Here's my issue with the "Bragging Rights" logic.

[Dr. T is an alien]

I think some of you are missing the point. We were not asking why you should care, but why you should believe that the wrestlers care all that much. As I said before, kayfabe-wise brand loyalty should be pretty much crap in the WWE. In this year alone there have been a draft, a supplemental draft, and two multiperson trades involving all 3 brands. I mentioned Matt Hardy because he has been the most extreme example this year. He has changed brand 3 times, and only once was that supposed to have been his choice. It waters down the interbrand feeling.

Honestly, I would not mind multiple interbrand interactions like Bragging Rights if I had reason to buy into brand loyalty on the part of the wrestlers. To simulate that, I would make the following booking changes.

1) Titles should no longer change brands. EVER. If a champ is going to change brands for any reason, he/she forfeits the title first.

2) I would run the draft like pro sports run expansion drafts. Every GM can protect X number of top talent, though the criteria that they use to make those decisions can vary. Raw, without having a full time GM, would likely have immunity matches instead of GM picks. ECW might not have the budget to protect the very top of their card. Smackdown would likely protect the very top of the card unless a top talent obviously wants out. I would also limit the number of picks for each brand to 3.

3) Trades should be make sense. ECW might trade top talent whose contracts are coming up soon for a couple of talents who are cheaper (i.e., the guys needing to rebuild their reps). Raw might trade a couple of upper midcarders for a main eventer. Trades currently seem to only happen to shuffle things, rather than make any real improvements.

4) Have more references to the business side of things, but in a kayfabe manner. Teddy Long can only focus so much of his energy in so many directions, so someone like Mike Knox who could potentially get elevated with a slight repackaging (meaning that kayfabe wise he is granted a larger production budget for wardrobe, music, presentation, etc.) could actually have an angle without the neverending feuds that midcard talent get stuck in currently, as he might merely be pitching himself for free agency when his contract expires "in a couple of months". Some guys might actually pitch themselves differently. Some may try to show that they can be a winner, while others might show that they can generate controversy (which creates cash!), and others might merely try to show that they can connect with an audience.

5) Interbrand matches should continue to be a big deal after the fact. In fact, they should have 2 PPVs a year dedicated to the idea of brand superiority, which the brands should split relatively evenly.

- They should reinstate KotR, but make it a tournament for the top stars. That means that it should be limited to main eventers and upper midcarders poised to move into the main event. Winning it should be a big deal even after the fact, especially if the winner is a heel that will mention it often (like Regal did) or went full bore like Booker did. Making winning grant your brand the Summerslam main event might also go some distance, especially if the winner is supposed to become a free agent prior to Summerslam.
- Bragging Rights should go full out. WWE champ vs. WHC vs. ECW champ, IC vs. US, Women's champ vs. Diva's champ, a 4 corners match for the Unified Tag Titles (a contending team from each brand), and the mutli-person tag match (consisting of the other main eventers and upper midcard).

6) There should be a few other interbrand matches where winning lets you write your own destiny. This is already the case with the Royal Rumble and the MITB, but this could be expanded upon with other situations.

- There can be double elimination tournament (much like the Jr. College Basketball tournament) for mid-to-uppercarders where winning grants you a new contract to the WWE, rather than a specific brand. What this will mean is that the wrestler can appear on all 3 brands (much like the Unified Tag champs), can compete for any title, and should be a subject of jealousy. In fact, this contract could even be said to have a salary topping clause that ensures that for the next 6-12 months that the winner is the highest paid talent in the WWE.
- The Scramble Match concept could be limited to interbrand possibilities. Every title should be defended in a Scramble once a year (but not at the same PPV) against contenders from all 3 shows. Including the defending champ, there should be 2 people from Raw, 2 from Smackdown, and 1 from ECW in each match. Winner goes to (or stays on) the home brand of the title as champion.

[dh03grad]

If they want fans to invest themselves into 'brand wars', number 1 they should cease yearly drafts. How many people in the match just switched brands this year? If these brands were ran with autonomy with no yearly drafts, single brand ppvs and such, then maybe the fans would care more.

[AriadosMan]

Oct 22, 2009 14:23:02 GMT -5 dh03grad said:

If they want fans to invest themselves into 'brand wars', number 1 they should cease yearly drafts. How many people in the match just switched brands this year? If these brands were ran with autonomy with no yearly drafts, single brand ppvs and such, then maybe the fans would care more.

