Legion
Fry's dog Seymour
Amy Pond's #1 fan
Hail Hydra!
Posts: 22,851
|
Post by Legion on Jun 5, 2021 11:53:40 GMT -5
As others have said, they're in a holding pattern now.
Hell in the Cell has been moved so that the match type is the attraction, and not whose in it.
They're waiting to get out of the Thunderdome before they do anything worthwhile.
|
|
|
Post by DSR on Jun 5, 2021 11:58:49 GMT -5
Beter yet...STOP THE DAMN BRAND SPLIT. That’s a terrible idea. Do you really want to see the same storylines play out over 5 HOURS per week? The brand split is necessary. They could end the brand split and still use a wide variety of wrestlers across both Raw and Smackdown. They could keep the brand split and still use a wide variety of wrestlers across both Raw and Smackdown. The problem isn't brand split or no brand split, the problem is they only write for about five people and fill the rest of the time with loooong matches that have no stakes.
|
|
Chiral
Salacious Crumb
Posts: 73,700
|
Post by Chiral on Jun 5, 2021 13:25:00 GMT -5
Selfishly, I like the idea of a brand split because I started watching in 03 so I have a lot of nostalgia for the concept, as said above they just focus on like five people no matter what. The last no brand split time was miserable because you had absentee champion Brock, de facto champion with MITB Seth. Then when the brand split was back we had that awesome 2 month span of Litdown then it crashed into Ellsworth/Jinder/Bray vs. Orton/etc. Whlie Raw just pretty much sucks all the time lol.
WWE has deep structural issues that a brand split becoming a thing or not becoming a thing, a draft or a superstar shakeup, a WILDCARD RULE™ or a brand to brand superstar exchange, won't fix. But to them as long as they're making that dough why bother I guess.
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Jun 5, 2021 13:32:54 GMT -5
That’s a terrible idea. Do you really want to see the same storylines play out over 5 HOURS per week? The brand split is necessary. They could end the brand split and still use a wide variety of wrestlers across both Raw and Smackdown. They could keep the brand split and still use a wide variety of wrestlers across both Raw and Smackdown. The problem isn't brand split or no brand split, the problem is they only write for about five people and fill the rest of the time with loooong matches that have no stakes. Yeah that’s probably true for Raw. Smackdown I think is booked perfectly, though. And most matches actually do have stakes on SD as opposed to Raw.
|
|
|
Post by drjayphd (feat. Pitbull) on Jun 5, 2021 23:29:09 GMT -5
That’s a terrible idea. Do you really want to see the same storylines play out over 5 HOURS per week? The brand split is necessary. Hmmmmmm.... Well I guess for the women maybe. Weren't the WTTC dual-branded? Technically three-branded because they could go to NXT but they only did that a couple of times before they had the Capitol Screwjob Center and NXT just created their own women's tag belts.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jun 6, 2021 5:02:19 GMT -5
That’s a terrible idea. Do you really want to see the same storylines play out over 5 HOURS per week? The brand split is necessary. They could end the brand split and still use a wide variety of wrestlers across both Raw and Smackdown. They could keep the brand split and still use a wide variety of wrestlers across both Raw and Smackdown. The problem isn't brand split or no brand split, the problem is they only write for about five people and fill the rest of the time with loooong matches that have no stakes. Yeah, it's tough to say the split itself is the issue when WWE routinely fails to exploit the advantages that having it in the first place offers...and in the times they don't have a brand split, they're usually failing to exploit that advantages that offers, too. Having a brand split is a good surface level idea: you have a massive roster, so why not divide it in two? This enables more people to get TV time, offering different feeling shows to your audience that might prefer one to the other, that sort of thing. Yet WWE's booking most often uses it as a way to just push the same small number of people week in, week out, and often rerun the same matches week in, week out, with little reason or progression. *Not* having a brand split is also a good surface level idea: you have more people on the shows, thus creating a more varied, vibrant booking ecosystem, where more talent can play off one another and it's much easier to draw up fresh matches and feuds, since everyone's available to you. Yet WWE's booking still uses this format to basically push the same small number of people week in, week out, and not give anyone else anything to do that means anything, and now they're booking the same matches across two weekly shows instead of one. Clearly, we have a common denominator, here. Smackdown 2016 seems to highlight something interesting: a smaller roster, but a lot of high-end names, plus booking that seemed to actually value the stories it was telling with those talents, but it just couldn't really last, apparently. I think that's the risk with a smaller roster that's running weekly multi-hour shows; you simply can't keep everything fresh for very long, even if the underlying booking isn't bad. If you want to run with a roster that small then you need to shift to more of a seasonal format, like Lucha Underground used to do.
|
|
|
Post by burdette25159 on Jun 6, 2021 13:16:19 GMT -5
Guessing we're going to have a emergency WWE Draft to rebuild the SD roster
|
|