Anyone else feel disconnected with the consensus? (SD/RAW)

[Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-]]

I should preface a lot of what has been said about Smackdown being the better show and just making RAW look bad or downright awful most weeks in comparison is a large reason I have a distaste for RAW a lot of the time.

And I'd also like to say, I don't LIKE hating RAW, I WANT to like it, it has Sami, New Day, Cesaro, Bayley, Sasha, Braun, Enzo and Cass, Rollins, The Cruiserweights, I SHOULD like it. Problem is, RAW's biggest glaring problem to me is that they take people like the above, and they do not use them right.

They either make them look like shit, write them inconsistently, or shove them down peoples throats because they showed even the tiniest investment into the characters. People on RAW are booked really REALLY dumb, in the booking and literal senses. As for shit like Roman Reigns, I've already made multiple threads about what a booking problem he has been.

Smackdown Maximizes its assets, RAW takes their assets and mass produces them like a factory. Also I know Steph is supposed to be the more EVIL one of the GMs, but saying "I never wanted you on my show" is downright dogshit. Nothing is stopping these people from going to Smackdown in Kayfabe, but she's done it MULTIPLE TIMES and it's just insulting, like some other things they do. Smackdown as Ive stated, is not perfect, there are things they do wrong but in comparison to RAW, it is not as glaring and they usually correct their mistakes a few weeks in. Maybe that is a testament to the writing and booking, probably, because RAW could easily do the same things, but they do not. I'd also like to say, 205 Live has been good, and also does some of the shit I wish RAW would do.

I think the thing that bugs me most like Ric where you basically go "In my opinion my opinion is the better opinion but that's just my opinion", which to me, sounds so incredibly forced. You don't want people factoring in how the shows differ but that is IMPOSSIBLE. When one show under the same umbrella is performing better than the other one, people look at both shows and go "Well why is one doing so much better than the other, while the other one most weeks sucks?" , they may fundamentally be different story wise, but they're in many ways the same, and if one show is doing something right to the point the Board praises is a lot of the time, the other show maybe should take some notes.

I get you think people who hate RAW and love Smackdown bandwagon, and I also think you think the Threads suddenly change peoples opinions on wrestlers (Which I think is the dumbest shit in the world but hey, that's MY opinion), but frankly, I really think you look too deep into shit and try to find some underlying reasons why people hate RAW like they do and like Smackdown like they do, when it's just as simple as it is presented. RAW has a lot of terrible shit going on, Smackdown has very much less terrible shit going on but can have off weeks. It's just how it is right now. Maybe it will change, but it's just how it is for most people right now.

[Bo Rida]

Jan 3, 2017 14:09:30 GMT -5 nisidhe said:

Finn Balor disappeared completely from Raw after he relinquished the title and he's not been mentionedon Raw since, let alone featured on status reports or anything similar. It disturbs me to no end that they would essentially ignore what some were calling the future Face of the Company(tm) throughout the rehab period

Especially with his gimmick, he could be doing the equivalent of Sting in the rafters or one of Undertakers hiatuses.
The demon king stalking the pretender(s) to his throne until he can take back what is rightfully his.

[fw91]

Jan 3, 2017 15:36:07 GMT -5 Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-] said:

I should preface a lot of what has been said about Smackdown being the better show and just making RAW look bad or downright awful most weeks in comparison is a large reason I have a distaste for RAW a lot of the time.

And I'd also like to say, I don't LIKE hating RAW, I WANT to like it, it has Sami, New Day, Cesaro, Bayley, Sasha, Braun, Enzo and Cass, Rollins, The Cruiserweights, I SHOULD like it. Problem is, RAW's biggest glaring problem to me is that they take people like the above, and they do not use them right.

They either make them look like shit, write them inconsistently, or shove them down peoples throats because they showed even the tiniest investment into the characters. People on RAW are booked really REALLY dumb, in the booking and literal senses. As for shit like Roman Reigns, I've already made multiple threads about what a booking problem he has been.

