SmackDown Will they ever "fix" this brand split?

Discussion in 'SmackDown' started by Crayo, Jun 21, 2013.

  1. Currently there is none, but it's not treated as such really. SmackDown just seems to be there. Nothing major happens there due to the show being taped and not receiving the amount of viewers as RAW, and it just feels like the show where second rate talent have more freedom but significant storyline progression is more or less non-existent.

    I know SmackDown tops the ratings every week by a mile with their current network, and because of that there is no real reason to put effort into it, but there are some issues with the set up. One being poor showings at the SmackDown tours, resulting in WWE having to put Cena or Punk on SmackDown simply to sell tickets. Now, I think they fixed this by ending the split on tour, but I'm not sure if that has happened already or is going to.

    Either way, the TV show seems so irrelevant when it could be a great tool. Would you prefer the split to be split again, where we don't see SmackDown talent on RAW and vice-versa? I would. It opens up so many possibilities. What do you think the chances of WWE actually doing anything with SmackDown is?

    inb4 lines like "it's been better recently" and "more focus seems to be on SmackDown now" as that doesn't contribute much, as we all know it's the second-rate show that WWE simply don't put anywhere near the level of RAW in terms of importance.
  2. I would love it if they resumed the brand split, I much enjoyed watching WWE when they had their separate brands and Rival PPV's. I would also suspect Raw to go back to 2 hours, also bringing back the brand split brings back the WWE draft which is good because that would be the only episode of Raw which would be 3 hours.
  3. I would love to see the brand split back. It would allow more people to be used than the main 8-10 people they use now. It would also allow for feuds to build up better,an annoying thing for me is when they continue a feud from RAW onto Smackdown. Another thing is it could allow for a separate brand PPVs like Judgement Day/Armageddon and a few mixed branded PPVs like WrestleMania,Survivor Series,and, Bragging Rights. Also,it would bring back the Draft,the Draft was one of the most exciting non-PPV shows they put on because it was suspenseful to see who got drafted to which brand.
  4. Whenever I watch Smackdown, I do feel like the brand split's completely gone and I'm watching Raw's leftovers with a big main event. (Given how often Raw's plate is empty it's amazing how they can have leftovers). So I don't really understand your question. It seems like they're trying to get us to care about SD with stuff like "the Shield took their first loss omg" but doesn't look like they're keep it up.

    If they really want Smackdown to thrive, they need the brand split back.
  5. I'd love a proper brand split personally, the biggest problem is they've neglected Smackdown so much that it's caught in a vicious cycle (nothing big happens on Smackdown - OMG that's such a waste on Smackdown - and back around). I'd bring back the brand split and build it around Punk, like they had with Hardy in 09. Punk as the crown jewel feuding with the likes of Henry, ADR, Sandow whilst DZ is built up as the second face (he's over currently but he must be handled with care) most importantly stop the fucking crossovers, when a SD guy comes onto Raw make it have a purpose and make it a big event. Raw guys to SD for a similar feel.
  6. The brand split is definitely needed. The "raw Super Show' concept was shitty from the start, and it developed into something even worse, where we are now with guys just freely going on both shows and SD having literally no storylines and giving people zero reason to watch.

    The main reasons I want it back

    -Gives more prestige to the WHC. As of now it is just an upper mid card belt on Raw. Being the champion of a brand, even Smackdown, is much more prestigious than what it is now
    -Keeps feuds fresh. You keep guys away from one another while they are on different brands and then you use the draft or 'trades' between GMs to have guys switch brands once they begin to run out of feuds
    -Smackdown becomes the 'proving ground' for up and comers to cut their teeth. This gets more people on TV instead of seeing the same ones on SD & Raw
    -Gives us a reason to watch Smackdown if it is its own show instead of Raw Jr

    Some drawbacks? I don't want to see lame PPV concepts like "Bragging Rights" or a 6 on 6 SVS elimination tag between the two brands. That is just corny booking. I don't want to see the draft have 30 selections. The last draft I remember saw most of the fucking roster swap. It needs to be more gradual and not all at once.

    edit: And if WWE is too lazy/ignorant to reincorporate the brand split then they HAVE to unify the titles IMO. Having two 'world champions' with no brand split is dumb as hell
    • Like Like x 1
  7. I kinda like it because NXT hasn't joined the split
  8. They don't do Bragging Rights anymore

  9. Yea, no shit sherlock. I was saying if they did bring back the brand split one thing I wouldn't want to see is cheesy PPVs like Bragging Rights make a comeback.
  10. That would kinda suck
  11. So true. I detested that PPV SO much.
  12. The concept of Bragging Rights I liked but the booking into was horrible, people who hated each other would suddenly align for a trophy. One idea to solve it would be to have the person who got the winning pinball given a world title match at the next ppv, you're giving them enough motivation to work together whilst still allowing for tension to grow.
  13. My honest opinion? If you're going to have a 3 hour raw put a lot into it, and get rid of smackdown. Use the other shows to showcase the up and comers/jobbers and use the midcarders for the main events.
  14. I vote in favor of not resurrecting the brand split but rather leaving it in the ground where it lies already.

