault. Does Raw really have that many more stars? It's got Kane, Benoit, HBK, Jericho, HHH and has or at least trying to do Orton and Batista. SD has got Taker, Booker,Eddie Angle, Big Show, and has at least tried to make Cena and JBL. It's not like there's a huge difference. The only real difference is that Raw has better booking. surely thats obvious?

 

Thus if the fans don't give a toss about people on both shows, why would they give a toss about them, if you stuck them on one show? Still the same wrestlers, being booked by the same people.

 

Just think about it logically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why will the shows pick up? If people don't care about Cena' date=' Eddie, Undertaker, Booker etc now, why would they care about them if it was all one show? And if the booking still sucks on 1 show, then why should anyone care more?[/quote']

 

I'm not talking about guys like Eddie, Cena and Taker...those are the name stars I am saying SD! dont have enough of. I'm talking about guys they are feuding with. Taker is feuding with Heidenreich and Luthor Reigns, who cares about those guys? Not many! Eddie is stuck in a tag team working with the lowly Bashams, a team not many people care about. Cena just got through feuding with Angle (well, they had 1 match) which was great. 2 name value stars people care about. Now he will move onto work with JBL, who, even though WWE champion, isnt a big value name star, and again, nobody will care.

 

So, after Cena wins the WWE title, who can he feud with? Luthor? Heidenreich? JBL? Wow, sounds fantastic, doesnt it!

 

Cant you see the obvious here? SmackDown! SUCKS! Why? Its certainly not because of the booking, its becase they dont have anybody decent to book, LACK OF TALENT! Face it, nobody gives a **** about the majority of the entire SD! roster, and whether they are booked well or not makes no difference, the face cant connect with them, and thats it.

 

If they aren't making any new stars' date=' then it's the writers fault, not the brand split's fault. Does Raw really have that many more stars? It's got Kane, Benoit, HBK, Jericho, HHH and has or at least trying to do Orton and Batista. SD has got Taker, Booker,Eddie Angle, Big Show, and has at least tried to make Cena and JBL. It's not like there's a huge difference. The only real difference is that Raw has better booking. surely thats obvious?[/quote']

 

No, its not obvious at all. If there isnt a huge difference in talent, then please explain to us all why SD! is considered to be such a huge joke? Why are SD! PPV's getting lower buyrates than RAW ones (and both brand pull lower buyrates than joint ones). Its nothing to do with the booking. HHH is the top star on RAW and is booked the same as JBL on SD! Its to do with talent, SD! cant compete on a talent level with RAW. Look, fans what to see their favourite wrestlers, they want to see name stars and they want to see guys who they care about. Apart from Angle, Eddie, Cena and Taker on SD, there are none. Nobody really cares about JBL, Big Show maybe, Reigns, Jindrak, all of JBL's Cabinet, Booker, Heidenreich, all the cruisers etc...the majority dont want to see alot of those guys, they could get less.

 

RAW:

 

1. HHH

2. Batista

3. Shelton

4. Orton

5. Benoit

6. Jericho

7. Christian

8. Flair

9. Kane

10. HBK

11. Edge

 

And when they appear, the Rock and Austin are both RAW guys too!

 

SD!:

 

1. JBL

2. Cena

3. Eddie

4. Angle

5. RVD

6. Big Show

 

After that, its a huge slew of jobbers and nobodies!

 

Now you tell me that there isnt a big difference in name value stars...

 

Thus if the fans don't give a toss about people on both shows, why would they give a toss about them, if you stuck them on one show? Still the same wrestlers, being booked by the same people.

 

Just think about it logically.

 

You are the one who isnt seeing logic. Dude, its been blatantly obvious since the start that SD! has been treated like the lesser brand, and is a joke of a show. To deny that would be stupid, because its the truth.

 

And you say why would they care about guys who were all on one show if they dont when they are seperate? Is that a serious question? Isnt it obvious?!

