yash
AC Slater
Posts: 249
|
Post by yash on Jan 3, 2017 0:59:39 GMT -5
Smackdown has been consistent and feels like it is moving you will actually feel lost if you skip an episode unlike raw which is always the same old same old and whoever said that smackdown got iwc favourite players is probably watching a diffrent show then me raw got 3 horsewomen,jericho,owens,sami,rollins,enzo and big cass rusev Cesaro while smackdown got aj,dean and bray and alpha since brand split they got ellsworth more over then sami hell they gave him more memorable moments then sami they got slater over and created slater and rhyno they helped usos and carmella reinvent themselves they have made randy and wyatt family intresting again and now they are building corbin and alpha while all raw has been able to do is book strowman to his strength so yeah while the heat you witnesses here is more then likely exaggerated and playful banter they are justified
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2017 1:14:01 GMT -5
SmackDown definitely has its flaws to be sure - I think the big thing is the thinness of its roster makes itself known quite often, pretty much every single feud the show's done since the brand split has dragged on too long, and the tag division's booking has largely been awful with them seemingly going out of their way to avoid having a credible heel team - but the show feels fun and like things actually happen on it with every week at least feeling somewhat fresh, compared to Raw where any given show from the past six months would just be completely indistinguishable to me. And it's not just Raw being three hours either, I'm usually completely checked out of Raw 45 minutes in while SmackDown generally can keep my attention the whole time.
Though really the most remarkable thing about the brand split is somehow I'd say since it happened JBL is the most tolerable commentator in the company instead of being the most unbearable. Graves is still good when he's not on Raw but sucks on there, Saxton and Cole are even worse without JBL constantly shouting them down, Ranallo irritates me most of the time with how much he seems to be trying to make himself a meme, and Otunga is a dumbass.
|
|
xxshoyuweeniexx
King Koopa
Going Big and Saying That
Posts: 10,111
Member is Online
|
Post by xxshoyuweeniexx on Jan 3, 2017 1:49:55 GMT -5
I generally find RAW to be the same as it ever was. Not really good or bad... just boring. Seriously, besides the very first post draft Raw and when KO won the title, every Raw has generally felt like the same boring Raw it was at the start of the year. And last year, and the year before that and so on. It feels like the exact same show from 2002 compared to Smackdown, which feels completely different. Hell SD isn't even that good some weeks, the Ellsworth stuff kinda dragged too long, the thin roster, David Outunga, etc. but damn it at least it's consistent like 7 or 8 times out of 10.
|
|
|
Post by Oh Cry Me a Screwball on Jan 3, 2017 2:06:15 GMT -5
Smackdown has better storytelling, by a country mile. The storylines themselves feel like they actually have a beginning, middle, and end. There's very little in the way of anything really being forced, with the possible exception of Ellsworth, and even that feels logical in the way they have executed it. They aren't dragging title reigns beyond their shelf-life to force a meaningless record. They don't have a top babyface getting booed out of every building in the country. We don't know where the current storyline with the Wyatts and Orton is going, but I want to watch the show to find out. They aren't putting women in gimmick matches for the sole purpose of telling people that they are making history, and the one time they did a gimmick match it served for a meaningful title change as opposed to hot potatoing the title.
Sure, there's problems with the show, such as American Alpha's cold path to the tag team titles, guys like Apollo Crews being underutilized despite their being so little depth to the roster, and not a whole lot of good supporting cast in the tag division, but everyone that is featured heavily on the show (the Cenas, the Ambroses, the AJ Styles, the Wyatts, the Ortons, the Mizes) is being booked exactly the way they should be.
|
|
|
Post by Ryback on a Pole! on Jan 3, 2017 4:05:16 GMT -5
Raw is too long for me and has a terrible main event scene. The midcard I am fine with.
The tag division is nice and competitive. Rusev vs Enzo and Cass is a fun feud. I've loved Zayn vs Braun. The women's division is entertaining and has good stories.
