|
|
Post by Tyfo on Dec 2, 2009 17:12:16 GMT -5
Source: PWinsider
It's been reported this week that major changes are coming to WWE in the early months of 2010, with the ECW brand likely being shut down. According to a sources, WWE also has big changes in store for the SmackDown brand. The feeling is that RAW has enhanced its identity with the Guest Host concept and SmackDown needs something of its own to stand out. While nothing official has been decided on yet, it's believed that any big changes will take place after year ends.
Also as noted earlier here on the website, WWE is working on a deal that could change the current landscape of the company. WWE and SyFy have had preliminary meetings regarding the rebranding of the ECW series, which would include dropping name and brand "ECW". SyFy has noticed the dropping ratings since the debut of the show, and with the current TV deal ending in December, WWE is looking to improve ratings and freshen up the product. There was talk of a "magazine style" show, which was shot down, and the most recent pitch is an hour long show focusing exclusively on brand new talents. SyFy was very behind the brand when it debuted with a rating of over 2.0, but with the rating now averaging around a 1.0, the appeal has been lost.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, it seems they are trying to fix "problems" on the two shows that don't have many IMO. While the crappiest of them all is apparently fine and dandy?
I'd be more worried about pulling RAW out of the abyss that has been the last 9-10 months, then trying to mess with shows that are doing OK.
But the Guest Host gives RAW identity apparently. SmackDown does stand out. It's the show with good wrestling and interesting characters. Something RAW does NOT have.
|
|
Jimmy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,317
|
Post by Jimmy on Dec 2, 2009 17:13:54 GMT -5
WWE is entirely to blame for the ECW ratings going down, they stopped giving a crap about it after Heyman left.
|
|
|
|
Post by unoriginalalex on Dec 2, 2009 17:15:00 GMT -5
The 2nd paragraph makes sense, the 1st -- not so much.
|
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Dec 2, 2009 17:16:23 GMT -5
Trying to re-brand their two best shows? Dammit, it's like they're ashamed to be a wrestling company now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyfo on Dec 2, 2009 17:20:52 GMT -5
I just like how somewhere in their plan to increase ratings a magazine style show came up.
Who ever suggested that, whether they are from WWE or from SyFy should no longer be receiving gainful employment.
|
|
Fiddleford H. McGucket
El Dandy
My Mind's been gone for 30-odd years! Can't Break what's already broken!
Posts: 8,748 
|
Post by Fiddleford H. McGucket on Dec 2, 2009 17:21:40 GMT -5
1. To "Fix" Smackdown....move it to a REAL network.
2. ECW.....yeah, focus on the new guys, change the name keep it live, Drop Superstars (The Show) entirely and rebrand ECW as the "new" Superstars.
3. Hell, kill 2 birds with 1 stone move SD! to WGN in the place of Superstars and expand to 2 hours.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crusty Ruffles on Dec 2, 2009 17:21:45 GMT -5
As I said about ECW in the other thread, you can call it whatever you want as long as there is that third show to groom new talents or to revitalize someone who otherwise would not have the opportunity.
Remember how the brands used to distinguish themselves? Smackdown being the place with the Cruiserweights and Raw having the divas? You know, stuff involving actual WRESTLING?
This is why i haven't watched anything in months. This is garbage and completely dumb. TNA or an indie may not have the production of the WWE, but damn it, they have WRESTLING!
|
|
Zutroy
Don Corleone
That's preposterous. Zutroy here is as American as apple pie.
Posts: 1,933
|
Post by Zutroy on Dec 2, 2009 17:23:08 GMT -5
This doesn't sound like good news at all. It's still wrestling after all, but hey, whatever Vince decides is best we'll just have to accept it anyway, we have no choice in the matter if we want to watch WWE. And I do...  I like the idea of a show only featuring new talent, but I don't think it would last any length of time at all. |
|
|
|
Post by unoriginalalex on Dec 2, 2009 17:24:39 GMT -5
What is a 'magazine style show'?
|
|
Fiddleford H. McGucket
El Dandy
My Mind's been gone for 30-odd years! Can't Break what's already broken!
Posts: 8,748
|
Post by Fiddleford H. McGucket on Dec 2, 2009 17:26:56 GMT -5
What is a 'magazine style show'? Think TMZ or Entertainment Tonight.... |
|
Sajoa Moe
Patti Mayonnaise
Did you get that thing I sent ya?
A man without gimmick.
Posts: 39,683
|
Post by Sajoa Moe on Dec 2, 2009 17:27:53 GMT -5
What is a 'magazine style show'? Something like when they did the "WWE Confidential" show a few years back. Basically a news/insider show. |
|
|
|
Post by unoriginalalex on Dec 2, 2009 17:27:53 GMT -5
What is a 'magazine style show'? Think TMZ or Entertainment Tonight.... So it would be like a "This week in WWE..." type thing? |
|
Fiddleford H. McGucket
El Dandy
My Mind's been gone for 30-odd years! Can't Break what's already broken!
Posts: 8,748
|
Post by Fiddleford H. McGucket on Dec 2, 2009 17:29:01 GMT -5
Think TMZ or Entertainment Tonight.... So it would be like a "This week in WWE..." type thing? That's my best guess.....anyhoo It ain't happenin' someone with good sense nixed the idea already |
|
Matt Dunn
Hank Scorpio
It was inevitable.
Posts: 5,596
|
Post by Matt Dunn on Dec 2, 2009 17:30:21 GMT -5
What is a 'magazine style show'? Think TMZ or Entertainment Tonight.... WWE Excess or Confidential. |
|
|
|
Post by wrestlecrapcrap on Dec 2, 2009 17:32:16 GMT -5
I don't like the idea of a show featuring 'only' new talent. A show branded as a show where you will see the most excited young stars first, yes. But to make these new call-ups into actual stars that the fans care about, you need the guys like Dreamer, Regal and Goldust on the roster. It's also been a show to revitalise guys who aren't neccessarily young, like Mark Henry. He shouldn't lose his chance just because he's not considered 'young' if he has something to offer.
I think the ECW concept as it is, is fine. Just change the name ECW.
With regards to Smackdown, I think it makes sense with what they are saying, that Raw has an identity with the Guest Host concept, and it makes Smackdown look like 'the show that is equal to Raw, just that celebrities don't really care about it as much' which to us of course doesn't mean much, but to a lot of the casuals, they may be drawn into Raw and not Smackdown, so I think the Blue Show does need some sort of hook - as long as it keeps the focus on slightly longer matches, since they already have that as a differentiation from Raw.
|
|
|
|
Post by Avalanche Alvarez on Dec 2, 2009 17:32:35 GMT -5
Just make it FCW, a developmental show where the newbies wrestler each week to see who gets to go to the WWE.
It'd be far more entertaining than hearing Zach Ryder read poems and jump couches.
Seriously.
|
|
Jimmy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,317
|
Post by Jimmy on Dec 2, 2009 17:34:01 GMT -5
Think TMZ or Entertainment Tonight.... WWE Excess or Confidential. Excess made me want to put a bullet in my head. God that show was awful. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2009 17:42:17 GMT -5
I'm wary of the idea to make ECW a show where ONLY brand new talents are used. I like the current ECW format where the new talents are exposed one at a time in a way that allows meaningful interaction with wrestlers the fans already know...it's been working very well.
If they want to change the name...don't really care what they call it.
|
|
|
|
Post by CrazySting on Dec 2, 2009 17:45:34 GMT -5
Give Syfy want they want and turn ECW into a full blown Sci fi show.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crusty Ruffles on Dec 2, 2009 18:01:29 GMT -5
Anyone else amused at how Syfy had to rebrand for a stupid reason and now the WWE's show on Syfy is doing the same thing?
|
|
