Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: What point does Smackdown serve?

  1. #1
    Simply The Greatest

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,890
    Rep Power
    409

    What point does Smackdown serve?

    Does anyone feel that Smackdown doesn't serve a purpose anymore? Is it because the WWE doesn't try with it? It's weird. For Smackdown, they don't even build up matches, instead they do the "Did Big Show retain his title at Survivor Series?" garbage. Whereas even for Superstars, they build up a match every week in advance, and they make sure the Raw audience knows.

    Smackdown just seems like a watered down Raw with matches that aren't as good. Would the WWE be better off without it? What should they do to make it better? I'm looking for actual opinions here, not just "Smackdown has better matches than Raw and doesn't have as many segments" etc.

    I don't think the show should even exist (I know that wouldn't happen). Maybe have more themed episodes to try to get people to tune in and also boost up the amount of WHC title matches on the show.

  2. #2
    Chikara Trainee

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    126
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    The RAW Supershow format killed Smackdown. Any notable name talent on SmackDown shows up on RAW anyway.

    At this point I think they should just fully acknowledge that SmackDown is the lesser show, and restructure the brand split. Draft all the main talent like Randy Orton, Sheamus, Big Show, Alberto Del Rio, Wade BArrett, Cody Rhodes and Daniel Bryan to the RAW brand officially. Draft all the midcarders like Alex Riley, JTG, Zack Ryder, Santino, etc. to SmackDown. Let RAW be the flagship show with all the top stars and let SmackDown be the show where midcarders get to shine and get over with the fans.

    Maybe have 1-2 top guys make advertised "guest appearances" on SD in order to boost ratings or ticket sales.

  3. #3
    On Vacation
    jericho2k's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,076
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    They should just make SD the WHC and Tag team division, and add in the mid carders, and have Raw be all the main eventers.

  4. #4
    Chikara Trainee
    Happy Gilmore's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    147
    Rep Power
    262

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    What point does Smackdown serve? Getting more $$$ in companies pocket. I tend to like Smackdown, obviously it isn't as good as it once was in the Brand Extension period, but you generally find the match quality on Smackdown pretty good. I do agree that there needs to be some form of difference between Raw and Smackdown these days though. Perhaps themed episodes like you said, or in my opinion they should reinvent the Cruiserweight Division on Smackdown, the matches that Justin Gabriel, Tyson Kidd, Sin Cara, Mysterio (probably won't be involved but hey), Primo, Epico and Evan Bourne when he returns would be stellar, and I always find when there is something to fight for, I.e a title (even with how little they mean these days) match quality tends to be better and fan interest tends to be higher.

  5. #5
    Simply The Greatest

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,890
    Rep Power
    409

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by jericho2k View Post
    They should just make SD the WHC and Tag team division, and add in the mid carders, and have Raw be all the main eventers.
    Isn't that what it is for the most part now?

  6. #6
    The Only 2x WC HOF
    Shock's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    22,650
    Rep Power
    2336646
      Country                    Scotland

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    SmackDown is for solid wrestling and some angle advancement.

    However the good matches is invalidated by the fact that if they do a good match on SmackDown, they'll almost certainly repeat it on Raw.

    I gave up on watching SmackDown months ago because it is so inconsequential. I'll watch Sheamus and Bryan's matches on Youtube but other than that it's safe to skip it almost entirely.





    30 Days of WC Member's Choice - Coming Soon - PM me match suggestions

    Shock Reviews Archive

    The 100 Greatest WWE Matches (1986 - 1995) - Coming Soon



    The 100 Greatest WWE Matches (1996 - 2005) - Completed



  7. #7
    Curtain Jerker

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    24
    Rep Power
    0
      Country                    us=United States

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    smackdown has been boring to me for years now. I've only watched a hand full of shows since it was on upn. I MIGHT would have watched it after upn days, but I didn't have the channel. However, One night after awhile of not watching smackdown, I found a local channel that played smackdown at like 12am on saturdays. (yeah I doubt anybody else has ever heard of such a channel doing that, but yeah its true) I felt kind of bummed because I knew the channel was on my tv all this time but never had the slightest idea of the channel playing smackdown at all, espeacilly at an odd day and odd time like that. I watched it a few times there, but it was boring as crap, so I stopped watching. I was excited when it came to syfy, because then I could finally enjoy more wwe. I was kind of bored of just watching raw all the time, but yet I was wrong again. I've probably watched it four times since its been on syfy.
    Last edited by mzwwechick; 12-01-2012 at 08:43 AM.

  8. #8

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by mzwwechick View Post
    I found a local channel that played smackdown at like 12am on saturdays. (yeah I doubt anybody else has ever heard of such a channel doing that, but yeah its true)
    That's exactly how I used to watch Smackdown back in 2002-2003.

