Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 47,576
|
Post by Dub H on Dec 28, 2009 20:40:33 GMT -5
for me,it doesnt f***ing matter if its brand split or not,i just want a good wrestling show,and they can do that,brand split or not
Even if im in favor of brand split.And i would be sad because i would lose ECW
|
|
|
Post by drjayphd (feat. Pitbull) on Dec 28, 2009 20:56:21 GMT -5
Everything is a reason to end the brand split it seems. It's wednesday! Time to end the brand split! I need a few things from the grocery Do things alone now mostly Left me heartbroken, not lookin' for love Surprise in my eyes when I looked above The checkout counter and I saw her face My heart stood still so did time and space Never thought that I could feel real again But the look in her eyes said I need a friend She turned to me that's when she said it Looked me dead in the face, asked cash or credit And I ended the split
|
|
MolotovMocktail
Grimlock
Home of the 5-time, 5-time, 5-time, 5-time 5-time Super Bowl Champion 49ers-and Wrestlemania 31
Posts: 13,937
|
Post by MolotovMocktail on Dec 28, 2009 21:14:00 GMT -5
The brand split was a good idea in the short term, and was handled well kayfabe-wise as far as setting it up and maintaining the rivalry. It worked at the outset because, when the WWF took over WCW and ECW, they inherited their rosters, and had an overabundance of talent that could fill two brands, and would otherwise lead to overcrowding. Let me remind you who was on the roster to be divided between two shows...
-Steve Austin -The Rock -Hulk Hogan -Kurt Angle -Triple H -Ric Flair -The Undertaker -Shawn Michaels -Kane -Chris Benoit -Chris Jericho -Edge -Christian -The Big Show -Booker T -Rob Van Dam -Brock Lesnar -Eddie Guerrero
...and that's just the main event and upper midcard. Today, we have these guys...
-John Cena -Triple H -Shawn Michaels -Undertaker -Batista -Rey Mysterio -Randy Orton -Chris Jericho -Big Show -CM Punk
...stretched out across three shows. Plus, an overabundance of titles cheapen the belts, and make someone a champion of half the company. And while the tag belts are actually being defended now (though that's debatable how much that will happen with DX), it's still just singles guys being thrown together rather than true teams debuting and rising up together.
Mr. McMahon, tear down this wall.
|
|
Parrish
El Dandy
Banana Man Wouldn't Book That!!!
Posts: 8,729
|
Post by Parrish on Dec 28, 2009 21:35:35 GMT -5
point was to get new guys over and make new stars....here we are years later and the only new main event stars they have made are edge and jeff hardy.... they gave tons of guys chances and title runs but just gave up onthem too early and then didn't finish off their push to solidify them.
WWE either doesn't want to create anymore wrestlers main eventers and have stars for the future right now or they cant remember how.
either way end it that way we can atleast see everyone on one show
|
|
|
Post by Limity (BLM) on Dec 28, 2009 21:45:48 GMT -5
I have been forever against ending the split and always will be. RAW is absolutely atrocious. The only thing that's saved me all these years is SmackDown and its focus on actual wrestling versus two geriatric "rebels" and their retarded midget.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,306
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Dec 28, 2009 22:06:53 GMT -5
I think I have a compromise. Keep the brand split, unify the titles. The WWE, ECW, and World titles should be combined as well as the Women's and Diva's titles. The Champions can appear on all shows. The I.C. and U.S. titles can stay on their respective brands and maybe a TV title added for ECW. The Champion faces a challenger from a different brand at each PPV. With only one World title, we can have a little more variety in the main event scene without a ton of main eventers appearing on all shows taking time away from the midcarders. I think this would be the fairest thing for all involved. I have been saying that for some time now, but that usually gets crapped on when I say that here.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Dec 28, 2009 23:26:48 GMT -5
I have been forever against ending the split and always will be. RAW is absolutely atrocious. The only thing that's saved me all these years is SmackDown and its focus on actual wrestling versus two geriatric "rebels" and their retarded midget. Those characters are now on Smackdown too.