Didn't they drop the monobrand PPVs because they didn't sell enough? Its kind of a vicious cycle. WWE doesn't want to invest in a brand split because it wants its big guns available on both shows. But when the PPV calls for a epic brand war, the viewer has little invested in it because (other than Cena) the various wrestlers are just "WWE guys" instead of being mentally associated with a specific show.

[H-Fist]

Oct 22, 2009 13:05:20 GMT -5 Dr. T is an alien said:

I think some of you are missing the point. We were not asking why you should care, but why you should believe that the wrestlers care all that much. As I said before, kayfabe-wise brand loyalty should be pretty much crap in the WWE. In this year alone there have been a draft, a supplemental draft, and two multiperson trades involving all 3 brands. I mentioned Matt Hardy because he has been the most extreme example this year. He has changed brand 3 times, and only once was that supposed to have been his choice. It waters down the interbrand feeling.

Honestly, I would not mind multiple interbrand interactions like Bragging Rights if I had reason to buy into brand loyalty on the part of the wrestlers. To simulate that, I would make the following booking changes.

1) Titles should no longer change brands. EVER. If a champ is going to change brands for any reason, he/she forfeits the title first.

2) I would run the draft like pro sports run expansion drafts. Every GM can protect X number of top talent, though the criteria that they use to make those decisions can vary. Raw, without having a full time GM, would likely have immunity matches instead of GM picks. ECW might not have the budget to protect the very top of their card. Smackdown would likely protect the very top of the card unless a top talent obviously wants out. I would also limit the number of picks for each brand to 3.

3) Trades should be make sense. ECW might trade top talent whose contracts are coming up soon for a couple of talents who are cheaper (i.e., the guys needing to rebuild their reps). Raw might trade a couple of upper midcarders for a main eventer. Trades currently seem to only happen to shuffle things, rather than make any real improvements.

4) Have more references to the business side of things, but in a kayfabe manner. Teddy Long can only focus so much of his energy in so many directions, so someone like Mike Knox who could potentially get elevated with a slight repackaging (meaning that kayfabe wise he is granted a larger production budget for wardrobe, music, presentation, etc.) could actually have an angle without the neverending feuds that midcard talent get stuck in currently, as he might merely be pitching himself for free agency when his contract expires "in a couple of months". Some guys might actually pitch themselves differently. Some may try to show that they can be a winner, while others might show that they can generate controversy (which creates cash!), and others might merely try to show that they can connect with an audience.

5) Interbrand matches should continue to be a big deal after the fact. In fact, they should have 2 PPVs a year dedicated to the idea of brand superiority, which the brands should split relatively evenly.

- They should reinstate KotR, but make it a tournament for the top stars. That means that it should be limited to main eventers and upper midcarders poised to move into the main event. Winning it should be a big deal even after the fact, especially if the winner is a heel that will mention it often (like Regal did) or went full bore like Booker did. Making winning grant your brand the Summerslam main event might also go some distance, especially if the winner is supposed to become a free agent prior to Summerslam.
- Bragging Rights should go full out. WWE champ vs. WHC vs. ECW champ, IC vs. US, Women's champ vs. Diva's champ, a 4 corners match for the Unified Tag Titles (a contending team from each brand), and the mutli-person tag match (consisting of the other main eventers and upper midcard).

6) There should be a few other interbrand matches where winning lets you write your own destiny. This is already the case with the Royal Rumble and the MITB, but this could be expanded upon with other situations.

- There can be double elimination tournament (much like the Jr. College Basketball tournament) for mid-to-uppercarders where winning grants you a new contract to the WWE, rather than a specific brand. What this will mean is that the wrestler can appear on all 3 brands (much like the Unified Tag champs), can compete for any title, and should be a subject of jealousy. In fact, this contract could even be said to have a salary topping clause that ensures that for the next 6-12 months that the winner is the highest paid talent in the WWE.
- The Scramble Match concept could be limited to interbrand possibilities. Every title should be defended in a Scramble once a year (but not at the same PPV) against contenders from all 3 shows. Including the defending champ, there should be 2 people from Raw, 2 from Smackdown, and 1 from ECW in each match. Winner goes to (or stays on) the home brand of the title as champion.