    The brand split does open up interesting possibilities, namely having brand exclusive PPVs and the luxury of being able to push two world championship feuds and main eventers at once (JBL's lengthy title reign and the rise of John Cena on one show, the Evolution breakup leading to Triple H/Batista on the other, for example), but it also closes some possibilities, too. When wrestlers are constrained to being apart of a specific brand, it limits the number of opponents they can feud with. One way out of this could be to say that while the two shows have separate brands, maybe people can jump to the other at any moment? Just like how people can freely defect to different promotions in real life? The logic could be that each show has 'ownership' over certain titles that can only be defended on that show, and if you have the title and then defect to the other brand, you can't bring the championship with you so you'd end up stripped of it. For example, say Raw has the WWE Championship, Intercontinental Championship and the Tag Team Championships, while Smackdown has the World Heavyweight Championship, United States Championship and Diva's Championship. However, the wrestlers themselves can decide to go to whichever brand they want to, as long as the General Manager of that respective brand wants to sign them. This way, titles remains consistently with one show and because guys are 'apart' of a brand but aren't forced to stay there, WWE can have two guys feud if they want them to by simply having one of them jump to the other brand and get into a spontaneous situation where a feud with said wrestler erupts without having to wait until the annual draft show to have them end up on the other show.

    However, this would likely just water down the concept depending on how often people jumped, therefore making the whole idea mostly pointless.

    Overall, I personally feel it's best to just leave the brand split dead and buried. Looking at the roster as a whole, does anyone really think there's enough overall people of talent and merit to really justify having faith that WWE could actually book two separate branded shows with their own PPVs? I don't. I've always been a bigger fan of just having one ultimate world champion of the company anyway. Speaking of which, I do agree that if the brand split is gonna remain dead, they should get rid of the WHC soon enough. From a kayfabe point of view, having two guys who both claim to be "The Best" of the company isn't really consistent. I'm pretty sure the contract they have with Mattel might have something to do with the WHC still being around, though. They have some kind of creative control over whether WWE gets rid of one of their championships since it would affect the money they make from it's replica being sold (terrible logic since they can still sell the replica of a belt even if it's vanished from TV, but whatever.)
  15. They have arguably the best possible set up right now to reinstate the brand split with the McMahon program. The family feud for power can become so heated/tense that the board has to step in. Putting one of the McMahons (Lets say Trips) on RAW and another (Lets say Steph) on Smackdown (the show she ran when it first started if I remember correctly) and Vince gets kayfabe put in charge back in Conneticut or something like that. They then split the rosters and titles and boom, brand split back and if you have wrestlers siding with either Vince or Steph you can have some interesting programs depending on which brand these wrestlers end up one. Example: a wrestler supporting Hunter ends up on Steph's brand and she decides to give him hell.
  16. I used to love the Brand wars but now i don't even watch Smackdown anymore. WWE should sort out this problem and bring back the Draft and Bragging rights so we have Brand Supremacy
  17. Smackdown is getting boring these days

  18. I view this as a positive. It brings back the possibility of 'dream matches' like back in the day when everyone didn't wrestle everyone. You have Star A on Raw and Star B on Smackdown, but they can't wrestle one another. When they finally wind up on the same brand you have a match that has a lot of anticipation around it instead of just giving it away ASAP when both guys are on both shows. It keeps feuds fresh and prevents the company from running through all of the sexy match ups too quickly.

    What? no. As I mentioned before the way you can have guys move shows is through GM trades. I remember Edge being traded for Punk a few years back. And what would the point of the brand split be if guys were just freely hopping back in forth? It renders the entire idea useless.


    Absolutely I think there is plenty of talent to justify the brand split, especially with so many recent NXT call ups + guys who are ready to be called up at this point. WWE misuses so many talents and a big part of it is not using Smackdown properly. As for having brand exclusive PPVs, I'm not about that. I would rather all PPVs be co-promoted with matches from both brands, similar to how it was before they stopped using the brand split.
    I'm fine with having two champs as long as there is a legitimate brand split. The way it is now, yea, it sucks and the WHC is useless. I didn't feel that way when the WHC was the champion of the Smackdown brand.
  19. This is a positive of a brand split but even when it's all just one show, they can be smart and keep certain guys apart until the time comes to pit them against one another. I can see how separate brands would build anticipation better when you have two shining stars making their brand stand out (namely in the main event, Cena versus Batista in 2005 for example) but it seems to me the same sort of thing can be at least mostly accomplished without it.

    It all depends on the booking (same goes with the brand split being resurrected and used properly.)

    I'm surprised you would be against brand exclusive PPVs since it's supposed to be one of the main points of distinguishing between the shows when there's separate brands. Raw and Smackdown having it's own PPVs to me kinda goes right along with having it's own world champion, it's own GM, etc. Isn't the issue with two world titles without a brand split that one title (WHC) will always seem inferior to the other? Having both world titles ALWAYS defended on the same PPV wouldn't really be any different than it is now. Hell, even now, they could eradicate this problem when it comes to the TV shows at least by booking the WHC to be the main part of Smackdown.

    Anyway, I'm kind of two minds about this. I can see the argument for a brand split - having Cena on Raw and Punk on Smackdown, The Shield on Raw and the Wyatt Family on Smackdown, etc. and differences like that between the two shows, but I just don't mind there being just one full, complete roster again. And with WWE deciding to recently stop calling even their separate house show tours "Raw" and "Smackdown", I'm getting the feeling they're obviously headed in this direction.
  20. I'm the same way tbh. I can see why some people like not having the split, but for me the pros far outweigh the cons.