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Dec 29, 2009 5:25:00 GMT -5
Fun Fact: There were almost as many wrestlers in the DOA vs. Nation vs. Los Boriquas feud in 1997 than there are featured on each show. And this was during WWE's most fiscally terrible business year. Listen. There's a difference between liking the brand split and needing it. I can understand the fear of the RAW- creative direction becoming prevalent. That's a real issue. But the mass release scapegoat is ridiculous hyperbole. If they actually followed their previous successful business model there would be no need. You know, Tag Team divisions. IC title divisions. Hardcore divisions, what have you. Hell, there were more midcard schlubs fumbling around in the Hardcore Battle Royal at Wresatlemania 16 than there are collectively featured on each show, Main eventers included! Think about that. Hell, there were more employed MANAGERS on the 86-88 roster than everyone currently in ECW. That should really tell you something. And guess what? In the late 80's (Which had a larger roster than WWE & TNA combined) ran separate house shows. They just built the IC title up so much that Honky vs. Savage was drawing the same live gates in 87 that Hogan vs. Random challenger was that same night. Hell, they often had a third c-level card running the same night still with even lower card guys like the Killer Bees battling the Islanders in main events...and it still drew. And it could again with the right mixing and matching. Seriously. I fear for today's wrestling fans' sense and comprehension of remembered and established history. I'm really starting to think people have become so hopelessly inundated with this generation's clueless blundering direction that everyone's brain has since been desensitized and rendered into porridge since the year 2002. Maybe Vince really does own one of these, after all...
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Grimm on Dec 29, 2009 6:48:22 GMT -5
The brand split was a good idea in the short term, and was handled well kayfabe-wise as far as setting it up and maintaining the rivalry. It worked at the outset because, when the WWF took over WCW and ECW, they inherited their rosters, and had an overabundance of talent that could fill two brands, and would otherwise lead to overcrowding. Let me remind you who was on the roster to be divided between two shows... -Steve Austin -The Rock -Hulk Hogan -Kurt Angle -Triple H -Ric Flair -The Undertaker -Shawn Michaels -Kane -Chris Benoit -Chris Jericho -Edge -Christian -The Big Show -Booker T -Rob Van Dam -Brock Lesnar -Eddie Guerrero ...and that's just the main event and upper midcard. Today, we have these guys... -John Cena -Triple H -Shawn Michaels -Undertaker -Batista -Rey Mysterio -Randy Orton -Chris Jericho -Big Show -CM Punk ...stretched out across three shows. Plus, an overabundance of titles cheapen the belts, and make someone a champion of half the company. And while the tag belts are actually being defended now (though that's debatable how much that will happen with DX), it's still just singles guys being thrown together rather than true teams debuting and rising up together. Mr. McMahon, tear down this wall. Wow...those lists make one convincing argument. And no, that's not scarcasm. The collective star power that the WWE had following the Invasion storyline was immense and provided more than enough to draw ratings and still have good storylines. Now look at the ME on RAW alone: Cena Orton HHH HBK Big Sow Jericho (technically, he's still SD but he keeps popping up on RAW) That's six guys that you can see as legit world champions. And I use that term very, very loosely with Show. HHH is over 40 and HBK is in the twilight of his career. Just things to keep in mind. Smackdown has: Undertaker Batista Edge (when he comes back) Punk That's only 4 guys! And no, I don't count Rey as a ME who could legit hold the title. You can throw him in those matches, sure, but would he ever make a credible champ? Didn't think so. Don't forget that Taker and Batista won't be around for much longer either. So the ME scene is incredibly thin right now, which is why we've been getting so sick on seeing the same damn feud/matches. End the brand split and throw everyone back together. Midcarders can form stables just like the Nation, the Oddities, or hell, the JOB Squad. The restored the tag titles somewhat; give them actual teams to compete for them! As for what the mid and lower cards will do? Bring back the Hardcore title with the 24/7 rule. The matches can be both entertaining and funny, as we've seen in the past. The Divas? Really, I couldn't care less but you can merge the titles together, like what you'd do with the WWE and WHC titles, and go from there. Admittedly, the central problem I forsee in all of this would be the writers and their inability to plan anything long term. Solve that problem and we can really start discussing this seriously.
|
|
Dave at the Movies
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
VINTAGE D-DAY DAVE! Always cranking dat thing.
