Is a 2 hour show even too long?

[BatPunk]

From the start, I don't watch raw in its entirety. There's just too much filler and I get bored too easily by it. I'll watch highlights and the occasional full match, but that's about it.

I've started to do the same with Smackdown. Even though it's a much better show than Raw, I just can't watch a full episode. It drags too much.

However, this past week, I've watched a 1 hour episode of NXT, 1 hour episode of Cruiserweight Classic and the 1 hour episode of Lucha Underground back-to-back-to-back and was not bored or felt like I needed a break from it. All shows are paced well and there's a lot of story going on and it leaves me wanting more.

I understand why WWE does the longer shows from an advertising and revenue stand point and Raw and Smackdown won't be changed from their current formats, but do you think that in the future we might be seeing a trend towards shorter shows to get more fans back into wrestling?

[Deleted]

A one-hour wrestling show is the ideal length, to me. The problem is that even when WWF/WWE had one-hour shows, they tended to cram them with dull throwaway matches and filler.

[Gravedigger's Biscuits]

Unless it's a really terrible show then no, I'd say 2 hours is about the perfect length.

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

Two hours, fast forwarding through commercials, is perfect.

[Deleted]

60 minutes is plenty if used properly. Two hours is fine in a situation where there is a bloated roster and you want to include everyone.

A three hour show with a brand split roster has to be freakin torture to sit through. I don't know how you guys do it.

[Pushed to the Moon]

There's too many people for just a one hour show. And if the length of recent PPVs are anything to go by, the shows are only going to get longer not shorter.

[Limity (BLM)]

It depends. When TNA went to prime time on Spike, they really needed two hours, but were stuck with one. All TNA had at that point was one hour a week to get their product over, and convince viewers to buy their PPVs.

Now a company like WWE, has all kinds of ways to access fans and saturate their market. WWE didn't need three hours for a single show, the network did.

[JCBaggee]

I seem to recall reading something where Vince felt 90 minutes was the perfect length for a wrestling show, presumably with your main event taking up that final half an hour, and I kinda agree with that? But that's not really a length that's conducive to current television schedules.

[auph10imitated]

Two hours is fine if its all filled up properly with no dragging stuff like replays and shit. But one hour NXT stuff etc have been great for me, when your older yo just dont have the time to watch, let alone digest everything thats going on.

[Deleted]

2 hours is perfect for me.

[thecrusherwi]

It all depends on how good the show is. An hour long Raw from the worst parts of 1995/96 still feels way too long, whereas a really good 3-4 hour PPV flies by. It sounds like a cop-out answer, but the truth is if it's good, it doesn't matter how long it is.

[Deleted]

Sept 8, 2016 12:03:28 GMT -5 thecrusherwi said:

It all depends on how good the show is. An hour long Raw from the worst parts of 1995/96 still feels way too long, whereas a really good 3-4 hour PPV flies by. It sounds like a cop-out answer, but the truth is if it's good, it doesn't matter how long it is.

It's the same way I feel about movies. A bad 80 min film feels like 3 hours and a good 3 hour film feels like 80 mins.

[Slanted and Enchanted]

This needs constant mention but you can't blame the WWE or Vince McMahon for expanding the show to 3 hours. That was solely the idea of the USA execs and strictly enforced upon the WWE. Vince actually wanted to cut the show from 2 hours to 90 minutes which imo is perfect. That being said, 2 hours is also fine as long as the talent is utilized properly and there's not too much filler/throwaway segments.

[Hot Noodle Truck]

Generally it depends on the pacing and flow but 2 hours is pretty much perfect for me. With commercial runtime taken out, it usually ends up being around an hour and a hlaf or so, which is pretty good. But it all depends on the content in the end really. I watch Raw on Hulu and even though it's condensed to that length I still barely get through it but make it through Smackdown no problem.

So I guess it really cones down to a mix of engaging content and the pacing of the time.

[Deleted]

Two hours I think is the ideal length. One's often too short and three's usually too long. But it really depends on how it's paced and how much of the screentime actually means something.

["Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay]

I think a full hour - as in 60 minutes - is perfect. 45 is too short.

[canal]

Sept 8, 2016 10:50:58 GMT -5 @wvguitar said:

A one-hour wrestling show is the ideal length, to me. The problem is that even when WWF/WWE had one-hour shows, they tended to cram them with dull throwaway matches and filler.

It makes me wonder how they'd even do a 1 hour A-show type format these days when they have to give away more on TV. It'd be like when Nitro used to get an hour bumped for the NBA, and they'd try to cram in the main event angle and some random midcard stuff.

[Bo Rida]

Sept 8, 2016 10:57:46 GMT -5 YAKMAN is ICHIBAN said:

Two hours, fast forwarding through commercials, is perfect.

I think the sheer number of adverts has an impact on the pacing of shows even when when fast forwarding, especially with the ads that creep into the main show too. There's no way I could stand watching live, even at two hours.

[alred1982]

Sept 8, 2016 12:16:19 GMT -5 Slanted and Enchanted said:

This needs constant mention but you can't blame the WWE or Vince McMahon for expanding the show to 3 hours. That was solely the idea of the USA execs and strictly enforced upon the WWE. Vince actually wanted to cut the show from 2 hours to 90 minutes which imo is perfect. That being said, 2 hours is also fine as long as the talent is utilized properly and there's not too much filler/throwaway segments.

I've heard that before about Vince reckons 90 mins is perfect for a wrestling show I agree with him on that. In a perfect world raw and smackdown would be that.

[ASYLUMHAUSEN]

In my experience of late....

Raw is a slog at 3 hours and only, generally, made tolerable by joining my fellow FAN-ers in gutting it in the live thread.

Smackdown is generally brilliant and flys by because we're having a damn party, generally, in the live thread.

basically, I can't watch live events on TV or the Network anymore unless i've got my MacBook on my lap and the FAN Live Thread loaded