It falls apart because it's A) Lacking a good midcard champion the way Smackdown has Miz since Reigns is just holding the belt and doing nothing with it and B) The main event is dreadful and couldn't give a toss about the two main faces on the show and the two main heels are just so-so at the moment.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,533
Member is Online
|
Post by Bo Rida on Jan 3, 2017 4:44:52 GMT -5
I could never quite get by head around the anti-establishment argument when it was applied to NXT but Smackdown?
The show is named after one of the biggest stars in Hollywood and that name has made it into the dictionary. It features the two biggest stars in the company Cena and The Undertaker, the former may well become big in Hollywood too. All of the current Smackdown champions seem to have been chosen due to them having some measure of success outside of WWE and is so establishment that you have be a multimillionaire outside of wrestling and/or have a famous spouse to even do the commentary. It even has it's very own king (booker)!
OK I may have stretched that a bit far but my point is most people would be happy if we got two good WWE shows a week, we're quite happy with the establishment if they put on good TV.
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Jan 3, 2017 5:08:52 GMT -5
Like with a lot of things, it's all somewhere in the middle. RAW is usually the weakest of the two shows, but rarely is the whole show this abomination upon humanity that it may come off as when reading some of our most critical posts. SmackDown is usually better, but it's not always this flawless land of milk and honey that it gets made out to be.
For all the hand-wringing over the status of guys like Cesaro and Sami Zayn on RAW, they're rarely not on the show in a featured role. Cesaro, especially, I feel is in a damn good place right now with this team with Sheamus. Even Zayn, doing the thankless task of being the live tackle dummy for Braun Strowman tonight, made him work for that win. On the other hand, on a show with a smaller roster, the likes of The Usos, American Alpha, Apollo Crews, Tyler Breeze, Fandango, Jack Swagger, etc. can't crack it for consistent TV time.
|
|
King Devitt
Grimlock
It gets better the longer you stare at it
Posts: 13,743
|
Post by King Devitt on Jan 3, 2017 5:45:17 GMT -5
Plus Smackdown has Talking Smack, a quite innovative show with a catchy name that did so well Raw had to copy it with Raw Talk, a horribly named entity that sounds like an early morning show about porn stars who have had too much sex.
That is all you need to know about the differences between Raw and SDL.
One is trying new things. The other is Roman Cena.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Jan 3, 2017 6:09:37 GMT -5
I remembered when WWE announced the return of the Brand Split, people here and online said it would fail because no one would buy into the rival show mentality because it's a manufactured mechanism. And look where we are now, beefing over shows. Hoping for Raw's downfall while hyping up Smackdown to Carnival Barker Vince's level. The same people who thought they were too cool and smart to fall for the con are doing exactly that. And WWE plays into that ideology knowing they still are getting your viewership and your money. They did it before with NXT making it the anti-establishment super indy to sell to smarks. Since that is no longer hot for the cool kids and Smackdown taken that role, they are doing the same. And when that show loses its flavor and people latch upon the next hotness, WWE will be right there. Selling it to you like you are rebelling against the machine but in reality just fueling them.
Raw isn't as shit as people keep saying it is. Smackdown isn't as perfect as most claim. NXT isn't so boring as a mayo sandwich. 205 Live is a much better show than most will give credit to. People are highly influenced by the opinions of others. Dave Meltzer is the Siskel and Ebert to a generation of fans. His hot takes and cool picks are taken as gospel. If he says New Japan is the best wrestling in the world, people would accept it even if they never watched an actual match. Around here, if someone or something is deemed terrible; no matter how flawed the logic or if the OP is joking, people take it as truth. And if you go against that popular opinion, you get called a troll, mark, or worst: anti-IWC. Before long, the script will flip and Raw will be the beloved show while Smackdown is disliked with those on that show's dick now claiming they never did like it. Nature of the beast.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,069
|
Post by Mozenrath on Jan 3, 2017 6:13:28 GMT -5
Raw is usually like a diner for me. There's some good stuff to be had, but it's so often one pancake too many, and I've had my fill before it's done.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2017 6:37:55 GMT -5
SmackDown isn't even the best Wrestling show on TV.
