Discussion in 'SmackDown' started by Sage., Jan 7, 2012.

  1. It's so much better on SmackDown, much more bearable. Makes you realize what a state RAW is in, pretty much because of King. Cole is great when he's not play-by-play and has someone to compete with (Booker and mainly Matthews).
  2. The commentary on Smackdown is great alot of time. It's because it has balance for me. You've got Josh calling the moves with Cole and Booker chirping in with their allignment arguments. Where as on Raw you've got Cole trying to be the top heel thus neglecting the match while king sits their just calling it in and being an orange prick.
  3. He doesn't even call it, he just goes "WOAH" and when Kane enters "Ughhhh", yeah King you've done great making the casual fans scared of Kane...

    Anyway, completely agree with you Sage. I actually enjoy the commentary, Booker/Cole going at it is priceless, no one can compete with Cole with quick-witted comebacks (maybe Regal or Punk), but Booker competes in other aspects. Josh is a great play-by-play announcer too, really puts emphasis into his words. Surprising how much it makes a difference and can get you involved in the match.

    With RAW you just need Regal & Stanford to join Cole, I like the fact there's three announcers.
  4. Yeah, Lawler is terrible. Regal + Stanford + Cole. Stanford play-by-play, Cole heel and Regal as the tweener?

    I'd pay to see Regal and Cole get at each-others throats.