fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 38,960
|
Post by fw91 on Jan 3, 2017 0:00:53 GMT -5
Now let me preface this by stating that I am not crying for attention or slamming anyone's opinion. BUT what am I missing here? Opinion here leads to the impression that RAW is shittiest of shows and Smackdown is the holy grail of television. My opinion greatly differs. RAW is inferior, but I'm not going to turn to hyperbole and call it a dumpster fire, insulting or offensive. It's just a show that has some good, some bad. Smackdown? Really isn't all that holy imo. Their good stuff is great, but there are also times where I tune out, and besides TLC, I thought that the RAW ppvs, are much better than the SD ones. My honest opinion really reflects on the age old battle of IWC vs Establishment. RAW represents the establishment, I feel that a lot of you watch to crticize, and SD represents the anti establishment, so we go in to praise which in turn leads to (one again imo) overrating. But with opinions being hyperbolic in both directions, I never felt so disconnected with the fellow fanbase, I feel like a bitter old-timer lol, and I don't really like that.
|
|
|
Post by MAD TITAN on Jan 3, 2017 0:01:45 GMT -5
Stopped watching. Now I feel better!
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 38,960
|
Post by fw91 on Jan 3, 2017 0:03:10 GMT -5
Stopped watching. Now I feel better! thing is, I know I'll never stop, so maybe that's why I'll never complain
|
|
|
Post by 111111 on Jan 3, 2017 0:07:19 GMT -5
Watch whatever you like. Theres so much wwe content being pumped out and not all of it is going to appeal to everyone.
I only watch the ppvs, 205 live, talking smack and I only really follow Raw and Smackdown by watching clips that look interesting on YouTube unless they're in the UK then I usually watch the full shows for the crowd. That's plenty of modern wwe for me, usually fit in an indie show a week as well and sometimes old stuff on the network.
|
|
|
Post by katiemorgan67212 on Jan 3, 2017 0:08:36 GMT -5
I enjoy both RAW and SD. I only really hate 2 things in WWE right now - Mick Foley and David Otunga who are both horrible and I am rooting hard for them to both be fired ASAP but other than that I am pretty happy with most of what I see on WWE programming.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 38,960
|
Post by fw91 on Jan 3, 2017 0:10:52 GMT -5
I enjoy both RAW and SD. I only really hate 2 things in WWE right now - Mick Foley and David Otunga who are both horrible and I am rooting hard for them to both be fired ASAP but other than that I am pretty happy with most of what I see on WWE programming. That's pretty much where I am. Foley I really don't mind because he's Foley, and Otunga I'm indifferent bc of the strength of his coutnerparts.
|
|
Rican
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
July 17, 2011 - HHHe called it
Posts: 16,461
|
Post by Rican on Jan 3, 2017 0:12:04 GMT -5
The extra hour has a looooot to do with why people think RAW is so much worse. If SmackDown was three hours it would drag too. I can't watch a TV a show for that long. But last time I sat down and watched a whole RAW (the night New Day broke the record) it really wasn't THAT bad like you said. Just long. I think people are just burnt out and should cut back some, too. I mostly only watch the PPVs now and my viewing experience is much more enjoyable because there's just less of it.
RAW also has Stephanie McMahon and Roman Reigns, who are terribly booked characters that make everything around them worse. But they're really the only parts of RAW I would say are outright bad. If you took them out and cut the extra hour I don't think the two shows are fundamentally all that different.
|
|
ASYLUMHAUSEN
Fry's dog Seymour
GIFs | Shitposts | Fun
Posts: 24,372
|
Post by ASYLUMHAUSEN on Jan 3, 2017 0:12:49 GMT -5
Smackdown? Really isn't all that holy imo. (seriously though...that's fine. different strokes for different folks. I just don't happen to agree with you)
|
|
|
Post by schizo on Jan 3, 2017 0:13:54 GMT -5
SmackDown is my favorite WWE show right now but I don't think Raw is the drizzling shits people make it out to be either. There'd some good and some bad but I tend to find myself enjoying Raw for the most part
|
|
|
Post by Jacy Derangement Syndrome on Jan 3, 2017 0:14:24 GMT -5
I genuinely care about 205 Live more than anything else in WWE right now, and that's pretty much the Brawl 4 All division.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2017 0:14:26 GMT -5
Smackdown is a good show. Raw is not a good show. Raw has moments but the frequent mistakes they make are just too annoying to overlook, the distraction roll-up finishes, the weird cruiserweight division, the comedy main eventers.