I think I might love you.








Or at least respect your opinion and thought process.

[Solid Stryk-Dizzle]

Why should anyone care about anything? It's a fake sport with fake things happening, Why should I care about Miz fighting Morrison? I know they're friends in real life. WHO CARES?

[AriadosMan]

Oct 22, 2009 15:24:06 GMT -5 Solid Stryk-Dizzle said:

Why should anyone care about anything? It's a fake sport with fake things happening, Why should I care about Miz fighting Morrison? I know they're friends in real life. WHO CARES?

The burden falls on their booking strategy to make audiences emotionally invest. If they do a Divas swap 2 weeks before the PPV, it illustrates just how shallow the notion of "brand" has become.

[Andrew is Good]

Oct 22, 2009 0:42:08 GMT -5 Hanzo said:

Oct 21, 2009 21:31:55 GMT -5 Andrew is Good said:

Not caring is why ECW's ratings are in the s***ter. Think about this. Back when the new ECW started, they were pulling 2.5 ratings. Now, they can barely get to 1.3. Actually, that's a good week now.

Dude, who the heck cares about the ratings? (Well, fan-wise, I mean.) If people don't want to watch an hour of awesome wrestling, that's their loss.



For me personally, I can think of several reasons:

1. Christian

2. William Regal

3. Zack Ryder (Clap It Up!)

4. Goldust

5. Yoshi Tatsu

6. The Hurricane

7,8,9,10: Shelton Benjamin, Sheamus, Tommy Dreamer, Paul Burchill

Oct 21, 2009 21:31:55 GMT -5 Andrew is Good said:

It's not can't miss tv.

That's like...your opinion, man.


Yeah, I know I've been praising ECW non-stop lately. But it's either praise ECW or bash Raw into oblivion. And out of those two, I'd rather give the Tuesday night boys and girls their props.

And the reason why the Bragging Rights tag match doesn't hold my interest is because those two teams are comprised of a bunch of fat failure turtles and Kane. Kane's always been awesome, but he can't do everything.

Team ECW FTW.

It maybe an awesome hour of wrestling, but people don't know that. The guys aren't built up as much as they were when the ECW return concept came up.

If it's not can't miss tv, how come the ratings are that low. Again, what the ratings show is fan interest. And obviously, due to how ECW is presented as a whole on WWE television (ie, the Bragging Rights concept being only Smackdown vs Raw, the ECW Championship being left off the last pay per view, and potentially this one, etc) people don't care as much about the product. It's certainly not the talent, they have a great talent pool. But, it's how they are perceived.

The ratings help to show if people are interested in the product. Take the Edge/Lita live sex celebration. Didn't that do an epic number, like a 5 or something. I think the same thing happened with Viscera singing to Lillian Garcia. It showed that high ratings can happen, but due to how the product is to people, it's not watched What about the 4.5 they got on the Raw with no commercials? Where have all those fans gone? What the ratings show is how the WWE product is doing. You can still like it, but ignoring the ratings is like, ignoring evidence. My statement to ECW not being can't miss and people not caring about it has evidence within the ratings. Your response to that is to put your fingers in your ears, and go, lalalalala, I'm not hearing you.

The debut ECW show had a rating of 2.8. Now, it may've been Sci Fi viewers looking to check it out. But, in the weeks after that, it still had ratings in the 2.0s. Where has that audience gone? How come half the ECW on Sci Fi audience has stopped watching the show?

Yes, it being can't miss tv is my opinion. But I think it's backed up pretty decently. If half the audience has stopped watching it, maybe it isn't can't miss tv.

[AriadosMan]

Oct 22, 2009 15:56:55 GMT -5 Andrew is Good said:

It maybe an awesome hour of wrestling, but people don't know that. The guys aren't built up as much as they were when the ECW return concept came up.

If it's not can't miss tv, how come the ratings are that low. Again, what the ratings show is fan interest. And obviously, due to how ECW is presented as a whole on WWE television (ie, the Bragging Rights concept being only Smackdown vs Raw, the ECW Championship being left off the last pay per view, and potentially this one, etc) people don't care as much about the product. It's certainly not the talent, they have a great talent pool. But, it's how they are perceived.

