Smackdown is going live

[Wacokid27]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about the push he's receiving.

You're probably right, but, still.....

wk

 

[Rogue]

Take this for what it’s worth and remember that “card is subject to change” fine print, but the Mohegan Sun in Uncasville, Connecticut is advertising talent for the post-SummerSlam episode of Smackdown. The episode advertises the “new era” of Smackdown and features AJ Styles, New Day and Cesaro with Dean Ambrose, Sami Zayn, Paige and Naomi also being advertised on the website.

Sorta expected Smackdown to have this kind of roster, if true. Just hope they don't divide the tag roster, it's already thin enough as it is.

 

[alexb]

If anything, this issue has the entire wrestling community buzzing and while I understand the excitement that these news have brought, I for one am holding my horses for the time being and waiting to see how all this will unfold before...throwing a party.

There is no doubt that change is good and there always comes that time when things need to be shaken up a bit in order to gain interest. In Smackdown's Itcase, the fact alone that it will air live already is a big possitive for the simple reason it gives so much more meaning to the show and a good reason for each and every one of us to tune in every week. I mean, how could anyone watch Smackdown these days when the results and/or spoilers are available days prior to the taped show airing and when it's format was mosty Raw recaps and shit.

Now, this is a very sensitive situation because going for a brand split is one thing, however the most important thing here is how it will be done. I, for one, just hope splitting the roster doesn't cause too many changes, as in bringing back the (secondary, that's what it was) WWE title. Idk, I feel that would be a horrible decision. They may be two seperate shows but it's ONE company, WWE, and there should be ONE individual being (no pun intented) THE guy, THE champion.

I also hope that NXT isn't "raped" in the process cause with two seperate shows now, both RAW and Smackdown will need all the talent they can get and as much as they are apparently doing this in order to give more superstars opportunities, it's still 5 fucking hours of TV they'll have to fill. If 3 hours of RAW was tough, how about 5 hours of Raw plus Smackdown every Monday and Tuesday?

I feel the format should be kept pretty simple. For example, thet could move the IC belt on Smackdown and have it be a Smackdown "thing" and maybe add something new that could be unique for this particular show. I know there's talk about the Cruiserweight thing that's about to take place; there's a nice idea. Other then that, all the other belts (Tag Team, US and Womens) I think should feature and be up for grabs on both shows because, again, two shows but ONE company.

So, these are just a few things that came to mind after first listenting to these latest news and, again, I prefer to not rush into any kind of judgement before we get to see how they intend to make this work. By the way, I wonder how all this will affect (if at all) the PPVs...

 

[Stopspot]

Take this for what it’s worth and remember that “card is subject to change” fine print, but the Mohegan Sun in Uncasville, Connecticut is advertising talent for the post-SummerSlam episode of Smackdown. The episode advertises the “new era” of Smackdown and features AJ Styles, New Day and Cesaro with Dean Ambrose, Sami Zayn, Paige and Naomi also being advertised on the website.

Sorta expected Smackdown to have this kind of roster, if true. Just hope they don't divide the tag roster, it's already thin enough as it is.

If one team should be split it is the new day. Get Big E into singles

 

[Snowman1]

BEST NEWS EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Red Rain]

If anything, this issue has the entire wrestling community buzzing and while I understand the excitement that these news have brought, I for one am holding my horses for the time being and waiting to see how all this will unfold before...throwing a party.

There is no doubt that change is good and there always comes that time when things need to be shaken up a bit in order to gain interest. In Smackdown's Itcase, the fact alone that it will air live already is a big possitive for the simple reason it gives so much more meaning to the show and a good reason for each and every one of us to tune in every week. I mean, how could anyone watch Smackdown these days when the results and/or spoilers are available days prior to the taped show airing and when it's format was mosty Raw recaps and shit.

Now, this is a very sensitive situation because going for a brand split is one thing, however the most important thing here is how it will be done. I, for one, just hope splitting the roster doesn't cause too many changes, as in bringing back the (secondary, that's what it was) WWE title. Idk, I feel that would be a horrible decision. They may be two seperate shows but it's ONE company, WWE, and there should be ONE individual being (no pun intented) THE guy, THE champion.

I also hope that NXT isn't "raped" in the process cause with two seperate shows now, both RAW and Smackdown will need all the talent they can get and as much as they are apparently doing this in order to give more superstars opportunities, it's still 5 fucking hours of TV they'll have to fill. If 3 hours of RAW was tough, how about 5 hours of Raw plus Smackdown every Monday and Tuesday?

I feel the format should be kept pretty simple. For example, thet could move the IC belt on Smackdown and have it be a Smackdown "thing" and maybe add something new that could be unique for this particular show. I know there's talk about the Cruiserweight thing that's about to take place; there's a nice idea. Other then that, all the other belts (Tag Team, US and Womens) I think should feature and be up for grabs on both shows because, again, two shows but ONE company.

So, these are just a few things that came to mind after first listenting to these latest news and, again, I prefer to not rush into any kind of judgement before we get to see how they intend to make this work. By the way, I wonder how all this will affect (if at all) the PPVs...

Is it plausible that this project is a pre-emptive measure to insure the integrity and reputation of talent not named Roman Reigns? Allow me to elaborate.

HHH made Batista a star in 2005 predominantly because the WHC was at stake. Meanwhile, John Cena became WWE champion for the first time despite not even main eventing Wrestlemania that particular year. What's my point? Dean Ambrose or Bray Wyatt can headline Wrestlemania as well without stealing Reigns' thunder so to speak.

The WHC can main event PPV's where the WWE championship is also bring defended. This dynamic protects Roman Reigns from being over promoted, while at the same time keeping the WWE championship in his sights. This further prevents Reigns from mowing down talent in championship matches. It protects the Kevin Owens of the world from losing to Reigns en route to their own world title aspirations.

Your logic is sound but another perception might take into account that Reigns is having trouble staying over consistently these days (which was why HHH couldn't be arsed to try and put Reigns over again in yet another match).

On a side note, your writing style mirrors Lockard. I can't be the only person who believes that.

 

[Jacob Fox]

Is it plausible that this project is a pre-emptive measure to insure the integrity and reputation of talent not named Roman Reigns? Allow me to elaborate.

HHH made Batista a star in 2005 predominantly because the WHC was at stake. Meanwhile, John Cena became WWE champion for the first time despite not even main eventing Wrestlemania that particular year. What's my point? Dean Ambrose or Bray Wyatt can headline Wrestlemania as well without stealing Reigns' thunder so to speak.

The WHC can main event PPV's where the WWE championship is also bring defended. This dynamic protects Roman Reigns from being over promoted, while at the same time keeping the WWE championship in his sights. This further prevents Reigns from mowing down talent in championship matches. It protects the Kevin Owens of the world from losing to Reigns en route to their own world title aspirations.

Your logic is sound but another perception might take into account that Reigns is having trouble staying over consistently these days (which was why HHH couldn't be arsed to try and put Reigns over again in yet another match).

On a side note, your writing style mirrors Lockard. I can't be the only person who believes that.

My sister and I were discussing that the other day. Very good point and I agree.

 

[alexb]

On a side note, your writing style mirrors Lockard. I can't be the only person who believes that.

I probably should take this as a compliment since, though still a fresh face in this forum, I know that Lockard is a well respected member. If, by any chance, you're implying that I'm Lockard (and I do apologize beforehand if I misunderstood the comment), I do assure you I am not...

 

[Snowman1]

Is it plausible that this project is a pre-emptive measure to insure the integrity and reputation of talent not named Roman Reigns? Allow me to elaborate.

HHH made Batista a star in 2005 predominantly because the WHC was at stake. Meanwhile, John Cena became WWE champion for the first time despite not even main eventing Wrestlemania that particular year. What's my point? Dean Ambrose or Bray Wyatt can headline Wrestlemania as well without stealing Reigns' thunder so to speak.

