NBC strikes new deal with WWE.

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Snowman, May 15, 2014.

  1. Bad news for stockholders thanks to the empty promises of doubling revenues and all that stuff, but as fans this is great news for us. Everything is going to stay the same.

    (Also @Testify TNA can resign with Spike now, :hogan:)
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Good to hear they were able to dot the i's and cross the t's on a deal in the long run.
  3. Actually, this is good news for stockholders in the long run. It's better to have a lucrative deal in-hand than empty promises of doubling revenues in your dreams.

    Some stockholders are concerned that Vince wants to eventually broadcast all of WWE programming on WWEN. This frightens some stockholders (as it should). So, they're pretty happy with this deal with NBC/Universal.

    • Like Like x 1
  4. Know the stock price took a tumble when this was announced, as it was shooting up with promises of them being able to double revenue. Guess they couldn't because wrestling just isn't as DVR-proof as actual sports are. Haven't been paying attention to stock prices (don't care) but have to assume it's about at the level it was before the speculation and empty promises began.

    But you're right, this deal is better than no deal. And better than their last deal, so :yay:
    • Like Like x 1
  5. You're exactly right. The stock price was artificially inflated and has now come back to earth, although it is a bit higher than it was (if memory serves right). That reflects the solider future prospects with a deal in place than without one. However, anybody who bought the stock because it was hot and didn't dump it in time took a bath.

    Poor them.

  6. I never had any doubts that Raw would be staying on the USA Network. Whether Smackdown remained on SyFy or not was a somewhat different issue since it's hopped to like three or four different networks during it's life span, but I figured it wouldn't leave it's current home either.
  7. Bad news. RAW staying 3 hours and SD not going live.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Well, that's good for them, I suppose. It's not like they had a bad deal, and renewing it is a safe decision.
  9. [​IMG]

    Brad is right that Raw staying 3 hours is bad news, I miss watching it live haha
    • Like Like x 1
  10. I like 3 hour RAW if they put content in it to carry the three hours and not just weird ass filler Superstars randomly thrown together matches; definitely have seen some solid ones.

    I'm more disappointed in SD not going live :( although I figured more than not that would be the case.
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Definitely agree with both points here.

    There are five major championships in WWE, yet we only get true storylines for one, maybe two of them generally. A 3-hour Raw broadcast could easily feature a storyline for each one, making it more important on a weekly basis. That's five storylines to push, plus one or two non-title storylines that can be developed each week on Raw.

    I also think a live Smackdown could have a similar effect, plus making it live makes it more likely that "anything can happen", just like at Raw or a PPV. That capability is a good thing.

    • Like Like x 1
  12. 3 hours is too long for a show, but you're absolutely right. While it is hard to fill 3 hours there's really no excuse for there to be so few storylines and for so few people to be relevant. I like D-Bry as much as anyone except Adam but losing him should not feel like a deathblow to the roster.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Exactly right.

    We can argue all you want about 3 hours being too long or a good amount of time (obviously, we disagree there), but the fact is you've got 3 hours of live programming on Raw, 1 hour of live on Main Event, 1 hour recorded on Superstars, and 2 hours recorded on Smackdown (that's obviously not counting the hour of recorded programming on NXT, which has little to no effect in the storylines of the main roster for the most part). That's a total of 7 hours of programming a week (10 on weeks with a PPV, but I digress).

    There is literally no excuse for it to feel like the world's ending because Bryan is hurt and out of action for the next 2 to 3 months. Yes, it's a tremendous blow. He's the "face of the company", so that's a big deal. But, there should be a bevy of guys champing at the bit to fill into that top spot he holds (and I think there are...that's really not the problem) and a bunch more waiting to fill into the spots they vacate to move up to that spot. That's why it feels so insurmountable...and it shouldn't.

    • Like Like x 1
  14. Hmm...
    A lot of outlets are reporting that WWE potentially had added the concept of making SD live just to sweeten the deal for NBC; neither have accepted/declined to comment on that.

    I didn't see it in the initial post but does anyone have a link that solidifies that SD will not be live.
  15. You do have a point on that they CAN use the 3 hours effectively, I won't argue that.

    Don't like discussing history but there's a reason many fans reminisce about the year Austin was hurt. Austin went down, and not only could he just hand the baton to the Rock, but then up came Triple H and Kurt Angle as new stars for the company. And even with Bryan healthy, there was still a lot of debate about "why can't they find anybody for him to feud with, with all the great talent on this roster?" It just doesn't make sense.

    Think both WWE and the fans should stop picking guys apart. "Damien Sandow doesn't have a main-event gimmick" Yeah, why not? That ship has probably sailed at this point, but it's worth giving him a shot up there. Same with so many other guys, but so many of them are probably too damaged at this point.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. I think it's as much that the modern IWC fan often simply gets into a guy too quickly, then it becomes hip to hate that guy after every flaw he has is pointed out and heavily pushed (witness: Sandow, Damien; Punk, CM; Bryan, Daniel......I've already started hearing rumblings about Roman Reigns' shortcomings and I'm just waiting for people to start hating Bray Wyatt.....you know it's coming). By the time most guys have broken through to the main event scene, the IWC already hates him because it's "edgy" or "hip" to do so.

    As for me, I would love to see Sandow, Ziggler, etc., pushed to the ME scene. In fact, I'm willing to make a bold prediction that the MITB briefcase will be won by one of those guys and not Cesaro.

    • Like Like x 1
  17. Well, we HAVE gotten more wrestling out of the extra hour... and ironically, it's usually the most skipable thing about the show when I run through it on my DVR. I'm actually in favor of there being more non-wrestling segments on Raw.
    • Like Like x 1
  18. To go on my typical rant I can just copy and paste everywhere...

    We really are living in the golden age of actual wrestling on Raw. We're getting consistent good wrestling on a weekly, and virtually nightly, basis, as most of the roster either merely athletic enough to be entertaining or a flat-out good worker, while Triple H keeps the cupboard stocked with guys like Prince Devitt and Samuray Del Sol. They really deserve a lot more credit for the roster they have, there's just so many other issues to bitch about. Like Lockard said. Usually I prefer the "talk on Raw to get excited to see good wrestling on PPV" format, and judge the Raw show on it's build and overlook all the quality wrestling. Like we got a killer 6 man tag between the Wyatt Family and Cena vs the Usos, but what did it mean? Maybe it could set up a Harper and Rowan vs the Usos match down the line, I guess. But maybe it's just me (and BLFFL) but the most buzzworthy non-injury-related thing on Raw was the Paige promo and Alicia Fox going kinda-psycho. I'll happily take more stuff like that, even if it means taking away time from stuff like that great six-man.

    Really, that's what's hurt the PPV quality. While we all agree Extreme Rules was a good to great show, some people called it an extended Raw. Why? Because we had a great Bryan match, a great Shield match, some quality wrestling in the undercard with guys like Big E and Cesaro... We get that virtually every week for free.
  19. Well, of course you're in favor of there being more non-wrestling segments, 'cause there are guys like Bootista and Cena who can't wrestle. Don't get me wrong, but I don't wanna watch RAW that is 100% a soap opera. Yes, there should be talks/promos as much as wrestling.

    I can agree with what Snowman said, though - "talk on Raw to get excited to see good wrestling on PPV"