Smackdown Maximizes its assets, RAW takes their assets and mass produces them like a factory. Also I know Steph is supposed to be the more EVIL one of the GMs, but saying "I never wanted you on my show" is downright dogshit. Nothing is stopping these people from going to Smackdown in Kayfabe, but she's done it MULTIPLE TIMES and it's just insulting, like some other things they do. Smackdown as Ive stated, is not perfect, there are things they do wrong but in comparison to RAW, it is not as glaring and they usually correct their mistakes a few weeks in. Maybe that is a testament to the writing and booking, probably, because RAW could easily do the same things, but they do not. I'd also like to say, 205 Live has been good, and also does some of the shit I wish RAW would do.

I think the thing that bugs me most like Ric where you basically go "In my opinion my opinion is the better opinion but that's just my opinion", which to me, sounds so incredibly forced. You don't want people factoring in how the shows differ but that is IMPOSSIBLE. When one show under the same umbrella is performing better than the other one, people look at both shows and go "Well why is one doing so much better than the other, while the other one most weeks sucks?" , they may fundamentally be different story wise, but they're in many ways the same, and if one show is doing something right to the point the Board praises is a lot of the time, the other show maybe should take some notes.

I get you think people who hate RAW and love Smackdown bandwagon, and I also think you think the Threads suddenly change peoples opinions on wrestlers (Which I think is the dumbest shit in the world but hey, that's MY opinion), but frankly, I really think you look too deep into shit and try to find some underlying reasons why people hate RAW like they do and like Smackdown like they do, when it's just as simple as it is presented. RAW has a lot of terrible shit going on, Smackdown has very much less terrible shit going on but can have off weeks. It's just how it is right now. Maybe it will change, but it's just how it is for most people right now.

But don't you think that the constant comparison of the shows takes opinions in both directions to the extremes? I think that RAW being viewed as the drizzling shits, and Smackdown flirting with sainthood is due to the comparison. I think that stand alone, RAW is meh and Smackdown is decent.

[Deleted]

Jan 3, 2017 15:34:24 GMT -5 nisidhe said:

Jan 3, 2017 14:15:06 GMT -5 @nichotine said:

That's classic pro wrestling though, out of sight, out of mind, so his comeback scores the biggest pop possible.

But they haven't mentioned him _at all_. It's as if he had never been there. They could have done so much better creatively if they had acknowledged him - Owens could be told once in a while that it took Trips to help him get that title; Rollins, that he couldn't win the title when he was left to his own defenses and when it would have meant something. Roman Reigns, ffs, running roughshod all over Raw, _lost_ to Finn in Balor's first singles match on the main roster.

Maybe it was intended to take some pressure off Fergal to heal up properly before his return - and perhaps there was a real fear there that the shoulder injury was a career-ender - but some of that could have been incorporated into the storylines if they'd just given it some thought. Sami Zayn could have cut his teeth on Rollins for what happened to his friend. Owens and Jericho could have worked some zinger promos on the fact that Balor was injured and that Rollins still couldn't get the job done. Reigns could have been taken down a peg or two by even other Club members keen on getting their founder over. It could have been, at worst (if he couldn't come back,) someone's Magnum TA moment in using a friend's injury to get the rub, or at best, when he came back, it would be the "Oh, shit - it's the Time of Reckoning" moment.

I'm not sure that any of that is possible, now. Rollins really isn't the deserving face to invoke Balor; Reigns is getting X-Pac heat; KO and Jericho are slowly making the Universal title an afterthought now that they've got a tandem comedy act going. Raw may be the kind of place to need Balor, but does it deserve him?

What you're saying makes sense but I'm not too bummed that they haven't done that. Raw is so prone to making guys feel stale and the silver lining of being injured is that you get to miss guys for a while. I'm not much of a fan of Finn at all but even I'm looking forward to his return just to break up the monotony.