 

People are sick of seeing the same guys wrestle the same guys over and over. You double the amount of people that fans care about on one show and surprise surprise, you have twice the amount of feuds, it isnt rocket science.

 

Sure, eventually that would get stale too, to an extent, but by the time you are exchausting all the new possible feuds, you will have other guys rotated into the main event like Hassan, Chris Masters (if he meets expectations) etc and you will also have double the amount of name talent working two shows per week, helping to raise newcomers.

 

I'm not telling you what I'm saying would 100% work if it was put into operation, but its not like things can get any worse, and the general consensus amongst fans is that they hate the brand split. You dont have to agree, thats fine, but they are MY OPINIONS, you need to learn to live with the fact we dont all think the same way and when it comes to opinions on the brand split, you're opinion that its a good thing and is working is in the minority.

Edited by The Beltster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you have been saying that it would work 100%. And where's this general consensus, more people in this thread have said they prefer the brand split than not having it. Hardly general consensus is it?

 

And how can you say its nothing to do with the booking? If that was true, then I'd expect to see buyrates doubled for every PPV with one brand, as booking clearly doesn't matter in your world, and it's just who you have on the show that matters.

 

Thus again by your reckoning, why would people care about the SD talent on 1 combined show, if they don't care about them now?

 

Why do you think Eugene got successful? How about well played roles, and originally decent booking? You can't just stick anyone there, and expect them to do great with nothing. Being a Hogan mark, and looking at history surely you know that. If these same guys you're talking about on SD people care about, then why are the PPV and TV ratings bad? Maybe because they don't care.

 

You're incredibly one sided. How do you think you make stars? They just appear and are naturally great? You have to book them well, and you have to pick the right ones, and try. So who's fault is it WWE have put their main stars on SD in feuds with bums like The Bashams, and Luther Reigns? That's right, the booking crew.

 

The same thing would happen if Benoit was booked in a feud on Raw against say Gene Snitsky, and Edge was with La Resistance. It just happens you have better booking on Raw. Plus they've picked better guys to push.

 

The people they are feuding with, they are trying to make stars of, and yeah its not working, and they are the wrong choices, thus that's the bookers fault, and not the brand split, thus if you have one brand, the same thing will still happen, the main guys can still feud with losers who aren't ready, and you'd soon realise, changing the roster split, wouldn't change any of the problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I'd say the only thing as irritating as a HHH thread on TWO is another roster split one.

 

The split could easily work, and its just as Jung says, clearly the company shooting themselves in the foot with it. Smackdown went through a period as the better show, and Raw the crap one during the Lesnar/Angle/Show period, and Smackdown for a long time had Vince on it remember, so I dont buy the whole deal that Raw is deliberately made better. Perhaps it is because of big nose wanting his show to be the better one, but fact is theres no excuse for Smackdown being crap.

 

I mean they could easily do on Smackdown what they do on Raw. Look at Raw's entrants to the Rumble for instance compared to Smackdowns. Raw has new stars like Shelton Benjamin and Gene Snitsky, Raw has a strong undercard. Smackdown's booking means that it just hasn't and it sucks. Not the roster split. Smackdown.

 

They really need to do something to that show, and here's hoping someone backstage either gets a knock to the head to restore sanity or the draft brings new decent talent over.

 

Sure the WWF/WWE survived without a roster split for so long, but this is a different period in the business. There is NO competition in the US, and the WWE has basically a monopoly. It never really had that, or the massive hoarde of talent that it has now in the past.

 

I love the roster split. I just hate Smackdown just now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you have been saying that it would work 100%. And where's this general consensus' date=' more people in this thread have said they prefer the brand split than not having it. Hardly general consensus is it?[/quote']

 

No, I havent said it will 100% work, I'm saying IMO it would work. I cant look into the future to see if it would work or even if it will ever come to fruition, all I can give are opnions, like you and everybody else and in my opinion, the brand split is a huge problem and if it were dropped, it would be a GREAT start in rejuvinating WWE and things would start to pick up.

