The End of the Brand Extension?

[John McHenry]

With the 6 on 6 tag match finally announced for Wrestlemania could we see an end to the brand extension? It's become more and more irrelevant through the years and we're at a point now it's meaningless.


Get rid of one of the Main Event titles keep the two mid cards and done. You then use some Main event talent to help the mid cards while keeping the ME title the dream for everyone. Sure you'll need to cut people but theirs a lot of dead weight already. After the sprucing more time on the shows for tag and divas.

Should this match and full control of both brands mean no draft/ brand extension?

 

[Slim]

It should... but there is near no chance of it ever ending. Sadly it just won't ever end.

 

[SAL]

Right now it exists in name only. Sure, I'd like to get rid of it to end the draft and the boring meaningless "brand vs brand" thing that nobody cares about, but not if it means the main-eventers will take up lots of time on both shows.

 

[PHX]

You may as well say it's been ended ever since they did the whole Raw supershow idea really. They try and act every now and again that the brands matter but they really don't. Only thing that they really stay consistent in doing is not having Raw's top stars show up on SD. Point of a brand split is to give more talent more opportunity. No brand split pretty much kills that.

 

[The Cork]

Point of a brand split is to give more talent more opportunity. No brand split pretty much kills that.

It doesnt have to be that way though, look at WWE from '99 to early '02, when they had both shows but no draft. They still allocated a LOT of time to getting undercard feuds over, and lest not forget this is a time when the roster was way more star-packed than it is now.

The bigger question is how inept would you have to be to fuck this up, theres much more scope for feuds and matches. We wont have to see Punk v Ziggler rematches every week on Raw.

 

[Kiffy Lube]

I'd like to hear PSYCH again explain how they can't do this because they generate more money from house shows having two separate brands touring.

 

[PHX]

The roster now is about twice as big than they were in the 90's and early 2000's. I just think given how dumb the booking and writing teams now can be not knowing how to use guys they would often play it safe too much and have Cena all over both shows for example rather than letting a up and coming possible main eventer get a shot.

 

[The Cork]

Well you have a 'unification' angle to use right off the bat, so theres instantly a chance to put over a new guy.

I really think its a no-lose situation.

 

[Defiant]

I don't its the brand extension thats causing any problems. I blame creative's laziness in regards to the lower-tier titles.

 

[PHX]

Well you have a 'unification' angle to use right off the bat, so theres instantly a chance to put over a new guy.

I really think its a no-lose situation.

I can agree with that but my point is given how lazy creative will be wanting to just play it safe they'd just probably miss the boat on that which is my fear of the whole thing. Would just make it easier for them to be lazier.

 

[SAL]

That's a legitimate concern. The number of Raw recaps they show on Smackdown that have nothing to do with the show is way too high already.

 

[chefboyardee]

its been as dead as the dodo the last 6 months or so.

 

[Troy]

I'd like to hear PSYCH again explain how they can't do this because they generate more money from house shows having two separate brands touring.

As soon as I saw the thread title this is what I was coming here to post.

WWE make a lot more money these days because of the fact that they can run two seperate house show circuits each week. They are doubling the money they get from house shows because each week rather than running 4 they can run 8. I highly doubt that WWE would want to get rid of that cash cow. You could argue that by combining the roster and by having all the top stars on every show that house show attendances will increase so that will help offset it but I don't think that it would be enough.

If they did combine the rosters then I would want them to have patience. A WWE/World title unfication bout is a huge deal and really should occur at WM29. They would need to resist pulling the trigger for an entire year but I think that the payoff would be worth it. If they did this then I would also prefer it if they unified the IC and US titles, they are at the exact same level so there is no reason to have two of them. Bring in a Crusierweight title if you want another midcard title but it has to be something below the IC title.

Titles could be; WWE, Intercontinental, Crusierweight, Tag Team, Divas. Five titles are more than enough if the rosters are combined.

 

[Aniking]

If the WWE cut down to one brand, they're fucked in the head.

The reason why Smackdown is nowhere near as good as Raw is because of this stupid Raw Supershow crap and constantly pushing things that happened on Raw on Smackdown. They need to book both shows the best they possibly can, not just one because it's the fucking "flagship show". I don't care that Raw has been around for longer, that shouldn't mean Smackdown should be hindered by it.

After Wrestlemania, Raw superstars need to STAY on Raw and Smackdown superstars need to STAY on Smackdown.

 

[Andrew]

If the WWE cut down to one brand, they're fucked in the head.

The reason why Smackdown is nowhere near as good as Raw is because of this stupid Raw Supershow crap and constantly pushing things that happened on Raw on Smackdown. They need to book both shows the best they possibly can, not just one because it's the fucking "flagship show". I don't care that Raw has been around for longer, that shouldn't mean Smackdown should be hindered by it.

After Wrestlemania, Raw superstars need to STAY on Raw and Smackdown superstars need to STAY on Smackdown.

110% agreed with this comment. I rather see more mid-carders on TV.