The ratings help to show if people are interested in the product. Take the Edge/Lita live sex celebration. Didn't that do an epic number, like a 5 or something. I think the same thing happened with Viscera singing to Lillian Garcia. It showed that high ratings can happen, but due to how the product is to people, it's not watched What about the 4.5 they got on the Raw with no commercials? Where have all those fans gone? What the ratings show is how the WWE product is doing. You can still like it, but ignoring the ratings is like, ignoring evidence. My statement to ECW not being can't miss and people not caring about it has evidence within the ratings. Your response to that is to put your fingers in your ears, and go, lalalalala, I'm not hearing you.

The debut ECW show had a rating of 2.8. Now, it may've been Sci Fi viewers looking to check it out. But, in the weeks after that, it still had ratings in the 2.0s. Where has that audience gone? How come half the ECW on Sci Fi audience has stopped watching the show?

Yes, it being can't miss tv is my opinion. But I think it's backed up pretty decently. If half the audience has stopped watching it, maybe it isn't can't miss tv.

How many Zack Ryder PPV matches have there been? I know he's popular here, but just how popular is Ryder (who will probably be the future of the brand)?
We need a better pulse on how much a success ECW is in and of itself.

[Andrew is Good]

Let's also not forget that everytime there is a Champion vs Champion match, the ECW Champion loses. Everytime there's a draft, ECW's knee gets pounded into obliviocry. And they're not always on pay per view, because their matches are obviously not important enough.

[AriadosMan]

Oct 22, 2009 16:11:30 GMT -5 Andrew is Good said:

Let's also not forget that everytime there is a Champion vs Champion match, the ECW Champion loses. Everytime there's a draft, ECW's knee gets pounded into obliviocry. And they're not always on pay per view, because their matches are obviously not important enough.

Aren't the matches they do get often dark matches?

[sunnytaker]

Oct 22, 2009 15:26:08 GMT -5 AriadosMan said:

Oct 22, 2009 15:24:06 GMT -5 Solid Stryk-Dizzle said:

Why should anyone care about anything? It's a fake sport with fake things happening, Why should I care about Miz fighting Morrison? I know they're friends in real life. WHO CARES?

The burden falls on their booking strategy to make audiences emotionally invest. If they do a Divas swap 2 weeks before the PPV, it illustrates just how shallow the notion of "brand" has become.

well in their defense, pretty much any trade/roster swap that is done at any time is pretty much 2 weeks before some PPV

[Galluchadore]

I think my biggest problem with the whole brand vs brand is that makes it difficult for the fans to decide who to cheer for. Each team has some faces and heels so who are we supposed to get behind? I know alot of people right now like Smackdown over Raw but to most fans they aren't going to cheer just for Smackdown guys over the Raw guys the whole match because it's being booked better. There is no emotion or heat leading up to the main event of this new PPV. It's not that it's a special or unique concept that is going to sell itself like an Elimination Chamber or a Royal Rumble. The whole reason to get this ppv is that its Raw vs Smackdown... which we've seen so many times over the past years which again gets no emotional response for the fans. There needs to be a reason for the audience to care enough to shell out 50 bucks to see this match. I don't feel strongly enough for or against any of these guys to win or lose to pay to see the ppv. It's not like its NWO vs WCW where the audience is emotionally invested into one of the sides.

[Bones58]

Get rid of the brand split.

[Deleted]

Oct 22, 2009 15:24:06 GMT -5 Solid Stryk-Dizzle said:

Why should anyone care about anything? It's a fake sport with fake things happening, Why should I care about Miz fighting Morrison? I know they're friends in real life. WHO CARES?

If you want to throw that tired excuse around, why watch any TV show, movie or play?

WWE's job is to make this stuff believable or at least entertaining and, to a good number of people, they haven't.

[Hanzo]

Oct 22, 2009 15:56:55 GMT -5 Andrew is Good said:

It maybe an awesome hour of wrestling, but people don't know that. The guys aren't built up as much as they were when the ECW return concept came up.

If it's not can't miss tv, how come the ratings are that low. Again, what the ratings show is fan interest. And obviously, due to how ECW is presented as a whole on WWE television (ie, the Bragging Rights concept being only Smackdown vs Raw, the ECW Championship being left off the last pay per view, and potentially this one, etc) people don't care as much about the product. It's certainly not the talent, they have a great talent pool. But, it's how they are perceived.

