Guest JMA Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Seeing how this is the last season of Buffy, UPN will be needing a show to feel that spot. Could Smackdown be that show? It would be a really good slot and would have the advantage of being live. Of course, then I would have to chose between it and Smallville. What do you think?
Guest j.o.b. squad Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 i doubt it, if they did there woude be a void of wrestling in the latter parts of the week. you woude have saturday velocity, sunday heat, monday raw, tuesday smackdown, and wednesday nwa-tna, i believe thats to scrunched up to be a good buisness decision
Guest bob_barron Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Absolutely not. Making Smackdown! a live show would be a terrible decision. The shows are better off taped. They should tape RAW as well
Guest teke184 Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 i doubt it, if they did there woude be a void of wrestling in the latter parts of the week. you woude have saturday velocity, sunday heat, monday raw, tuesday smackdown, and wednesday nwa-tna, i believe thats to scrunched up to be a good buisness decision It depends if they think they can get better ratings on a Tuesday. I'd say it's a good possibility of getting those ratings considering the only true hit show on Tuesday is American Idol, as opposed to Survivor, Friends, and Will and Grace on Thursday. I don't think they'd want to mess TOO much with their flagship show, though.
Guest JMA Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Nah. I don't like taped wrestling shows. It's too easy to get spoilers.
Guest Choken One Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Tuesday already cluttered with good shows...We don't need to add another one. It's better off on Thursday, Live or Taped. UPN will just move one of it's "HIT" Shows over...
Guest JMA Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Tuesday already cluttered with good shows...We don't need to add another one. It's better off on Thursday, Live or Taped. UPN will just move one of it's "HIT" Shows over... "HIT" shows? Don't you mean "SHIT" shows?
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Absolutely not. Making Smackdown! a live show would be a terrible decision. The shows are better off taped. They should tape RAW as well. Nah. I don't like taped wrestling shows. It's too easy to get spoilers. Not only that, but they are much cheaper as well. I can understand RAW being live after PPVs, but there is really no need the rest of the time and it would probably be better served by being taped. Do what I do, don't read them. I used to back when I was still debating whether to watch it each week, but now that I watch it every week I avoid them. It is quite easy if you have even the slightest bit of will power.
Guest Choken One Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Nah. I don't like taped wrestling shows. It's too easy to get spoilers. Just Don't read them...Simple as that.
Guest teke184 Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Tuesday already cluttered with good shows...We don't need to add another one. It's better off on Thursday, Live or Taped. UPN will just move one of it's "HIT" Shows over... Choken... you DO realize what comes on Thursdays against SD? WTF on Tuesday can compete with Friends and Survivor at the same time?
Guest bob_barron Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Nah. I don't like taped wrestling shows. It's too easy to get spoilers. No it's not- just avoid them. It's much cheaper and looks better production wise to do taped shows
Guest JMA Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 No it's not- just avoid them. It's much cheaper and looks better production wise to do taped shows No can do. If I can't see the spoilers I don't want anyone else to either. Having the shows live means anything really CAN happen.
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 No it's not- just avoid them. It's much cheaper and looks better production wise to do taped shows No can do. If I can't see the spoilers I don't want anyone else to either. Having the shows live means anything really CAN happen. You can see the spoilers, but if you don't want to that shouldn't stop other people who do from reading them. I don't like Mexican food, but I don't want Taco Bell banned. It makes about as much sense as what you said.
Guest Steviekick Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 It propably would not be good for two WWE programs to be that close. It would lead to audience burn out. Especially on weeknights.
Guest Choken One Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Teke-Do YOU realize what's on Tuesday? Twenty Fucking Four. Alot of Wrestling Fans tend to be 24 fans as well... During the summer, They can put it on Tuesdays if they wish.... Thursday is better because Male Teens would rather watch Wrestling then Survivor and Will and Grace.
Guest teke184 Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Well pardon fucking me... I looked at my TV Guide for today and I saw a 2-hour block of American Idol on Tuesday and NOT 24, which I would have noticed.