I think you're right though that they could have at least used the momentum of Finn's injury as a catalyst for something. They wanted Seth to be a face, so why not have him show some remorse for being the one to put Finn on the shelf, and say that Finn's integrity in relinquishing the belt opened his eyes? Instead of just coming out one week and pretending he's everyone's friend for no reason. But even then I wouldn't get in the habit of saying his name too often in the meantime after that.

[Oh Cry Me a Screwball]

Jan 3, 2017 15:13:30 GMT -5 Fade is a CodyCryBaby said:

It's that third hour, man.

Scratch it and the product would organically improve upon itself tenfold. I used to think PPVs being three hours back in the day were long. Now they're five. And RAWs are overstuffed with promos and segments to make up for that third hour.

SD is far from perfect but it's fresh..and honestly the only WWE programming I can stand today.

I don't know if the third hour is even that much of an excuse though. I watch Smackdown Live, 205 Live, and Talking Smack all at once, which adds up to even more programming than Raw, and it doesn't feel like the same chore that Raw gets to be.

[Kevin Hamilton]

On the occasions I tune in, I can at least get through Smackdown. Raw is just such a chore to get through I never make it all the way.

That said, neither show is appointment viewing for me now. Mostly I'll just check out Youtube clips.

[Big Bad Kahuna]

Which RAW PPV was better than Backlash or TLC???

[Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-]]

Jan 3, 2017 15:42:00 GMT -5 fw91 said:

Jan 3, 2017 15:36:07 GMT -5 Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-] said:

I should preface a lot of what has been said about Smackdown being the better show and just making RAW look bad or downright awful most weeks in comparison is a large reason I have a distaste for RAW a lot of the time.

And I'd also like to say, I don't LIKE hating RAW, I WANT to like it, it has Sami, New Day, Cesaro, Bayley, Sasha, Braun, Enzo and Cass, Rollins, The Cruiserweights, I SHOULD like it. Problem is, RAW's biggest glaring problem to me is that they take people like the above, and they do not use them right.

They either make them look like shit, write them inconsistently, or shove them down peoples throats because they showed even the tiniest investment into the characters. People on RAW are booked really REALLY dumb, in the booking and literal senses. As for shit like Roman Reigns, I've already made multiple threads about what a booking problem he has been.

Smackdown Maximizes its assets, RAW takes their assets and mass produces them like a factory. Also I know Steph is supposed to be the more EVIL one of the GMs, but saying "I never wanted you on my show" is downright dogshit. Nothing is stopping these people from going to Smackdown in Kayfabe, but she's done it MULTIPLE TIMES and it's just insulting, like some other things they do. Smackdown as Ive stated, is not perfect, there are things they do wrong but in comparison to RAW, it is not as glaring and they usually correct their mistakes a few weeks in. Maybe that is a testament to the writing and booking, probably, because RAW could easily do the same things, but they do not. I'd also like to say, 205 Live has been good, and also does some of the shit I wish RAW would do.

I think the thing that bugs me most like Ric where you basically go "In my opinion my opinion is the better opinion but that's just my opinion", which to me, sounds so incredibly forced. You don't want people factoring in how the shows differ but that is IMPOSSIBLE. When one show under the same umbrella is performing better than the other one, people look at both shows and go "Well why is one doing so much better than the other, while the other one most weeks sucks?" , they may fundamentally be different story wise, but they're in many ways the same, and if one show is doing something right to the point the Board praises is a lot of the time, the other show maybe should take some notes.

I get you think people who hate RAW and love Smackdown bandwagon, and I also think you think the Threads suddenly change peoples opinions on wrestlers (Which I think is the dumbest shit in the world but hey, that's MY opinion), but frankly, I really think you look too deep into shit and try to find some underlying reasons why people hate RAW like they do and like Smackdown like they do, when it's just as simple as it is presented. RAW has a lot of terrible shit going on, Smackdown has very much less terrible shit going on but can have off weeks. It's just how it is right now. Maybe it will change, but it's just how it is for most people right now.