The WHC can main event PPV's where the WWE championship is also bring defended. This dynamic protects Roman Reigns from being over promoted, while at the same time keeping the WWE championship in his sights. This further prevents Reigns from mowing down talent in championship matches. It protects the Kevin Owens of the world from losing to Reigns en route to their own world title aspirations.

Your logic is sound but another perception might take into account that Reigns is having trouble staying over consistently these days (which was why HHH couldn't be arsed to try and put Reigns over again in yet another match).

On a side note, your writing style mirrors Lockard. I can't be the only person who believes that.

Excellent post JC!

Thought the same thing with the world title debate. I'm in favor of bringing back the second title, as the one world title defenders seem to love to talk about how super-credible the WWE WHC is, which is all well and good except for how much burden it is to be THE TOP GUY in 2016. With the one world title we got Daniel Bryan as THE GUY, but also Roman Reigns. Having a easier personality to get behind holding the second belt should make it feel like Roman isn't being shoved so hard - while still keeping his heat.

Also, as you say, WWE's talent roster is pretty loaded right now. Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose, Zayn, Rusev, Owens, Wyatt, Big E, Neville, Owens, even Cody before last week are all potential-packed guys of different sizes, strengths, and characters who are young enough to be good to go for another decade in WWE. And that's before you get to guys like Cesaro, Lesnar, and Styles who are older but can main-event tomorrow and we'll love it, maybe bridging the gap while they rehab Wyatt. And when you look at a guy like Dean Ambrose who's stock is falling faster than an American car company because there's so many guys to focus on... The second world title does help. Plus - while lately they've gotten better at this - on PPV, that means there's another match that actually matters on the show. (I've never understood the argument of "oh but it's the shitty Smackdown world title" or whatever. Go be miserable somewhere else)

However, to Shadow's point, take it a step further. Keep the tag titles on Raw and let the tag division chill over there, but move the women - sans a few valets or something - to SD. No need to have Sasha stuck in pointless feuds with Naomi while Charlotte defends on Raw. Hell with Raw you "could" bring the cruiserweight belt back if you want. We're playing off so much history from other promotions already, and Austin Aries was just signed......

(Unpopular opinion: I like taped SD though. Canned heat is better than no heat, even though I realize it doesn't work in 2016. They can also edit another Reigns promo off the show, always a positive!)

Alex here has the best opinion, let's reserve judgement until it happens.

AND WE WANT TWO HOUR RAW

 

[Roadster]

RAW isn't going to go 3 hours. They're making more money than ever with a 3 hour RAW. WWE isn't going to give up the potential millions of dollars just because the 3rd hour is a chore.

 

[Cloud]

Hope this means RAW gets cut to 2 hours! I doubt it but damn that 3rd hour was technically for the whole Supershow and a packed roster. Imagine how grim it's going to get trying to fill the extra hour when half the roster is on SD or in NXT.

 

[Wacokid27]

RAW isn't going to go 3 hours. They're making more money than ever with a 3 hour RAW. WWE isn't going to give up the potential millions of dollars just because the 3rd hour is a chore.

This is correct. I see it as more likely that we get a 3 hour SD than a 2 hour Raw.

wk

 

[Snowman1]

Don't give them any ideas Waco! :angry:

 

[Rogue]

Remember H saying the first thing he'd change about Raw was cutting the 3rd hour? Maybe they finally will.

As for USA potentially losing out on the extra $$, why not take the pre & post shows and have them on both ends of Raw? Gives them that extra hour they want, but keeps it separate from the main program. Or they could do a 1 hour replay like they used to.

 

[Stopspot]

Remember H saying the first thing he'd change about Raw was cutting the 3rd hour? Maybe they finally will.

As for USA potentially losing out on the extra $$, why not take the pre & post shows and have them on both ends of Raw? Gives them that extra hour they want, but keeps it separate from the main program. Or they could do a 1 hour replay like they used to.

As of about two weeks or so, RAW airs a 2 hour version on Syfy if people are in desperate need of a 2 hour version