Is RAW intentionally worse than Smackdown?

[SamoaRowe 0]

Which is better? Raw or Smackdown? I'm going with Smackdown. Why? Because I can actually sit through the entire thing and enjoy it. When I watch Raw I keep finding myself driven to change the channel and never come back.

[Damaramu 0]

You can't completely blame those on RVD at all. Number 1 the cage was to low and number 2 HHH was WAY to close to RVD. He could've scooted back.

Oh and he's never even put anybody out of action or ended a career.

[Guest TripleHater]

Raw or Smackdown eh? Well I'll Say What I Always Say In SMACKDOWN/RAW Threads No Doubt "SMACKDOWN" Is The Better Show.

 

Raw SUCKS

 

-Boring-Short Matches

-Bad Workers

-Too Many Pointless Segments....Ok This PAST MONDAY,What Was The USE OF That Guy Saying

"IM YOUR BIGGEST FAN" To Austin? I Can Go On,RAW Has Too Many Pointless Segments.

-"WONT DIE" Boring Storylines.....TEST/STEINER,DUDLEYZ/LA RESISTANCE

 

Also Pretty Much The Same Thing Always Happen On RAW.

 

-Austin Going Ahem Ahem BackStage When ERIC

Makes A Match For A *HEEL*

-Christian Compalining(Watch He Complain That He

Lose The Title TO RVD This Monday)

-Austin Re-Starting Matches When A HEEL CHEAT TO Win

*roll eyes*

-Molly/Trish Again?

-Mark Coming On Winning The TAG-MATCH W/ MACK

With A "SPLASH"

-Steiner/TEST Match? Segment? Again *Sighs*

-AUSTIN/ERIC Shown BackStage Talking AT-LEAST

4 Times A Night.

-Boring HHH Promo

 

Smackdown Aint "GREAT" But Its Better Than "Raw".

 

-The Matches Are Good,Way Better Than RAW'S Sorry

Excuse For A "Wrestling" Match.

-Better Wrestlers

-Better Announcers

-Better TAG-TEAMS

-TITLES Used CORRECTLY Unliked On RAW When The

TAG-TEAM Is DEFENDED Like Once Every 5 Months

And The IC TITLE Being Kicked OUT The RING By

Y2J Like A SOCCER BALL,Remember That Guys?

 

Some People Say RAW Is Better Because The MCMahons

Take Up AIR-TIME But WHAT About On RAW?

 

-Austin Takes UP Air-TIME,So Does Eric Bishoff

On SMACKDOWN You Dont SEE An Announcer

Going FOR THE TITLE? *rolleyes*

 

On SMACKDOWN You Dont SEE A 3 Minute Match.

 

Also People Have Been Saying For The PAST Month's

That RAW Has More Main-EVENTERS But Really

SMACKDOWN Does.

 

PAST MONTH'S : HHH,DEFEATS 1,Then GOES TO MID-CARD,Then Another. HHH Has Been The Only Main-Eventer For The Past Year.

 

Now Only GOLDBERG.

 

Smackdown: You Have BROCK/KURT/BIG SHOW

 

See? Smackdown Has More More So Think AGAIN.

[Spaceman Spiff 0]

-Too Many Pointless Segments....Ok This PAST MONDAY,What Was The USE OF That Guy Saying

"IM YOUR BIGGEST FAN" To Austin

That was so Austin could get the guy's ticket, enabling him to be ringside for the JR/Coach match.

[Damaramu 0]

I still want to know how buying a front row ticket gets you access to the ring.

I will go to RAW next time it's in OKC get front row tickets and act like THE DUMBEST MARK EVER. And then jump into the ring and when they take me away say "Austin got to get into the ring with a front row ticket! He said it was ok!"

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

A 3.2 for Smackdown equals about 4.0 for RAW due to the difference in cable and network ratings.

 

UPN & Spike are in approx. the same number of homes according to the Torch and Dave Meltzer.

[Guest Redhawk]

RAW loses because they have more stupid, illogical, pointless segments.

 

--Mae Young and Moolah have been on Smackdown one time that I recall since the split, but have been on RAW at least 3 or 4 times.

--Kane gets kicked into a burning dumpster and has NO burns.

--Coach has his choice of any match in which to keep his job, and he doesn't pick something that plays to his obvious advantages?

 

Amd that's just recently. Not saying Smackdown doesn't have dumb segments, but RAW has more.

[cabbageboy 0]

SMDN has got to be better than Raw right now. I mean even my dad, who has long thought SMDN to be the B show, thinks SMDN is better these days. Mostly due to.....

