Guest pappajacks Posted October 29, 2002 Report Posted October 29, 2002 Did the WWE give any specific reasons for not having Smackdown live? Is it because UPN wants the show to be edited before it gets on the air? Is it because of house show scheduling? Is it to give enough time for the people at After Burn to pick the best highlights of Smackdown? If anything, RAW should be the show that is taped due to the lack of quality wrestlers on that show.
Guest Brian Posted October 29, 2002 Report Posted October 29, 2002 Censors and it costs far less to tape the show. The scheduling couls work out perfectly, with RAW touring Friday-Monday and SmackDown Thursday-Sunday.
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted October 29, 2002 Report Posted October 29, 2002 Costs. It is far cheaper to do a tape show than a live show. If it wasn't for RAW being on Monday (and just plain habit) it would probably be taped now as well. Before Smackdown started, they used to do RAW on Monday and tape next week's RAW on Tuesday.
Guest Boseephus Jones Posted October 29, 2002 Report Posted October 29, 2002 Yeah, like he said, it's a lot cheaper. The only reason RAW went live really was because Nitro was hurting their ratings by giving away the results to their matches on live tv. And if you were wondering if the fact that SD is taped hurts its ratings, it's not really the case. They WWF have experimented with Smackdown on a couple of occasions, schedulings live broadcasts probably twice a year. But, they've never seen a significant increase in the ratings so they've decided it's not worth the cost or the trouble of putting out a live show.
ChrisMWaters Posted October 29, 2002 Report Posted October 29, 2002 Plus the fact that Smackdown can get pre-empted due to baseball, basketball, and hockey games costing it a bit.
Guest Brian Posted October 29, 2002 Report Posted October 29, 2002 No they weren't. That backfired on them. The reason they went live though was to prove they were putting out a live product. They've never fully experimented with running live SmackDowns to the best of my knowledge. They had a brief period where they had mistakenly scheduled two shows thinking they'd be a split, but they haven't actually put the effort into doing live shows.
Guest Choken One Posted October 29, 2002 Report Posted October 29, 2002 It's better taped anyways...We can prepare for our Weekly **** match.
Guest Midnight Express83 Posted October 29, 2002 Report Posted October 29, 2002 Live Smackdown currently can happen with shows for SD brand going Thursday to Sunday. But before, it is harder to have a live Smackdown when you have a live show Monday, go home tuesday, leave weds, have live show Thursday, on the road Fri, Sat, Sun. Then wash, rinse, repeat. It is pointless and extra traveling time. Plus, you can edit out bad endings and shit on a tape show, they can't do that on a live show. Don't forget, they can add heat to wrestlers on tape shows and not live...I am looking at YOU Henry.
Guest The Tino Standard Posted October 30, 2002 Report Posted October 30, 2002 Considering the fact that the company is starting to lose money, I wouldn't be surprised if Raw starts going to tape. Cost cutting measure. They already never have opening pyro on Raw anymore (at least not that I can remember in the last 4 or 5 weeks at least), which saves some $$$, so why not take that show to tape as well? Don't say I didn't warn you.
Guest Kotzenjunge Posted October 30, 2002 Report Posted October 30, 2002 I think the lack of pyro is to hide the incredibly empty arenas. Notice how the lights aren't as bright anymore for entrances? Jeff Hardy's entrance was the only one Monday night that wasn't altered somehow. Fo sheez, Kotzenjunge
Guest bob_barron Posted October 30, 2002 Report Posted October 30, 2002 SD! was gonna be live last summer but they did two test runs and it bombed. Doing a live SD! would put a huge strain on production
Guest Brian Posted October 30, 2002 Report Posted October 30, 2002 Those weren't test runs. They thought that they'd have seperate shows by then, and stepped back before they scheduled anymore.
Guest Kotzenjunge Posted October 30, 2002 Report Posted October 30, 2002 TWO live Smackdowns last summer? I remember the Pre-SummerSlam one where they premiered the new set, but other than the 9/11 one that couldn't have been scheduled like that, I don't remember the other. Fo sheez, Kotzenjunge
Guest bob_barron Posted October 30, 2002 Report Posted October 30, 2002 TWO live Smackdowns last summer? I remember the Pre-SummerSlam one where they premiered the new set, but other than the 9/11 one that couldn't have been scheduled like that, I don't remember the other. Fo sheez, Kotzenjunge The one after SummSlam with Austin v. Jericho was live. Had the ratings done a large increase it prob would've been live every week
Guest Kotzenjunge Posted October 30, 2002 Report Posted October 30, 2002 I must not have watched that one, because I have literally NO memory of such a match or show ever taking place. Bloody turbulent Alliance period. Fo sheez, Kotzenjunge
Guest bob_barron Posted October 30, 2002 Report Posted October 30, 2002 RVD faced Jeff Hardy, Raven came out and they brawled
Guest Brian Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 The point of the live shows was because they thought they'd have the split going, not because they wanted to shift SmackDown live at the time. Ratings or not, they had scheduled tapings for like the next two months.
Guest BA_Baracus Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 I quite frankly don't care. The ability to do post-production on Smackdown often results in a slicker, more entertaining show. I think Raw should be pre-taped too.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now