*cough* Lucha Underground *cough*
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Jan 3, 2017 9:47:03 GMT -5
Smackdown has better storytelling, by a country mile. The storylines themselves feel like they actually have a beginning, middle, and end. There's very little in the way of anything really being forced, with the possible exception of Ellsworth, and even that feels logical in the way they have executed it. They aren't dragging title reigns beyond their shelf-life to force a meaningless record. They don't have a top babyface getting booed out of every building in the country. We don't know where the current storyline with the Wyatts and Orton is going, but I want to watch the show to find out. They aren't putting women in gimmick matches for the sole purpose of telling people that they are making history, and the one time they did a gimmick match it served for a meaningful title change as opposed to hot potatoing the title. Sure, there's problems with the show, such as American Alpha's cold path to the tag team titles, guys like Apollo Crews being underutilized despite their being so little depth to the roster, and not a whole lot of good supporting cast in the tag division, but everyone that is featured heavily on the show (the Cenas, the Ambroses, the AJ Styles, the Wyatts, the Ortons, the Mizes) is being booked exactly the way they should be. Basically how I see it. Raw is full of talented wrestlers and performers, I don't even mind Steph that much (though I don't need to see her on TV every week, but I don't flat-out hate her like so many do). The issue with the red brand is a lack of direction and that extra tedious hour. Smackdown just feels like a more fundamentally fun wrestling show. The roster seems to be allowed to be (relatively) more natural, and their characters' actions make more sense. Hell, I actually love stuff like New Day and Jericho's list. But RAW's sitcomy writers make me burn out on them before their segments are finished.
|
|
thecrusherwi
El Dandy
the Financially Responsible Man
Brawl For All
Posts: 7,656
|
Post by thecrusherwi on Jan 3, 2017 9:51:56 GMT -5
I often can understand the "consensus" opinions around here even if I don't agree with them. All except for one: I still f***in hate The Miz and anytime he's on my screen, my hand goes for the remote.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2017 10:06:43 GMT -5
I only kinda sorta follow the WWE product and it's been that way for almost 3 years now. I barely even come to these threads anymore haha and if I do it's just to browse.
However, seeing the product live is still so much fun especially when it's a house show. In fact, the first RAW I ever went to was just last year and it was a total blast. It really feels like house shows exist in a vacuum. At least in my experience, crowds cheer for the faces and boo the heels as they're presented without issue. Something about being in the crowd makes it so easy to get caught up in the whole experience. My point is, those moments tell me that I still love pro wrestling. WWE is just really disappointing and has been for years. It's like really enjoying football but not watching current NFL.
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Jan 3, 2017 10:10:12 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? Why do you think Enzo wouldn't get TV time in the Attitude Era? I think he'd be one of the most suited character to just drop right into that era and be over.
|
|
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 10:59:57 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? Why do you think Enzo wouldn't get TV time in the Attitude Era? I think he'd be one of the most suited character to just drop right into that era and be over. I think perhaps as a manager he'd work (and if that parlayed into a couple matches, he'd be serviceable enough to make it work), but he'd have plenty of work to do in regards to his in-ring ability. So much so that I don't think he'd get a real shot at being anything in that era. Maybe a jobber role in WCW or something. And I'm also running on the idea that Enzo doesn't get better in-ring than he is right now. He's got time to put it together and be a big deal. The CHARACTER of Enzo would absolutely be a hit. But that was still an era where you had to be either a pretty good wrestler or a physical anomoly (Giant/Big Show) to get real TV time. Enzo could absolutely be "THE guy" for the company if he got his act together in-ring, and he still could. And I'd love to see that, as I find even the promos and segments he's in that get lukewarm receptions enjoyable.