  9. #9
    Intercontinental Champion
    DarkestEarth's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    1,730
    Rep Power
    70690
      Country                    England

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    Smackdown is back down to how it was basically used during the Attitude Era after the novelty wore off. It is used to continue storylines (normally the World Heavyweight title scene) and also to have wrestlers compete in matches to get them more over...

  10. #10
    Curtain Jerker

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    24
    Rep Power
    0
      Country                    us=United States

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim View Post
    That's exactly how I used to watch Smackdown back in 2002-2003.
    Its kind of an odd thing. The years I did was 2006-2007. (even though I watched maybe 5 shows within that year span)

  11. #11
    God
    God's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    AJ Lee's dungeon
    Posts
    26,039
    Rep Power
    18005

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    During the early days of the brand extension, Smackdown was easily the better show despite WWE always giving everything to Raw. Since the split officially ended, Smackdown is basically the stuff they didn't have time for/want on Raw. Wouldn't make any difference at all if it didn't exist anymore.
    The Real Rock N' Rolla



  12. #12
    Heel Champion
    BackBone's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,359
    Rep Power
    2545
      Country                    Australia

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    I am starting to think that combining the rosters was a horrible idea. I mean ever since they merged the roster and got rid of the Brand Split they have had a formula for the shows.

    Examples...

    Say if Randy Orton and Dolph Ziggler wrestle on SmackDown one Friday and then the next upcoming Monday on Raw they face again? its like a repeated show (SmackDown). They always have rematches that take place on Raw on the next SmackDown show.

    I'm starting to think that combining the rosters was a terrible mistake. They don't even build up matches on the show now and they just have the same matches as Raw.

    These past three weeks I think Cena has shown up on SmackDown and has made it all about him. I know that the Brands are gone but they need to order the shows into some sort of structure maybe limit wrestlers to the shows, of course they can still go on any show but they need to do it less in order to build up storylines.

    I'm starting to think that this was a mistake... that has cost WWE now... ever since the rosters combined the shows have the same feel and the same matches and the only thing that is different is the color scheme of the shows one is red and the other blue.

    However one thing I like is that SD always offers better wrestling. Look at what SD has done to Orton all his matches on SD are great matches ever since he made the transition to the 'blue' show. Even his matches with midcarders have been good and not all have been squashes. But yeah to this topic... Combining the roster has made it a little hard to navigate the matches that are booked. I liked SmackDown and Raw as brands.

    Last edited by BackBone; 11-29-2012 at 04:18 AM.

  13. #13
    Sway

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Behind the Curtain
    Posts
    101
    Rep Power
    13
      Country                    xx=Not Telling, Black Flag

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    I think it pretty much sucks.
    http://www.facebook.com/lethalcontactwrestling

  14. #14
    Chikara Trainee

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    112
    Rep Power
    13
      Country                    us=United States

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    I was feeling the same way about Smackdown a few weeks ago. The show has grown so insignificant as of late that it's embarrassing. Sure there are still some find moments but it's mainly dull. I've been saying it for years now: WWE needs to consolidate their product. The brand split only sort of worked and they showed time and time again that they don't know how to manage it. I advocated for them to go back to the system that worked for 30 freaking years and saw two major booms: a full roster competing amongst another, one main title, one mid title, one tag title, a women's title and a possible 3rd title. At this point the only purpose Smackdown serves is to sell house shows and perhaps (improperly) elevate younger guys to the title picture.


  15. #15
    Heel Champion
    BackBone's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,359
    Rep Power
    2545
      Country                    Australia

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    SmackDown hasn't served much purpose since 2002. Even during Brock's 2nd WWE title reign the roster was slim and now the roster is even slimmer and they aren't doing much to any of the divisions and just putting on unadvertised matches.

  16. #16
    HOSS MOD
    Cyrus Truth's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Long and Winding Road
    Posts
    20,521
    Rep Power
    146213

    Re: What point does Smackdown serve?

    I've kinda bitten my tongue lately regarding this topic, mostly because it's no secret that I prefer Smackdown to Raw. But permit me to submit an alternative point of view, if I may.

    The issue isn't whether or not Smackdown is pointless. The issue is that there's really no incentive for casual fans to watch both Raw and Smackdown, especially when Raw pretty much blatantly copies anything decent that Smackdown does. The combining of the rosters has pretty much diluted any difference between the two shows short of the tippy-top name Superstars for the most part. Again, I subscribe to the "Smackdown is better" idea simply because I find the in-ring action to be mostly better than Raw and the progression of storylines that I actually care about tend to be done better on the blue brand. For me then, Raw is rather pointless simply because it's three hours of programming devoted to rehashing the good Smackdown matches and progressing angles that I want to strangle for wasting my time.

    So basically, it's not that Smackdown doesn't have worth, because I believe it does. It's a matter of both shows lacking any separate identity.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •