Jimmy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,317
|
Post by Jimmy on Apr 21, 2012 20:15:28 GMT -5
Now obviously for many years RAW has been WWE's flagship show and treated as such, but I think this is a turning point in how they use both shows now with a basically non-existant brand split and one GM running both shows. It really feels like SmackDown is now a complete afterthought; the Thunder to RAW's Nitro. Thunder was infamous for existing on an almost different plane from Nitro where the top stars didn't appear and much of the show was spent recapping/hyping Nitro along with matches featuring lower card guys. That's what SmackDown has felt like, and appearances by guys like Ryback, D-Young and Titus, The Usos, Hunico...all guys who almost certainly aren't going to appear on RAW anytime soon (and guys I like, don't get me wrong) but appeared on SD just last night. Plus Damien Sandow's vignettes. Now granted they did have a DB/Henry/Rhodes vs. Sheamus/Big Show/Orton main event, but even still of those guys only Orton is considered a 'big' star. Just wait until the equivalent of Konnan vs. Stevie Ray is main eventing SmackDown.  |
|
Ryanar
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,429
|
Post by Ryanar on Apr 21, 2012 20:18:25 GMT -5
I would argue that Big Show is a more recognizable name than Orton. A Non-WWE Fan would know who Big Show is before Randy Orton.
|
|
|
|
Post by Todd's crazy , Man. on Apr 21, 2012 20:28:05 GMT -5
Have to be careful with my words. Uh , Smackdown is the wrestling show to me and Raw is the entertainment show?
I don't know how to explain it really. Raw is like a variety show with wrestling where as even though they do a lot of skits on Smackdown they feel like the skits feel more relevant to actual wrestling then what raw does?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimichiro Likes Erick Rowan on Apr 21, 2012 20:32:02 GMT -5
Have to be careful with my words. Uh , Smackdown is the wrestling show to me and Raw is the entertainment show? I don't know how to explain it really. Raw is like a variety show with wrestling where as even though they do a lot of skits on Smackdown they feel like the skits feel more relevant to actual wrestling then what raw does? I know what you mean. Smackdown tends to have less matches but they last longer than the matches on Raw. And regarding the topic at hand - is that necessarily a bad thing? I'm fine with Smackdown being the show for midcarders and B-level main eventers. |
|
|
|
Post by Brick Killed a Guy on Apr 21, 2012 20:32:49 GMT -5
Hasn't it always been WWE's Thunder? At least compared to RAW.
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on Apr 21, 2012 20:37:36 GMT -5
It's definitely Thunder in my eyes. Give it time and it could become Sunday Night Heat circa 2003.
|
|
Jimmy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,317
|
Post by Jimmy on Apr 21, 2012 20:37:50 GMT -5
And regarding the topic at hand - is that necessarily a bad thing? I'm fine with Smackdown being the show for midcarders and B-level main eventers. Not necessarily a bad thing, but it doesn't seem to make much sense if the intent is to continue the brand split. |
|
CH Punk
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Advice: Noted
Stuck in the Retro Zone
Posts: 15,570
|
Post by CH Punk on Apr 21, 2012 20:42:09 GMT -5
Hasn't it always been WWE's Thunder? At least compared to RAW. There was a period of time where Smackdown had better ratings than Raw and, until last year (with all the injuries and retirements), Smackdown always had a comparable number of big names to Raw. Also, I think at this point, because ratings for Smackdown aren't very important, that they are using the show as a way to build names to transfer to Raw when they feel they're ready. |
|
|
|
Post by Cry Me a Wiggle on Apr 21, 2012 20:45:15 GMT -5
Hasn't it always been WWE's Thunder? At least compared to RAW. In the two-and-a-half years before the brand split, it was only slightly underneath Raw in terms of stature. Big things still happened on Smackdown, and it was generally as can't-miss as Raw. Once the brand split hit, they were both equally important, especially once the Undisputed Title split. I'd say Smackdown became Thunder around the time of the ECW revival and Heyman left as booker. He was probably the only one who gave a damn about keeping it even with Raw, and once he was gone... it'd been a steady spiral ever since. |
|
|
|
Post by rapidfire187 on Apr 21, 2012 20:47:44 GMT -5
Have to be careful with my words. Uh , Smackdown is the wrestling show to me and Raw is the entertainment show? I don't know how to explain it really. Raw is like a variety show with wrestling where as even though they do a lot of skits on Smackdown they feel like the skits feel more relevant to actual wrestling then what raw does? I don't really feel it's like that now, but it certainly was before. Especially in 2002-2003 and again in 2008-2009. Now it just seems that Smackdown is a less exciting version of RAW. There may be more wrestling on Smackdown but it's not particularly great wrestling. RAW seems to be the one that gets the occasional must see match these days, but that's nkt ery common either. |
|
|
|
Post by mistressofpain on Apr 21, 2012 20:49:34 GMT -5
Hasn't it always been WWE's Thunder? At least compared to RAW. There was a period of time where Smackdown had better ratings than Raw and, until last year (with all the injuries and retirements), Smackdown always had a comparable number of big names to Raw. Used to be that Cena, HBK, and Triple H were the faces of Raw and the Undertaker, Batista, and Rey were the faces of Smackdown. Nowadays, you've got Cena and Punk, and... Orton and Bryan? To be truthful, both shows have lost a lot of star power. |
|
Celgress
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Superior One
Posts: 19,009
|
Post by Celgress on Apr 21, 2012 22:08:14 GMT -5
It's definitely Thunder in my eyes. Give it time and it could become Sunday Night Heat circa 2003. I agree with you, on both points. |
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Apr 21, 2012 22:51:10 GMT -5
Pretty much anything that gets over on Smackdown will end up on Raw.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2012 0:10:36 GMT -5
I wish they could do it in such a way that both shows can stand on their own legs but that's not the case. Raw is their flagship show, it's Raw while SD is their secondary. While I think in these next few months with more debuting stars it'll turn into a far better place I'm never thinking that it'll be up to Raw's level. It'll get better and while it does have a "Thunder" vibe I doubt it's permanent.
|
|
hassanchop
Grimlock
Who are you to doubt Belldandy?
Posts: 14,917 
|
Post by hassanchop on Apr 22, 2012 0:13:03 GMT -5
If only I can post that video called Thunder Blunders where the most embarrassing moments of Thunder are shown.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2012 0:41:47 GMT -5
Imagine how pissed off, say, Kevin Nash would have been if he was drafted to THUNDER.
Russo could've booked some "awesome" worked-shoots based on that.
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,976
|
Post by agent817 on Apr 22, 2012 0:54:47 GMT -5
A little off-topic, but hasn't anyone noticed how the colors matched for each promotion's shows? Nitro had the whole red thing going on like Raw did (and still does), while Thunder and Smackdown always had blue.
|
|
Mochi Lone Wolf
Fry's dog Seymour
Development through Destruction.
Posts: 24,175
|
Post by Mochi Lone Wolf on Apr 22, 2012 1:12:20 GMT -5
In theory, yes. In quality, no thank god.
|
|
|
|
Post by -Lithium- on Apr 22, 2012 2:21:16 GMT -5
Hasn't it always been WWE's Thunder? At least compared to RAW. I wouldn't say in 2003. They beat RAW in the ratings numerous times, and Hogan, Rock, and Vince were on the show. Vince McMahon. The Rock. Hulk Hogan. Along with Lesnar, Taker, and Angle... |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Woodrow on Apr 22, 2012 6:03:22 GMT -5
Hell, there were times in 2002 where it felt like Nitro in it's prime and Raw was WCW Worldwide
|
|