The ratings help to show if people are interested in the product. Take the Edge/Lita live sex celebration. Didn't that do an epic number, like a 5 or something. I think the same thing happened with Viscera singing to Lillian Garcia. It showed that high ratings can happen, but due to how the product is to people, it's not watched What about the 4.5 they got on the Raw with no commercials? Where have all those fans gone? What the ratings show is how the WWE product is doing. You can still like it, but ignoring the ratings is like, ignoring evidence. My statement to ECW not being can't miss and people not caring about it has evidence within the ratings. Your response to that is to put your fingers in your ears, and go, lalalalala, I'm not hearing you.

The debut ECW show had a rating of 2.8. Now, it may've been Sci Fi viewers looking to check it out. But, in the weeks after that, it still had ratings in the 2.0s. Where has that audience gone? How come half the ECW on Sci Fi audience has stopped watching the show?

Yes, it being can't miss tv is my opinion. But I think it's backed up pretty decently. If half the audience has stopped watching it, maybe it isn't can't miss tv.

Oh, you're absolutely right about everything here. Numbers don't lie.

I just meant that it's can't miss TV for me. ;D

Sorry for the confusion. I should have said that to start with. Then I could have saved you the trouble of typing all of that.

[H-Fist]

Oct 22, 2009 20:16:57 GMT -5 @jinxed said:

Oct 22, 2009 15:24:06 GMT -5 Solid Stryk-Dizzle said:

Why should anyone care about anything? It's a fake sport with fake things happening, Why should I care about Miz fighting Morrison? I know they're friends in real life. WHO CARES?

If you want to throw that tired excuse around, why watch any TV show, movie or play?

WWE's job is to make this stuff believable or at least entertaining and, to a good number of people, they haven't.

Because it's still real to method actors, Ric!

[dh03grad]

Oct 22, 2009 14:52:07 GMT -5 AriadosMan said:

Oct 22, 2009 14:23:02 GMT -5 dh03grad said:

If they want fans to invest themselves into 'brand wars', number 1 they should cease yearly drafts. How many people in the match just switched brands this year? If these brands were ran with autonomy with no yearly drafts, single brand ppvs and such, then maybe the fans would care more.

Didn't they drop the monobrand PPVs because they didn't sell enough? Its kind of a vicious cycle. WWE doesn't want to invest in a brand split because it wants its big guns available on both shows. But when the PPV calls for a epic brand war, the viewer has little invested in it because (other than Cena) the various wrestlers are just "WWE guys" instead of being mentally associated with a specific show.

Makes you question why is there a brand split then eh? WWE has been half ass with too many things. Wanting to use the name ECW, but being appalled when the fans wanted 'ECW'. Presenting a half ass Attitude era, not it being a half ass PG era. They have definitely gotten lazy with the brand split. In theory it was an absolutely great idea where you can utilize more stars to main event level, thus more draws, have more house shows with a separate crew, more PPVs as well. If the brand split were executed like it should, they could have had 2 PPVs every month. WWE never took the long term approach towards the brand split like they should have, and today it is a destructive force that has definitely aided in the business downturn.

[Kevin Hamilton]

Oct 21, 2009 18:36:41 GMT -5 Lair of the Shadow MaDaBa said:

Oct 21, 2009 15:02:37 GMT -5 Shy Guy said:

if that's your issue, then shouldn't you say how YOU don't care as opposed to NOBODY?

i care. i'm sure not caring is in the minority here. and i'm also sure that your one opinion isn't going to change wwe's booking for anything.

YOU don't care. other people do.

I just...I've watched this stuff, and all I could think of is "How could ANYONE watch this? How is this entertaining? Am I missing something that other people can see? HOW IS THIS ENTERTAINING???"

Seriously, what am I missing? I want to understand.

On one hand I'm in agreement with you on the ' not entertaining' thing.. but on the other that's the reason I HAVEN'T watched in a coupla weeks.

Much better use of my time honestly. Your mileage may vary. And I'm not saying 'if you don't like it don't watch or watch and don't complain', though it might sound that way; all I'm saying is what's worked for me. The show hasn't entertained me for quite some time, hence I bailed on it.