Posts: 18,224
|
Post by Dave at the Movies on Dec 29, 2009 7:34:34 GMT -5
Fun Fact: There were almost as many wrestlers in the DOA vs. Nation vs. Los Boriquas feud in 1997 than there are featured on each show. And this was during WWE's most fiscally terrible business year. Listen. There's a difference between liking the brand split and needing it. I can understand the fear of the RAW- creative direction becoming prevalent. That's a real issue. But the mass release scapegoat is ridiculous hyperbole. If they actually followed their previous successful business model there would be no need. You know, Tag Team divisions. IC title divisions. Hardcore divisions, what have you. Hell, there were more midcard schlubs fumbling around in the Hardcore Battle Royal at Wresatlemania 16 than there are collectively featured on each show, Main eventers included! Think about that. Hell, there were more employed MANAGERS on the 86-88 roster than everyone currently in ECW. That should really tell you something. And guess what? In the late 80's (Which had a larger roster than WWE & TNA combined) ran separate house shows. They just built the IC title up so much that Honky vs. Savage was drawing the same live gates in 87 that Hogan vs. Random challenger was that same night. Hell, they often had a third c-level card running the same night still with even lower card guys like the Killer Bees battling the Islanders in main events...and it still drew. And it could again with the right mixing and matching. Seriously. I fear for today's wrestling fans' sense and comprehension of remembered and established history. I'm really starting to think people have become so hopelessly inundated with this generation's clueless blundering direction that everyone's brain has since been desensitized and rendered into porridge since the year 2002. I 100% agree. You hit the nail right on the head. When the brand split started it worked. 2003 was the last year I actually really liked watching WWE and still didn't miss a show. Once they started getting rid of the invisible line between the brands is when I started to feel like they should just say screw the brands and bring the roster together. There are a lot of pros and cons on both sides but overall ending the brand split I think has less cons. Ending brand split Cons- 1. Risk the chance of RAW crap storylines being on all shows. This is a big risk. Smackdown is good for the most part but no where near as good as it could be if you mixed up the midcards on both Raw and Smackdown. 2. Some people may get released. Pros- 1. It would build up a better midcard division. People could actually have real feuds that don't just involve titles. 2. Stables would finally work again. The reasons stables don't work now is because they don't have enough people to feud against. There is a reason why there has only been one successful stable this decade in Evolution.(which only worked back when the brand split wasn't as bad off as it was now.) There just isn't enough people for a stable to feud with. They feud with a group of wrestlers for like a couple of months and then they have nothing else to do. That is the reason why Team Angle, JBL's Cabinet, and Heyman as a manager stable(which never even got off the ground) didn't work. 3. Tag Team would be much better. Just look at how unifying the tag belts have improved the division. You put the shows together and I'd say it would help even more because all the tag teams coudl actually face eachother rather than just facing the same team over and over and over and over.(yes I do mean Harts VS Cryme Tyme). 4. It would help the main event. Unifying the world titles would make the one true world title mean so much more. I honestly believe one of the reasons Cena has never truly been able to be the top guy is because they won't let him be the one and only true top guy. Just think if they ended the brand splits and turned him heel at around the same time.(which is exactly where I think they are headed with Cena right now.)
|
|
repomark
Unicron
For Mash Get Smash
Posts: 3,043
|
Post by repomark on Dec 29, 2009 7:48:54 GMT -5
Yay another brand split debate! I am all for ending it, but then I was never in favour of having it in the first place.
Whilst I agree it has its benefits in terms of giving new talent more of a spotlight that they would not necessarily attain in a non brand split world, there are ways of retaining this and unifying the world titles without fully ending the brand split.
Unify the world title, have the world champ defend one month against Raw contender, next month against smackdown contender. You could still have people only appearing on one or the other show building up feuds and one emerging as the challenger for the Undistputed Champion who could appear on both shows depending on when required. Sort of like how it was briefly in 2002 before they split the titles.