Guest Choken One Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 24 is the main Tuesday show...It's Just on Hiatus now...
Guest bob_barron Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 No it's not- just avoid them. It's much cheaper and looks better production wise to do taped shows No can do. If I can't see the spoilers I don't want anyone else to either. Having the shows live means anything really CAN happen. Why? I don't get that. Taped shows are much less sloppy (see RAW), cheaper and they can do longer matches
Guest Choken One Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Sure, But could'd you imagine how much LOWER ratings would be for Raw if it was taped? The Live thing kinda makes it interesting... My TAKE Is this...Do it live...Fine with me... Here is something to take note...Raw has the ability to run over for at most 15 minutes...Smackdown has to end EXACTLY at 10:00. So that could play a factor.
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Sure, But could'd you imagine how much LOWER ratings would be for Raw if it was taped? The Live thing kinda makes it interesting... My TAKE Is this...Do it live...Fine with me... Here is something to take note...Raw has the ability to run over for at most 15 minutes...Smackdown has to end EXACTLY at 10:00. So that could play a factor. It wouldn't be lower. They have experimented with it in the past. Taped RAWs in 1998/99 did no worse than Live RAWs. And the Live Smackdowns in Fall 2001 actually did worse than the taped ones.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Sure, But could'd you imagine how much LOWER ratings would be for Raw if it was taped? The Live thing kinda makes it interesting... My TAKE Is this...Do it live...Fine with me... Here is something to take note...Raw has the ability to run over for at most 15 minutes...Smackdown has to end EXACTLY at 10:00. So that could play a factor. RAW has been ending around 11 for a while now. Why would ratings go down? As Kahran said- they were at their peak in 1999. And when SD! went live the ratings didnt do squat
Guest JMA Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 I like live wrestling shows better than taped ones. That's just the way I feel. After all, football, boxing, baseball, and basketball games are almost always live. It gives the feeling that "anything can happen." That and you can see when wrestlers fuck up.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Seeing wrestlers fuck up is not good though. It makes wrestling come off as really really phony. I don't really care if it's lived or taped- As long as the show is good
Guest justcoz Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Live wrestling used to be the shit on Monday nights when we had competing shows and each were trying to out do the other with big angles and the element of suprise. That era died when Nitro ended. Now if the WWE were really serious about "sports entertainment", they would compete just as seriously against MNF and Everybody Loves Raymond as they did WCW. But they don't. Raw is a formulatic show now and doesn't take advantage of the live format. I don't want to see live wrestling die though. I don't think there is a need for Raw to be live each week but I do think it could possibly be in their best interests to rotate live/taped Raw's and Smackdown's. One week Raw is live on Monday and Smackdown is taped Tuesday. The next week it's taped Sunday night. That week Smackdown is live on Wednesday. Yes, I said Wednesday. WWE would be pricks and screw NWA TNA but maybe that would give them incentive to end the failed weekly pay per view thing and bust ass to get a cable deal - plus Smackdown would probably do a better number with less competition.
Guest JMA Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Seeing wrestlers fuck up is not good though. It makes wrestling come off as really really phony. I don't really care if it's lived or taped- As long as the show is good Well, my one pet peeve are wrestlers and commentators pretending that the show is live (i.e. Michael Cole saying it's Thursday on SD! when it's actually Tuesday). I feel the same way about shows like Heat and Velocity. It ruins my suspension of disbelief... and I NEED that to enjoy wrestling.
Guest treble charged Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 They never say they're live, though, and to say, 'Hey, we taped this show 2 days ago!' at the beginning would be pretty stupid.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 TC is right- they NEVER say 'we are live'.
Guest JMA Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 But what gets me though is Velocity. Velocity, as most people know, is tapped before SD! is. But the commentators of Velocity regularly mention the results of SD! (even though they haven't happened yet). I REALLY hate that.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Are they supposed to act like Smackdown! never happened?
Guest JMA Posted March 12, 2003 Report Posted March 12, 2003 Are they supposed to act like Smackdown! never happened? It HASN'T happened. They are acting like it happened when it HASN'T.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now