|
Post by g1megatronfan on Sept 9, 2016 10:30:29 GMT -5
For these guys with their shitty creative writing department which leads to no character development or interesting wrestlers...yes. WWE's writing is so piss poor they can't even manage an hour at this point in time.
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on Sept 9, 2016 14:38:46 GMT -5
2 hours is perfect but the issue is pacing the time. 3 hour Raws have been bad since day one because it hasn't been A. Action packed and hasn't used the whole roster to keep it fresh. Now it worst because of the brand split. Why Smackdown is easy to watch Raw isn't. Think about the first brand split. Raw was 2 hours and still horrible because again pace and lack of balance. HHH in almost all segments in 2002 and 2003 was horrible.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Sept 10, 2016 5:18:21 GMT -5
In order to keep up with the attention spans of modern fans, RAW should be 20 minutes long.
|
|
|
Post by mehmonster on Sept 10, 2016 5:25:48 GMT -5
No. It works on NXT because that's how it has always been and they cycle "ready" talent with those "learning" so the time regulates it all.
An hour long RAW and SmackDown would be crap.
|
|
|
Post by Macho Pichu on Sept 10, 2016 10:49:12 GMT -5
I can get to bed earlier on Tuesdays, so I can't complain about length.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2016 11:07:55 GMT -5
Even when I can stay up to watch the last hour of Raw because I'm off or go into work late the next day, I don't. Those guys have burned me too many times for me to even acknowledge they have a 3rd hour.
|
|
|
Post by mehmonster on Sept 10, 2016 11:10:34 GMT -5
I can get to bed earlier on Tuesdays, so I can't complain about length. That's not what she said.
|
|