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Jan 3, 2017 11:05:42 GMT -5
Why do you think Enzo wouldn't get TV time in the Attitude Era? I think he'd be one of the most suited character to just drop right into that era and be over. I think perhaps as a manager he'd work (and if that parlayed into a couple matches, he'd be serviceable enough to make it work), but he'd have plenty of work to do in regards to his in-ring ability. So much so that I don't think he'd get a real shot at being anything in that era. Maybe a jobber role in WCW or something. And I'm also running on the idea that Enzo doesn't get better in-ring than he is right now. He's got time to put it together and be a big deal. The CHARACTER of Enzo would absolutely be a hit. But that was still an era where you had to be either a pretty good wrestler or a physical anomoly (Giant/Big Show) to get real TV time. Enzo could absolutely be "THE guy" for the company if he got his act together in-ring, and he still could. And I'd love to see that, as I find even the promos and segments he's in that get lukewarm receptions enjoyable. The in-ring wrestling in the Attitude Era was much, much worse than it is today. If anything, he will be prevented from being a singles star in THIS era because of his wrestling ability, whereas he'd have a better chance of breaking out in the late 90s.
|
|
|
Post by sunnytaker on Jan 3, 2017 11:50:08 GMT -5
the extra hour and the split rosters hurt RAW a lot for me. I do find myself fast forwarding through more of RAW of the two and get more of the "how much longer is this?" feel towards the end of the show. plus there's not really much of a midcard- they keep going to the tag division. seems to show more having a main eventer in reigns holding the US title keeping it from it's natural habitat. and it pretty much took til the last couple weeks for any women's division story other than HISTORY!: the tale of charlotte and sasha to occur. while on smackdown they've had at least two storylines going from the get-go almost.
smackdown I think is doing better at giving personalities or at least letting them shine than raw does. I don't see ellsworth, alexa or beauty and the manbeast for example having the chance to get over on raw like they have on smackdown. so I find myself skipping less because I like the characters. given the extra hour like raw has it'd probably get stretched thin as well (though on the other hand they would have a deeper roster since the whole 3 picks for RAW for every 2 of smackdown draft rule wouldn't be in place then). and with Miz as IC champ there's actual storyline going on for titles beyond the world title and you didn't see Miz interact with the top guys much (brief thing with AJ on Miz TV and teaming up in one tag match at the start of the ellsworth saga) til this feud with ambrose.
smackdown just seems fresher of the two.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2017 12:23:56 GMT -5
Raw isn't as shit as people keep saying it is. Smackdown isn't as perfect as most claim. NXT isn't so boring as a mayo sandwich. 205 Live is a much better show than most will give credit to. People are highly influenced by the opinions of others. Dave Meltzer is the Siskel and Ebert to a generation of fans. His hot takes and cool picks are taken as gospel. If he says New Japan is the best wrestling in the world, people would accept it even if they never watched an actual match. Around here, if someone or something is deemed terrible; no matter how flawed the logic or if the OP is joking, people take it as truth. And if you go against that popular opinion, you get called a troll, mark, or worst: anti-IWC. Before long, the script will flip and Raw will be the beloved show while Smackdown is disliked with those on that show's dick now claiming they never did like it. Nature of the beast. Don't agree with your assessment in regards to Meltzer pied pipering the forum along to our stances on Raw/Smackdown/NXT. Papa Meltzer is actually quite cold to NXT and Smackdown most of the time. The enthusiasm for both around here definitely doesn't reflect Meltzer's opinion, he's big on the Takeovers usually, but he's relatively nonplussed about the weekly shows. Can it not be as simple as people don't like Raw and like Smackdown and not some underlying mind control?
|
|
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 12:27:16 GMT -5
See thing I think a lot of you are comparing the two shows. I don't and consider them both under one umbrella. Perhaps that's the key to a more level judgement?
|
|