Just the way I would like to see it - I hate having two world titles as it makes wrestling feel like boxing where there are so many different heavy weight world champions no one knows who is meant to be the top guy.
|
|
Dave at the Movies
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
VINTAGE D-DAY DAVE! Always cranking dat thing.
Posts: 18,224
|
Post by Dave at the Movies on Dec 29, 2009 8:05:07 GMT -5
Yay another brand split debate! I am all for ending it, but then I was never in favour of having it in the first place. Whilst I agree it has its benefits in terms of giving new talent more of a spotlight that they would not necessarily attain in a non brand split world, there are ways of retaining this and unifying the world titles without fully ending the brand split. Unify the world title, have the world champ defend one month against Raw contender, next month against smackdown contender. You could still have people only appearing on one or the other show building up feuds and one emerging as the challenger for the Undistputed Champion who could appear on both shows depending on when required. Sort of like how it was briefly in 2002 before they split the titles. Just the way I would like to see it - I hate having two world titles as it makes wrestling feel like boxing where there are so many different heavy weight world champions no one knows who is meant to be the top guy. This was an idea I thought of as well as I'm sure others did too but I still don't think it would be as effective in the long run. Overall I just think ending the brand split would be the best choice. It would be a repackaging period for a while but I think after a year WWE would greatly improve.
|
|
|
Post by wrestlecrapcrap on Dec 29, 2009 8:57:04 GMT -5
One thing they could do is two the draft twice-annually instead of just once. You've got less main eventers per show now than when there were combined rosters, so to stop feuds overstaying their welcome (HHH/Orton and Cena/Orton) you then know that there will be new main eventers coming through, if they are needed. I think part of the reason they won't send those 3 off of Raw is because they think Raw couldn't do without them for a year, ratings wise, but if they knew they were only gone for 6 months, they could come back if Raw ratings suffered.
Of course, if they actually wanted to do a long feud, and it really caught fire with the fans (HBK/Jericho) and they didn't want it ended by the draft, you wouldn't have to change those particular main eventers, just if you saw them spinning their wheels and recycling old feuds instead of doing something new.
One problem is that with Wrestlemania season, quite rightly the brand rules are relaxed. Mania features the top card guys, and you want these guys promoted on the tv shows you are running, so you don't want their time taken up by lower card guys that aren't going to feature. So if there is a 'Mania season' between say Elimination Chamber and Backlash, thats about 2 months where you don't have draft implications anyway. Normally I would say you could do one draft show the 2nd Raw after Wrestlemania, and then do another one 6 months later, so in October sometime, but if you have a Mania season 4 months after that then there wouldn't be much point.
Maybe a proper draft in April and a 'mini draft' after Summerslam, incase there was a 'post Mania lull', which shouldn't happen if the original draft is used correctly. Maybe the Summerslam one isn't a 3 hour episode, just each show getting 2 picks, and if ECW is there they get one. So you can switch a main eventer and a prominent mid-carder from each show if need be. Divas can be traded throughout the year as has been done, since I don't think anyone cares too much about the rules there, although you may as well keep them fresh if you can.
I think the split definately still needs to be there though. You can't say 'Only Jeff Hardy and Edge have been made since 2002' since it simply isn't true. Look at the guys who have held world titles that simply wouldn't have been anywhere near if the split never happened. Cena, Batista, Orton, Edge, Jeff Hardy, CM Punk, Chris Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, JBL, King Booker, Jericho, Rey Mysterio, Sheamus, Big Show, RVD and Lashley (when the ECW title was billed as a World Championship) all got world title reigns post brand split. I'd bet only a quarter of them would have got a run had there been no split. Not to mention guys like Kennedy and Regal who they have tried to push but circumstances got in the way.
|
|
|
Post by RI Richmark on Dec 29, 2009 13:52:23 GMT -5
With all this talk of stables I just want to get my 2 cents in. I'm not a big fan of stables and I think they rarely help a midcarder's career. Sure, some stables have been successful, like the 4 Horsemen, DX, Evolution and to a lesser extent the Nation (I'm not even counting the NWO because that was a different concept.) But did Los Boricuas, DOA, the Cabinet, or La Familia really help the people in it.
