TheDieselTrain
Fry's dog Seymour
Chicks Dig Hootie.
Is Stone Cold gonna have to smack a bitch?? WHAT!!!?????
Posts: 23,724
|
Post by TheDieselTrain on Aug 18, 2013 12:53:05 GMT -5
I think people really romanticize the single brand PPV's. Sure, when they were done right they were entertaining and gave the rosters more to do and a better chance at showcasing their talents. Good examples would be Vengeance 2003, Backlash 2004 and Vengeance 2005. Each of those featured strong cards which had long matches, and storylines which people actually cared about. However during that period there were also a number of shockingly bad PPV's. Great American Bash 2004 is one of the worst PPV's I've ever seen, with such elusive matches as Luther Reigns vs. Charlie Haas, Kenzo Suzuki vs. Billy Gunn, Mordecai vs. Hardcore Holly and of course Undertaker vs. The Dudleys as the main event. People had to PAY to watch those! Other bad PPV's were Armageddon 2003, Armageddon 2004, Cyber Sunday 2006 and of course December to Dismember. There were also a lot of 'bleh' events where nothing of value really happened. Just because a PPV lets the roster flex their muscles and showcase themselves doesn't necessarily mean its going to be good. It depends on the talent, and if the talent sucks (like some did between 2003 and 2007) then it'll lead to a bad show. You can't expect WWE to just give away Luther Reigns vs Charlie Haas for free. IIRC that actually was a bonus match made the night of when Haas laughed at Angle for being in a wheelchair or something. So the crowd got that as an extra treat.
|
|
|
Post by Been burned too many times on Aug 18, 2013 13:21:36 GMT -5
Kinda, yeah.
It was cool having both Raw and Smackdown feel like 2 different shows with different wrestlers on them. Felt like each champion got a chance to do something when the brands were split. Look at Cutis Axel, what's he doing with that IC title? Same for Dean Ambrose and the US title, he only just got an opponent a week before the ppv. Brand split allows each show to focus on their own wrestlers, I also liked how the GM's got mad when their wrestlers appeared on another show. It actually meant something back then and when a Smackdown superstar showed up on Raw, it was like "Whoa. What's gonna happen?" Because WE knew that it was supposed to happen except for special events Mania, Rumble, Summerslam, etc.
Right now its pretty much the same guys interacting on every show. Obviously not every match but still. I think it makes each show have its own identity when they're split too.
If the brands were split folks like Punk, Cena, etc showing up on Smackdown would feel special. The drafts were pretty fun too when they actually stuck with their decisions. Not stuff like HHH to Smackdown for like a week or John Cena going back and forth to Smackdown/Raw in one day.
|
|
|
Post by mrtuesday on Aug 18, 2013 15:09:44 GMT -5
Like I've said before, the only way a brand split could work today is if the two brands were "WWE" (Raw and Smackdown, PG, kid/family friendly, typical "sports entertainment" silliness, skits and comedy segments) and a smaller, stripped down spin-off brand with a distinct name that would operate (kayfabe) as an semi-independent subsidiary, and would feature a trimmed roster, more harder hitting, adult content for the older mainly male demographic in smaller arenas with more of a focus on "wrestling"/in-ring action. It would be the Miramax to WWE's Disney. In essence, an edgy "indie" operating under WWE's control. You pretty much described the current NXT.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2013 15:16:35 GMT -5
Not in the slightest.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Aug 18, 2013 15:33:23 GMT -5
Like I've said before, the only way a brand split could work today is if the two brands were "WWE" (Raw and Smackdown, PG, kid/family friendly, typical "sports entertainment" silliness, skits and comedy segments) and a smaller, stripped down spin-off brand with a distinct name that would operate (kayfabe) as an semi-independent subsidiary, and would feature a trimmed roster, more harder hitting, adult content for the older mainly male demographic in smaller arenas with more of a focus on "wrestling"/in-ring action. It would be the Miramax to WWE's Disney. In essence, an edgy "indie" operating under WWE's control. You pretty much described the current NXT. Something like NXT could be the basis of it. The main difference is that it wouldn't be a developmental system, but rather something on equal terms with the main roster.
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,888
|
Post by agent817 on Aug 18, 2013 18:30:06 GMT -5
Okay, I will be blunt about this. Back in 2006, Smackdown actually had some good PPVs despite the angles not being so good. No Way Out, No Mercy and Judgment Day were actually good. Especially No Way Out. That was one of the best PPVs from that whole year. The main event was a great match and it had a decent undercard.
|
|
Essential1
Hank Scorpio
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Essential1 on Aug 18, 2013 18:54:42 GMT -5
Although the roster split made each show unique, the actual branded PPV's were awful. A real struggle to get through.
I remember Bad Blood 2003, which had 3 main event calibre matches in Flair/Michaels,Jericho/Goldberg and Nash/HHH still seemed like a chore and a longer version of RAW when you had Rodney Mack/Chris Nowinski vs Dudleys open the show followed by Scott Steiner and Test. You also had Steve Austin and Eric Bischoff running around playing Redneck Spin the wheel or whatever. All I remember was them doing a burping contest with Steve Austin doing a fake burp in Terri Runnels face and Mae Young giving Eric Bischoff a bronco buster. Now THAT'S filler.
|
|