It's not like Smackdown has been the best wrestling show ever but it's a good show the characters for the most part behave sensibly, and Talking Smack adds a whole other layer to things that makes the whole presentation come off more three dimensional. I think a lot of the hype for Smackdown might be overblown because its graded on a curve, but I still think they are doing very good shows with a good cast of characters that I'm genuinely interested in seeing for myself what they're gonna do next. I don't think Smackdown's hype or the general disappointment in Raw are undeserved opinions. I can't name much that Raw got right in the last year and I can't name a whole lot Smackdown's done wrong.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 38,960
|
Post by fw91 on Jan 3, 2017 0:16:59 GMT -5
Smackdown? Really isn't all that holy imo. (seriously though...that's fine. different strokes for different folks. I just don't happen to agree with you)oh it's good, don't get me wrong. but A) Their ppvs are kinda boring B) I never watched a show and thought it was amazing. I think there have been weeks where RAW was better. As another poster mentioned, I really think fundamentally they are similar, just SD doesnt have the extra hour and more iwc friendly players.
|
|
Jiren
Patti Mayonnaise
Hearts Bayformers
Posts: 35,163
|
Post by Jiren on Jan 3, 2017 0:20:20 GMT -5
I'd say the comparisons are like
Raw = Phantom Menace = Some very good bits but overall it's shit SD = Return Of The Jedi = Very good but has some very noticeable flaws
|
|
RI Richmark
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 21,093
Member is Online
|
Post by RI Richmark on Jan 3, 2017 0:21:56 GMT -5
Now let me preface this by stating that I am not crying for attention or slamming anyone's opinion. BUT what am I missing here? Opinion here leads to the impression that RAW is shittiest of shows and Smackdown is the holy grail of television. My opinion greatly differs. RAW is inferior, but I'm not going to turn to hyperbole and call it a dumpster fire, insulting or offensive. It's just a show that has some good, some bad. Smackdown? Really isn't all that holy imo. Their good stuff is great, but there are also times where I tune out, and besides TLC, I thought that the RAW ppvs, are much better than the SD ones. My honest opinion really reflects on the age old battle of IWC vs Establishment. RAW represents the establishment, I feel that a lot of you watch to crticize, and SD represents the anti establishment, so we go in to praise which in turn leads to (one again imo) overrating. But with opinions being hyperbolic in both directions, I never felt so disconnected with the fellow fanbase, I feel like a bitter old-timer lol, and I don't really like that. I know how you feel. I don't want to tell anyone how they should feel but sometimes all the anger gets annoying.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2017 0:24:20 GMT -5
Raw has mostly been meh to bad every week, but Smackdown hasn't been without fault either. The last two weeks were the first Smackdowns I've enjoyed in a while, but even during the lean weeks people were banging the drum saying it was incredible and Raw was literal dog shit. Opinions are opinions, but I feel like quite a few of these weeks were closer in quality than people would admit.
But it mostly bums me out how invested people are in one show succeeding or the other failing. I want both shows to be good every week, but we're at the point now where you can rate a show poorly without even needing to watch it. Raw and Smackdown are both under the WWE umbrella... if the company fails, both shows fail.
I don't want Raw to be better than Smackdown or for Smackdown to be better than Raw... I want both shows to be as great as the talent they have at their disposal.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jan 3, 2017 0:26:12 GMT -5
I generally find RAW to be the same as it ever was.
Not really good or bad... just boring.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Jan 3, 2017 0:32:42 GMT -5
SDL is a good consistent show, IMO. They know what they want to do and do it with little variation. Hell, even when disaster strikes, they find a way to make it work (Becky's illness, AJ's foot injury, Zack's injury and so on). That to me makes a better show. To use the number scale, SDL is usually between a 5 and a 7 to me.
Then there is RAW. RAW seems to have zero clue what they want to be. Are they a wrestling show or a variety show? Do they want to appeal to the lapsed fans, the current audience or the old man running it? Then where as SDL has shown they will roll with the fans if they like or dislike something (Carmella and Heath Slater), RAW gives no shits about what the audience wants. That is not a Roman knock either. KO is turned into a pussy that cannot win without Jericho, Sami is a loser that cannot win a damn match (and it has zero to do with being an underdog), Bayley is moron, Foley is a moron, are Sheamus and Cesaro allies and faces or forced heel/face partners now?, and so on. See they can put on good shows but they have zero consistency with it. They live off 10s and 1s instead of trying for something that, IMO, makes you say "hmm, I cannot wait for next week".
|
|
Powerline
ALF
I'm a pale imitator of a boy in the sky, with a cap on his head and a knot in his tie
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by Powerline on Jan 3, 2017 0:37:21 GMT -5
To answer the question of the thread title, I've felt that way for ages. Hell, in fear of being too honest, I used to only semi-joke that speaking ill of Jericho was an open invitation to get torn apart on here, and there were a couple occasions I got called out as a flame-baiter, just because I was making (admittingly, very strongly worded) arguments that this Jericho run was trash and people were just forgiving it because it was Chris Jericho. I'm still convinced if it was "The List of Rusev" or if one of Enzo's catchphrases was "stupid idiot", people'd shit on it. But I'm over it. He's still a talented cat, and he's over. Just gotta swallow the pill.