Most of the time, all wrestlers do in stables is stand in the ring as the leader is talking, interfere in the leader's matches and get their ass kicked, sacrifice their own goals for those of the group (or leader), leach off the leader's heat, and get yelled at by the leader for screwing up.
Stables work best when they're kept small so everyone has something to do. Also they have to have members who are either already over with the crowd or who the company is willing to help develop. Just shoving midcarders into stables with little rhyme or reason does little for their careers. You think people would start thinking differently about Dolph Ziggler and Mike Knox if all they did was stand around while Chris Jericho talked.
Also because stables need a lot of TV time to develop you can't have to many of them. There simply isn't enough TV time to get all of them involved.
Of course, that just my opinion. I could be wrong.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Dec 29, 2009 15:46:28 GMT -5
On "time to end the brand split", most of the rationale given for maintaining what remains of the split was along two paths. 1. Smackdown would turn into RAW. 2. Alot of people would be fired. There's not much of a rebuttal I can give to #1 except say that the SD main events are more like RAW's now than most people would like to admit (Batista/Taker=2 established guys, DX on both shows. However, I have a very strong rebuttal to #2. In 1999, before the brand split and the acquisition of most WCW/ECW talent during Pax McMahon, the WWE still had a larger overall male roster than it now has. And much more of its midcard talent was over. What logical reason would there be for a company with less airtime to have more talent than it now posseses? Economics. Both micro and macro. In 1999, not only was WWE itself a great deal more popular than in 2009 (micro), but the overall economy itself was MUCH stronger than it now (macro). This was the tail end of the 1990s Internet-related economic boom, which brought America prosperity and $ not heard of since the 1920s. Fast forward to 2001, victory over WCW, and the beginning of Pax McMahon. The economy is beginning to tank as the first of two recessions begins.Wrestling's popularity is also beginning to diminish somewhat, but the individuals who made Attitude popular (Rock/Austin) and the ethos are still there. The contraction of the overall size of the fanbase is countered by the fact that WWE is now the ONLY game in town, which means ALL wrestling fans now watch it. As a result, WWE can afford to hire ex WCW and ECW talent en masse and ends up with a HUGE block of wrestlers for the InVasion. Fast forward to 2003, as Pax McMahon continues. The InVasion has been botched and has driven away some of WWE's viewers, but most WWE fans remain. The Rock/Austin era ends with Rock's final departure, so ratings are down somewhat anyway, and WWE begins the push of its Next Big Things-Cena and Batista-at a slow pace. Even with Rock gone, WWE is overloaded with main eventers from every wrestling league it has conquered. A small league that will eventually become modern TNA comes into existence, but its impact is negligible. WWE's roster size is at its zenith, so it begins the Brand Split as a means of creating new superstars to replace Rock and Austin. Fast forward to 2008. The worst recession in US history since the 1930s begins, affecting all businesses and doing massive damage, both monetary and psychological, to businesses. WWE is maintaining the "brand split" as a means to maximize its profits by creating different "properties" and has even introduced a third property, ECW. In response to the economic crisis, WWE has began cutting "dead weight" (mainly leftover employees from Attitude and earlier) from its roster. The rosters of each individual brand start to become thing, resulting in predictable matches, feuds, and a lack of tag teams. Fast forward to beginning of 2010. The recession has done more damage than even the most negative predictions anticipated. In 2009, the WWE DID make a profit. However, it was not due to increased revenue, but due to cost-cutting, which included even MORE firings. A number of trends suggest that WWE will do this again. The fact that the nation has not entered a true period of increased economic growth and increased spending, as well as several potentially unfavorable renegotiations of contracts for its TV properties (Smackdown possibly forced to WGN America, ECW canceled or rebranded into "Heat") suggest that WWE will fire even more people, regardless of whether the brand split is maintained or not. In short, WWE will only maintain its roster size if it thinks it can benefit from it. Whether WWE thinks it can benefit from it depends on the conditions of the broader US/World Economy and the professional wrestling/TV industries. Not on making either brand look "good".
|
|
|
Post by rrm15 on Dec 29, 2009 19:25:53 GMT -5
As has been said, a big complaint now is how stale the main event pictures on BOTH shows can be. Hell, Punk vs. Hardy happened like 3 months in a row on SD. It was good, but it KEPT happening. If they didn't have the split, there is more room for fresh challengers. Lets say Orton is champ. He can defend against Rey Mysterio one month, 'Taker the next, HBK the next..all sorts of possibilities.
