OOC: I would first like to say, to be honest, I think this debate was unfair and one sided. I mean, whoever gets RAW gets the win basically, it's as simple as that. It's like saying which is better - Soda or Piss. It's logically to know which is better. But anyway, I did my part, it sucked IMO, and to be honest again, was prety pointless and whack, 'cause I know I lost big time, trying to back SD! is like trying to back a rapist....ya' just can.t anywa, here it is, I know it sucks, trust me.....
I would like to start off by saying, Great One, good job on your argument. You have a very good opinion, but now I would like to give out the facts, if I may.
It all depends on how you define the word "Better." Is it by since their boss is frequently on the show, that makes it better? Because history speaks for itself. Sure, ten years ago when Mr. McMahon was a character on RAW every week, it was better. But that was ten years ago, son. We're talking about right now. People say, the fans say RAW is better without Mr. McMahon hogging up the Camera Time with sharades of him and his "illigetimate" son, Hornswoggle. That is a storyline RAW has been built around from September-April, when it finally stopped. It's not about what HAS been better, it is what IS better. Right now. Because as of 2008, the RAW Brand is like reruns. You will see the same thing again, and again, and again. Week in and week out, you will see Triple H score a victory some how. You will see Divas fighting. You will see John Cena fight the odds. Is that what you like? Is that what you want to see every week? Lets look at what the people want. Since John Cena has been on RAW, he's been booed by the RAW crowd. And even more so as the time went on. Now, right here and now, John Cena is the most hated Babyface in not just RAW, not just WWE, but Wrestling. This man is supposed to be the big money maker, the top draw for RAW, yet he gets booed by a large crowd in the audience. That brings me to why Smackdown! is superior to RAW.
On RAW you have men like John Cena who is not over with the crowd inside the arena as he once was on the Smackdown! Brand. Triple H, he's aging, not what he once was. Shawn Michaels, again, aging older and older. He can do amazing things, but Smackdown! is looking towards the future, while RAW lives in the past, with stars such as Chris Jericho, and the othre two I mention, being Triple H & Shawn Michaels. RAW brought back Y2J, a former Wrestler. Meaning, all RAW has are older guys. They depend on men like Steve Austin, Mick Foley, sometimes even Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson to boost their ratings. They bring in older stars of yester-year, praying their ratings would go sky high...but they fail miserably. Smackdown! Doesn't need the big names, because a big name isn't as good as being a great athlete. The Smackdown! Brand, they have men like MVP. The future of not just Smackdown!, but Wrestling in general. He's the total package, and exactly what uou want when your looking for Wrestlers. Young, talented, charismatic, great athlete. Look at men like Edge. No doubt about it, he truely is the biggest heel in Pro Wrestling dating back from 2005-present. Another thing the Smackdown! Brand has that RAW doesn not have, and that is a talent exchange with ECW. They can bring even more better and younger talent to their show, something I assure you, RAW can not, and just will not do.
It's your choice. You can choose men you've been watching for ten+ Years, and who have been tired, washed down Wrestlers. Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Mr. McMahon, Jim Ross, Jerry Lawler, Chris Jericho. And even the occasional cameo from men who come to earn their paycheck, Steve Austin and Mick Foley. You can even see men and women who should not be inside a Wrestling ring, that's right, celebritys. Is that what you want to see when you want some of your wrestling, and wrestling only? You want Soap Opera Storylines on your Wrestling show? You want a man who got famous by marrying a singer? You want Kevin Federline beating your WWE Champion on your show?! You want A Boxer on your Wrestling show? Or perhaps you'd like to see a man who has never even stepped inside a ring before, a billionaire Donald Trump actually get involved? Better yet, how about two men who are not even real celebrities, Steve-O and Chris from Jackass fame. You want Jackasses on your Wrestling show? Because tune in every M<onday night, and that is what you'll get. That is the message RAW is sending. Tune in every Friday, the show that changed Friday nights for the better, Smackdown! You wont get celebrities on a Wrestling show, you won't get over the top storylines on your Wrestling Show.....
Tune into Smackdown! and you will get the greatest Wrestler of all-time, The Undertaker! He may be old, in fact older than some men on RAW even, but the difference is simple: Undertaker is above them in each category.
Tune into Smackdown! and you'll get men like Edge. Been around for a decade, and is still in his prime, young, and the best "bad guy" around today. This man brought in RAW's highest Ratings in over Five years back in January of 2006....and now he is on Smackdown! Does that tell you something? Obviously Edge is the most watched Champion, yet he is not on the self preclaimed "A" Show.
Tune into Smackdown! and you can watch the most charistmatic, entertaining, athlete, who is the future of Sports Entertainment, by the name of Montel Vontavious Porter. The longest reigning WWE United States Champion.
Tune into Smackdown! and watch the young talents, the future talents. Men like CM Punk, a Money in The Bank Winner and current holder. See the largest athlete in the world, The Big Show. See Jesse & Festus, Finlay, Kane, "The Animal" Batista, and even the self preclaimed greatest highflyer in the world, Rey Mysterio.
And in closing, I would like to address what my opponent said. He said RAW is better because it's live. Is that true? Does live shows mean its better than a taped show? Let me ask you this. Is the Kid's Choice Awards better than let's say, Seinfeld? Kid's Choice Awards is a live show, Seinfeld was not. So judging from what my opponent said, KCA is better. Live does not exactly mean it's better. The my opponent said RAW gets better ratings, therefore it is superior. I think not. Because if you go on the Nielsen Ratings, then it's false. Let me ask you, how many people have a Nielsen Ratings Box? It's 2008, son. Not many have that anymore. They judge on those, and not facts. Fact is, nobody knows who has the better ratings. But if ratings is what you judge on quality, then your quality isn't that good. Basically, what it boils down to is this...
RAW, a place for your old stars from yester year, and old, tired, dried up storylines.
Smackdown!, a place of excitement, great matches, and future stars.
It's your choice, and THE only choice is Smackdown!