But don't you think that the constant comparison of the shows takes opinions in both directions to the extremes? I think that RAW being viewed as the drizzling shits, and Smackdown flirting with sainthood is due to the comparison. I think that stand alone, RAW is meh and Smackdown is decent.

I cant speak for everyone, but some weeks, that's how Smackdown is to RAW, and others, it's a more even race. As I even said myself, Smackdown is not perfect and has more down weeks, but they also have better presentation, better storylines, and have me overall more invested to the point where I can go "Eh they'll make it better next week" where with RAW if they do something right it's "Ok, how are they going to ruin this" at this point. There are weeks where RAW is better and Smackdown isn't as good, the problem RAW has is consistency and overall burning fans with their product, where Smackdown has built way more of a trust hence why it also gets more of a pass than RAW.

In many peoples eyes, RAW needs to PROVE itself more, it needs to show it can remain consistent and keep good shows going instead of staying meh to shit like a rollercoaster, while Smackdown has built what they got with less time than RAW in the Live and Hour sense and has won many more fans over with trust in their roster and their decisions so if they do something dumb, it's given more of a pass until otherwise because they've proven they can do right keep the show consistent from Great to at least as you said Decent. Where RAW it's like "Good, Meh, shit, meh, meh, meh, meh, OH MY GOD THAT WAS GREAT, Meh, meh, shit, really shit, meh, meh, terrible", and that's not an exaggeration for most on this board, and it also reflects in the Polls if those are anything to take into consideration.

RAW opened up the New Era with one of the best shows they've had in quite a long time, and they've followed it up with in many peoples eyes little to no success, making everything that show was a complete waste for their future, Smackdown's premiere was shacky and has only improved with the foundation it was given. It's just how it is right now. I hope RAW gets better, but I'm currently not holding my breath at the current pace they're going.   

[SUN ATTACK]

The reason i like Smackdown better than RAW is simple enough, while NOT perfect, it makes me want to watch a weekly wrestling show, pretty much like Lucha Underground does (although that is quite different because LU is more of a series).

While RAW pretty much represents everything i don't like about current WWE or Wrestling in general.

A few examples.

There is too much programming - This is obviously the 3 hours on RAW (2 hours and 15 minutes without commercials), i mean who the hell watches 3 hours of the same thing WEEK AFTER WEEK and doesn't get tired of it, the audience of today has far more things to spend their free time on, there's videogames, movies, the hottest 1 HOUR drama you can watch, sports, whatever, and don't get me started on three hour PPVs and FOUR HOUR BIG FOUR PPVs, today's audience likes to be hooked, but not obligated to watch. In my ideal WWE, programming would be: 1 hour RAW - RAW Talk, 1 Hour SD - Talking Smack, 2 Hour regular PPVs, 3 hour Big 4 PPVs, and without the brand split, just to spread the talent in a better way, obviously USA Network f***s up the idea of my ideal WWE.

RAW has a wrestler that can be good, but they book him like shit and the crowd hates him for it - Roman Reigns of course, Cena was a victim of this obviously but he arguably was beloved when he rose to the top.

RAW's 2 top babyfaces are HORRIBLE, again because of booking - Roman Reigns again, and Seth Rollins, who i think is supposed to be a face but still comes across (to me at least) as a whiny little bitch that is upset at Papa H because he did not hand him the Universal Title, then again, Cena also was a victim of this, but he evolved his character (took him well enough) to the point of being above the Heel/Face alignment and being more of a 90's Jumbo Tsuruta-esque wrestler.

RAW's 2 top heels don't make me want to hate them - Owens has some really weird babyface traits on him, he is a guy that i feel i can get behind sometimes, the only heel thing he does is teasing a big move and then doing a headlock. He has a bromance with the other top heel, Jericho, who from what i recall, everybody LIKES the list, the gift of Jericho, and the IT thing, so i don't know what to actually boo about them. On Smackdown, AJ Styles is like this delusional douchebag that thinks he is pretty much god because he carries a belt and defeated John Cena, and he tries, REALLY HARD BECAUSE HE IS PRETTY MUCH THE MOST OVER GUY IN THE COMPANY to be hated by the crowd, Miz does this but even better, because he gets actual heat and not the "go away heat" people stupidly complain about in an industry where crowds don't cheer a good guy just because he is a good guy anymore.