 

UNCLE EDDIE~!

[Guest MikeSC]

He wasn't wrong....

Actually he was argueing against RVD getting the world title because he injured people and couldn't draw.

When he's never actually injured anyone nor has he been put in the position to draw.

Wasn't aware that I mentioned him injuring people.

 

He blows spots (a lot), his moves just look absurd, and he doesn't draw fans.

 

I'd give Hurricane or Goldust the mega-face push before RVD.

-=Mike

[AndrewTS 0]

I can understand if some people like Raw more. With IMMENSE DIFFICULTY, but still.

 

To me, it's just the fact that Raw has all of SD's problems and more, except it has Goldberg and Trish.

 

On the other hand, SD has better wrestling and better announcing, but the freakin' top stars are considered the McMahons. Yet at least Vince hasn't beaten or almost beaten Eddy.

 

Yet....

[Guest Redhawk]

Smackdown has the younger, more athletic announcers (I'm just assuming Michael Cole is a better athlete than Jim Ross) yet RAW is the show where the announcers are having matches seemingly once a month. If you MUST have announcers wrestling, than have Tazz get in a feud with someone. At least people would buy him as a legitimate threat to beat somebody.

 

And, sure, McMahonMania is running wilder on Smackdown than on RAW. But as someone said before, at least Vince and Steph aren't putting themselves over the top heels and faces. I'd much rather have Vince kicking Zach Gowen's ass than Shane kicking Kane's ass.

 

And the Smackdown World title actually matters. Brock and Kurt traded it for a while, and there is a list of believeable contenders. On RAW, HHH beat everyone twice over before Goldberg finally beat him, so who's left to challenge Goldberg?

[Highland 0]

All kidding aside, Smackdown IS the better show and the one I can actually watch in its entirety instead of channel flipping like I do with Raw. And unlike Raw I can't really recall a time on Smackdown where I felt the need to turn off the tv or change the channel in disgust (necrophilia angles, etc.).

Raw has higher ratings than SD because it is live, on a bigger network than UPN and since SD is taped, anyone on the internet can get spoilers so why would they watch the show if they already know the results? SD needs to be live.

[Guest TheGame2705]

Plus everyone can get Spike while UPN isn't available in all areas and to get it on Dish in some areas requires a higher fee.

People at the local colleges here can get UPN but not Spike.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Raw has higher ratings than SD because it is live, on a bigger network than UPN and since SD is taped, anyone on the internet can get spoilers so why would they watch the show if they already know the results? SD needs to be live.

 

It has been proven that being taped has minimal affect on Smackdown's ratings. Also, RAW does NOT get higher ratings than Smackdown on a regular basis and in fact Smackdown was trouncing RAW all last winter. You have to remember that cable ratings and network ratings are not the same. RAW drew a 3.6 this week (I think?), the network equivalent would be approximately 2.8. Smackdown should in all likelyhood beat RAW this week. They have been pretty even most of the summer, with the exception of the first couple weeks of Kane's run.

[Guest Redhawk]

I think the spoilers have something to do with it. On Tuesday you can read what's going to happen on Smackdown, and if nothing looks interesting you won't watch it. RAW is live, so it has that "You might miss something" element.

 

Also, the WWE does not market it's Smackdown stars as much. I know when I talk to people who know ABOUT wrestling but aren't necsessarily fans, they mention Stone Cold, The Rock and Triple H (sometimes). Brock Lesnar, Kurt Angle and even The Undertaker aren't really household names.

[TheFranchise 0]

You can't claim that The Undertaker isn't a house hold name.

[Guest Redhawk]

You can. How many times has Undertaker been on late night talk shows? Rock, Austin and HHH have all done the Leno/Conan/Kimmel circuit. I've never heard of 'Taker doing that. He's never guest starred on TV shows, never been in a movie. To wrestling fans the man is obviously a legend, but to the casual American, he's maybe a fringe household name at best.

[TheFranchise 0]

You go up to someone in a street and say 'who is the undertaker?'

 

They will say:

 

WWF!

[Guest Redhawk]

How about the other way around? Go up to somebody and ask them, "Who is in the WWF?"

 

They'll say: "The Rock, Stone Cold, Hulk Hogan....uhh.....Triple H.....uhhhh....."

 

Then they might mention Undertaker, Kane, Brock, Angle or whoever. Point is, Taker's in that 2nd or 3rd tier of mainstream popularity.