At this point I watch Smackdown exclusively. I don't pay a dime for the Network (though might get it for the Rumble, just to see), don't plan on watching Mania, anything non-Hardy in TNA is skippable, and I have no real access to RoH or anything in England. I'm considering getting NJPW World just for Wrestle Kingdom (I have Wednesday off) to finally see if that's worth following, but that's my exposure to wrestling.
And most importantly, I think Raw sucks top to bottom, and I don't think shortening it to 2 hours would make a damn bit of difference. Raw isn't instantly going to become as good as SD Live. It would still suck. Raw doesn't just suck because it's three hours, just like SD Live isn't good JUST because it's two hours.
I just feel like the WWE has burned fans like me who want faces and heels, doesn't mind laughs as long as it's not expecting me to take the jokers as serious threats right after (hi, Owens and Jericho), and where the in-ring product is the endgame and the starmaker, instead of being less important than its ever been before.
Nothing against a guy like Enzo, but when he got called up people thought he was a future multi-time world champion based solely on his charisma, when I have a hard time picturing someone with his talents (and lack of included) having ANY TV time in the 2000s and before. People think The Miz, based on a (admittingly good) heel gimmick should be the main heel on Smackdown, when I still don't trust him to carry a match with someone. Everyone points to the 4-way IC title match and then ignores the Darren Young match because "Darren Young sucks". I'm of the camp that you can't give Miz credit for a good 4 way including 3 excellent wrestlers, and then forgive him for a bad match with Darren Young. It's both or neither; either he was carried and then couldn't do it himself, or the fatal 4 way was good and the Darren Young match was bad in spite of him. And I don't think Owens, Cesaro or Zayn could have as bad a match with Darren Young as Miz did. And many people might say "of course he isn't in the same league, nobody's saying he's in the same league". Well then, in my opinion, that right there should be enough to keep him on the outside of ANY main event feud until he narrows the gap. Again, I believe the in-ring product should be the end-game. If you can't show up and have a decent match on a regular basis and have a good/great match when called upon to do so, the idea of you being on the main roster shouldn't even be entertained.
But anyway, I'm off track (and I hope my opinions don't hijack this thread).
My point is, I've just accepted what I want out of my wrestling and what the WWE product is are two different things (as far as Raw is concerned). I'll watch Smackdown because I'm LOVING AJ Styles, but I'm afraid the first "re-draft" event that happens will see him go to Raw while Owens or Rollins or Jericho go to Smackdown, and that'll take the wind completely out of that balloon. And I'd get excited for Samoa Joe or Nakamura or Roode, but I'm fully expecting them to be wasted on Raw. I have ZERO faith in their flagship show to be anything smart, compelling, or entertaining.
You said you feel like you can't quit watching. I eventually had to come to the logic of "This show sucks. Why am I watching a show that I think sucks? I could be doing something fun or fulfilling instead of doing/watching something I don't enjoy". It's as simple as that. Yeah, you're missing out, but you're not enjoying it anyway, why be of the mindset that once you stop watching it'll suddenly be good again?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2017 0:45:53 GMT -5
Raw has mostly been meh to bad every week, but Smackdown hasn't been without fault either. The last two weeks were the first Smackdowns I've enjoyed in a while, but even during the lean weeks people were banging the drum saying it was incredible and Raw was literal dog shit. Opinions are opinions, but I feel like quite a few of these weeks were closer in quality than people would admit. But it mostly bums me out how invested people are in one show succeeding or the other failing. I want both shows to be good every week, but we're at the point now where you can rate a show poorly without even needing to watch it. Raw and Smackdown are both under the WWE umbrella... if the company fails, both shows fail. I don't want Raw to be better than Smackdown or for Smackdown to be better than Raw... I want both shows to be as great as the talent they have at their disposal. I really don't think it's a matter of people wanting to hate Raw. If a show does things that people don't want it to be doing (shoehorned Roman Reigns pushes, historic women making history, comedy to a point of excess) and does these things often, I think it becomes less of people wanting it to fail, and more just an expectation that it's going to fail. And it probably causes some people to scoff at things too much but it's not unwarranted. If the shows are bad might as well have some fun with it. I get that three hours of television is tough to write for, but still a lot of the times the mistakes made on shows seems irrelevant to the length of time. And if that extra hour is the reason Raw isn't any good and Smackdown is better than so be it, that's the way it is. Smackdown might be worse if it was three hours but it's not three hours so it's not really much of a point to make.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 3, 2017 0:54:43 GMT -5
Raw isn't too bad, it's just too long. If it were two hours, it'd be more tolerable.
|
|