As for what the lower-level guys could do instead of getting fired...hello, new tag team division!
The Hart Dynasty Priceless The Worlds Greatest Tag-Team The Colons Cryme Tyme The Dudebusters Yoshi Tatsu & Evan Bourne Finlay & William Regal Lance Cade & Trevor Murdoch (Cade is already re-signed and I'm sure Murdoch will be back soon) MVP & Mark Henry
Thats 20 guys right there.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Dec 29, 2009 19:28:29 GMT -5
As has been said, a big complaint now is how stale the main event pictures on BOTH shows can be. Hell, Punk vs. Hardy happened like 3 months in a row on SD. It was good, but it KEPT happening. If they didn't have the split, there is more room for fresh challengers. Lets say Orton is champ. He can defend against Rey Mysterio one month, 'Taker the next, HBK the next..all sorts of possibilities. As for what the lower-level guys could do instead of getting fired...hello, new tag team division! The Hart Dynasty Priceless The Worlds Greatest Tag-Team The Colons Cryme Tyme The Dudebusters Yoshi Tatsu & Evan Bourne Finlay & William Regal Lance Cade & Trevor Murdoch (Cade is already re-signed and I'm sure Murdoch will be back soon) MVP & Mark Henry Thats 20 guys right there. How about a couple more? DOMINATION (Ezekiel Jackson and Vance Archer w/ Regal as manager) Dolph Ziggler + Zach Ryder
|
|
|
Post by skiller on Dec 29, 2009 19:32:02 GMT -5
I think the brand split actually got worse as time went on. At the start they had clearer divisions between the shows. Those began to fade and eventually it reached a point where you would see anyone from any show on any other brand. It was pointless.
The annual trade was a good idea on paper. But when they started just trading guys left and right on a whim, it not only made the big trade less effective. But it also shows that they might not think these things through too well. Kind of a reflection on the past few years IMO.
|
|
|
Post by coolkevthedude on Dec 29, 2009 21:46:53 GMT -5
As has been said, a big complaint now is how stale the main event pictures on BOTH shows can be. Hell, Punk vs. Hardy happened like 3 months in a row on SD. It was good, but it KEPT happening. If they didn't have the split, there is more room for fresh challengers. Lets say Orton is champ. He can defend against Rey Mysterio one month, 'Taker the next, HBK the next..all sorts of possibilities. As for what the lower-level guys could do instead of getting fired...hello, new tag team division! The Hart Dynasty Priceless The Worlds Greatest Tag-Team The Colons Cryme Tyme The Dudebusters Yoshi Tatsu & Evan Bourne Finlay & William Regal Lance Cade & Trevor Murdoch (Cade is already re-signed and I'm sure Murdoch will be back soon) MVP & Mark Henry Thats 20 guys right there. How about a couple more? DOMINATION (Ezekiel Jackson and Vance Archer w/ Regal as manager) Dolph Ziggler + Zach Ryder Goldust and Hurricane
|
|
ANTLOL
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,384
|
Post by ANTLOL on Dec 30, 2009 2:24:07 GMT -5
From a business standpoint ending the brand split would be a bad idea. With the brand split WWE has RAW and SD as pseudo-competition and ECW as an excuse for another smaller fed on TV. If there was just ONE WWE with ONE World Title and maybe two second-tier titles, I think many wrestlers would have nothing to do and think about deflecting to TNA. TNA would get stronger and eventually rise up to be real competition. The monopoly would start to crumble and WWE would have to care about the fans again.
From my personal standpoint I would love to see WWE lose a shitload of money and TNA as well as ROH rise up to be competition.
|
|