They stall too much on their storylines - Papa H pedigrees Seth 2 WEEKS AFTER SUMMERSLAM, no explanation given, and when Papa H grabs a mic is to say "THE FUTURE IS NOW, WE ARE NXT, DIS BIZNEZ" setting up pretty much for a Wrestlemania match, this also leads to people not buying into Kevin Owens (a guy who we actually like, A LOT) as a champion, because there is still no clear reason why he became "the guy chosen by Triple H" and he is viewed as "the guy that carries a belt that looks like it was made out of Strawberry candy". Although i can say Smackdown does some of this, but that at least is because of their thin roster, whilst RAW has a crapton of guys and things just don't progress.

The part-timers thing of giving them the spotlight too much and not to the current crop - Goldberg and Bork, nuff said. Smackdown is also looking for this in the Cena/Taker match (if it happens) at Wrestlemania, but the Cena vs Taker feud still has not started while Goldberg and Lesnar have been at it since the build-up to Survivor Series, and pretty much WE ALL KNOW this is leading to a Wrestlemania match between the two. Also, Cena has more predisposition in his left thumb to appear on weekly TV than either Goldberg or Lesnar (Taker is worse than either of them at this point though).

In RAW they just cant move on from The Shield and how HISTORIC the Women's Revolution was, and on Smackdown Dean Ambrose is more of his own man, while Alexa and Becky just feud and have this kickass promos without actually pointing out how HISTORIC it is despite the revolution being more than 1 year old already.

TL;DR RAW for me encapsulates the problem WWE has had for like a lot of years and makes me tune out every now and then even before the switch to 3 hours, good wrestlers (and matches) but bad writing, and when they do a good episode, they blow all the load they have, making the following episodes feel bland. While Smackdown Live has what to me feels like "OK at worst" writing and good wrestlers (and matches), they know how to advance the plot while not unloading everything on your face (sorry if it sounds pornographic).

That's what i think about it, sorry for that testament.

[trollrogue]

I'll plead the 5th on whether I like SDLive or RAW more, cause quite frankly I watch them both every week so the WWE has my money irregardless. But honestly the WWE themselves have set up this rather pointless rivalry between the Red and the Blue, so if you feel that people on the FAN forums are being territorial over liking one 'brand' and hating the other 'brand' (they are the same product in reality!) you can thank Vincent Kennedy McMahon for all that.

Anyways, Wrestle Kingdom 11 blows anything the WWE has to offer out the water so just watch that. When one of the 'brands' can beat that programming we can declare a true winner among the WWE.

["Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay]

So you would say you're in the disconsensus?

Yeah I just made that a word.

[Pushed to the Moon]

I don't think SD is THAT great but the differences are there. Look at the contract signing this week. Bryan comes out and introduces the guys then walks off. Every week Stephanie comes out and tells us how shitty all the wrestlers are and that we're all dumb shitty morons for liking them and that she's the greatest, richest person ever. Or Foley comes out and stumbles over his words and forgets what city he's in and does some phony emotional yelling. Also Raw is centred around Roman who most people don't like whereas SD is centred around Styles who most people DO like.

[Dukect]

Jan 3, 2017 23:57:16 GMT -5 SUN ATTACK said:

The reason i like Smackdown better than RAW is simple enough, while NOT perfect, it makes me want to watch a weekly wrestling show, pretty much like Lucha Underground does (although that is quite different because LU is more of a series).

While RAW pretty much represents everything i don't like about current WWE or Wrestling in general.

A few examples.