 

As for the general consensus, its with about 99% of people I speak with on about 20 different forums and in person in general as well as views and opinions of many people who write online columns and magazine columns. You're basing it on what a handful of people say here? Come on, the wrestling world doesnt start and end with Talk Wrestling Online.

 

And how can you say its nothing to do with the booking? If that was true' date=' then I'd expect to see buyrates doubled for every PPV with one brand, as booking clearly doesn't matter in your world, and it's just who you have on the show that matters.[/quote']

 

I'm not saying it has ZERO to do with booking, what I'm saying is the best booking in the world wont help you if you dont have good talent to book.

 

Thus again by your reckoning' date=' why would people care about the SD talent on 1 combined show, if they don't care about them now?[/quote']

 

They care about the main stars on SD!, but there arent enough of them to go around and nowhere enough to fill 2 hours of TV time per week and 3 hours of PPV time per month. If the bigger SD! stars were combined with the bigger RAW stars, we would have a whole bunch of stars who could create new feuds. Wrestling has never used a roster split, this is the first one, and its been a dismal failure.

 

You're incredibly one sided. How do you think you make stars? They just appear and are naturally great? You have to book them well' date=' and you have to pick the right ones, and try. So who's fault is it WWE have put their main stars on SD in feuds with bums like The Bashams, and Luther Reigns? That's right, the booking crew.[/quote']

 

No, I'm not one sided at all, I'm giving you my opinions and I'm putting out ways to improve BOTH shows, thats not one sided at all! Yes. of course you have to book them great, BUT they have to have natural talent also. There are hardly ANY naturally talented guys on SD! apart from some of the cruisers, and if you ever think the cruisers will be used as anything more than filler in WWE, then you're nuts. You can forget the cruisers, talented or not, because they will never be anything in WWE whether we like it or not.

 

And you say its the booking crew who is at fault for booking their top stars with bums? Thats true, but what choice to they have? They only have bums to book them against! What do you expect them to do? Continually feud Taker, Angle, Eddie and Cena over and over and over again? You are enforcing the point I'm making. There isnt enough big time name talent to go around, and by trying to build about 10 new comers all at once by throwing them in at the deep end with guys like Angle and Taker will never work. Number one, the fans dont want to be clustered with 10 new comers who all wrestle with their real names, no gimmicks and crappy generic music. They need to bring up 1 oe 2 at a time, max, and slowly build them, but they arent. Thats why WWE is flooded with nobodies, cos they are trying to elevate too many no-talent green horns too damn fast.

 

The same thing would happen if Benoit was booked in a feud on Raw against say Gene Snitsky' date=' and Edge was with La Resistance. It just happens you have better booking on Raw. Plus they've picked better guys to push.[/quote']

 

RAW isnt much better booked than SD!, but RAW can cover up their crappy jobbers by only having very few on the card, because they have the majority of name stars who people care about, thats why RAW PPV's always draw better than SD! ones. Name talent. This is the basis of my whole argument. The brand split has watered SD! down to a useless waste of air-time that nobody is really interested. Combine the shows, drop the dead weight and give us all the stars together on every show.

 

The people they are feuding with' date=' they are trying to make stars of, and yeah its not working, and they are the wrong choices, thus that's the bookers fault, and not the brand split, thus if you have one brand, the same thing will still happen, the main guys can still feud with losers who aren't ready, and you'd soon realise, changing the roster split, wouldn't change any of the problems.[/quote']

 

No, you wouldnt have the same, because without the brand split, there is only so much airtime per week, and it would be mostly taken up with the name stars. Without the brand split, there wouldnt be so much airtime to fill with a bunch of nobodies who the fans could care less about.

 

Drop the roster split, you all of a sudden have all the name talent on TV for 4 hours per week, thats not alot of airtime to use when you have alot of big name guys, so like I said, there wouldnt be much to spare on a bunch of jobbers, this way only 1 or 2 new comers would get a chance every few months and the company wouldnt be so saturated with people who are clueless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...