There is too much programming - This is obviously the 3 hours on RAW (2 hours and 15 minutes without commercials), i mean who the hell watches 3 hours of the same thing WEEK AFTER WEEK and doesn't get tired of it, the audience of today has far more things to spend their free time on, there's videogames, movies, the hottest 1 HOUR drama you can watch, sports, whatever, and don't get me started on three hour PPVs and FOUR HOUR BIG FOUR PPVs, today's audience likes to be hooked, but not obligated to watch. In my ideal WWE, programming would be: 1 hour RAW - RAW Talk, 1 Hour SD - Talking Smack, 2 Hour regular PPVs, 3 hour Big 4 PPVs, and without the brand split, just to spread the talent in a better way, obviously USA Network f***s up the idea of my ideal WWE.

RAW has a wrestler that can be good, but they book him like shit and the crowd hates him for it - Roman Reigns of course, Cena was a victim of this obviously but he arguably was beloved when he rose to the top.

RAW's 2 top babyfaces are HORRIBLE, again because of booking - Roman Reigns again, and Seth Rollins, who i think is supposed to be a face but still comes across (to me at least) as a whiny little bitch that is upset at Papa H because he did not hand him the Universal Title, then again, Cena also was a victim of this, but he evolved his character (took him well enough) to the point of being above the Heel/Face alignment and being more of a 90's Jumbo Tsuruta-esque wrestler.

RAW's 2 top heels don't make me want to hate them - Owens has some really weird babyface traits on him, he is a guy that i feel i can get behind sometimes, the only heel thing he does is teasing a big move and then doing a headlock. He has a bromance with the other top heel, Jericho, who from what i recall, everybody LIKES the list, the gift of Jericho, and the IT thing, so i don't know what to actually boo about them. On Smackdown, AJ Styles is like this delusional douchebag that thinks he is pretty much god because he carries a belt and defeated John Cena, and he tries, REALLY HARD BECAUSE HE IS PRETTY MUCH THE MOST OVER GUY IN THE COMPANY to be hated by the crowd, Miz does this but even better, because he gets actual heat and not the "go away heat" people stupidly complain about in an industry where crowds don't cheer a good guy just because he is a good guy anymore.

They stall too much on their storylines - Papa H pedigrees Seth 2 WEEKS AFTER SUMMERSLAM, no explanation given, and when Papa H grabs a mic is to say "THE FUTURE IS NOW, WE ARE NXT, DIS BIZNEZ" setting up pretty much for a Wrestlemania match, this also leads to people not buying into Kevin Owens (a guy who we actually like, A LOT) as a champion, because there is still no clear reason why he became "the guy chosen by Triple H" and he is viewed as "the guy that carries a belt that looks like it was made out of Strawberry candy". Although i can say Smackdown does some of this, but that at least is because of their thin roster, whilst RAW has a crapton of guys and things just don't progress.

The part-timers thing of giving them the spotlight too much and not to the current crop - Goldberg and Bork, nuff said. Smackdown is also looking for this in the Cena/Taker match (if it happens) at Wrestlemania, but the Cena vs Taker feud still has not started while Goldberg and Lesnar have been at it since the build-up to Survivor Series, and pretty much WE ALL KNOW this is leading to a Wrestlemania match between the two. Also, Cena has more predisposition in his left thumb to appear on weekly TV than either Goldberg or Lesnar (Taker is worse than either of them at this point though).

In RAW they just cant move on from The Shield and how HISTORIC the Women's Revolution was, and on Smackdown Dean Ambrose is more of his own man, while Alexa and Becky just feud and have this kickass promos without actually pointing out how HISTORIC it is despite the revolution being more than 1 year old already.

TL;DR RAW for me encapsulates the problem WWE has had for like a lot of years and makes me tune out every now and then even before the switch to 3 hours, good wrestlers (and matches) but bad writing, and when they do a good episode, they blow all the load they have, making the following episodes feel bland. While Smackdown Live has what to me feels like "OK at worst" writing and good wrestlers (and matches), they know how to advance the plot while not unloading everything on your face (sorry if it sounds pornographic).

That's what i think about it, sorry for that testament.