Stable Smackdown

[Guest Goodear]

Is it me or is the major problem with Smackdown that every little ever seems to happen? It has to be about the slowest paced wrestling the WWE has done since the days of Superstars and Challenge.

 

Chavo had been turning on Eddie for about a month now. Its been patently obvious that that event has been coming since the very beginning, but its been held in such a holding pattern that I looked at the turn yesterday and felt more 'FINALLY' rather than 'Chavo you bastard.'

 

Cena and Big Show have been 'feuding' for three or four weeks and they have had just about no interaction beyond the contractually obligated battle wrap that Cena does for every feud he has been in since Spanky.

 

The Bashams and Scotty & Rikishi have been set up for a match now for three weeks and they're slow burning THAT. HOW CAN YOU SLOW BURN A MATCH NO ONE CARES ABOUT? HOW! At least with Randy Orton matches, they happen in short order. You don't have to wait a month.

 

Something really needs to happen here as these are not the only examples someone can think about (Blind Nidia, A-Train turn, Shannon Moore). They have established where they want to go but seemingly have no steps from the beginning to the end. It's a show full of holding patterns.

[Enigma 0]

I was feeling the same way about the Loss Guerreros break-up until it actually happened. The turn was done so well. Chavo was getting some major heat from that crowd, with chants of "Asshole" and "Chavo Sucks." But the problem is, they've got to make Chavo a big deal now and maintain this heat so that Eddie's eventual win over him will mean something.

 

But yes, storyline build and continuity are certainly not one of WWE's higher priorities.

[haVoc 0]

They forgot about the A-train turn didn't they?

[Guest Duncan Eternia]

I personally think that Smackdown has the overall better roster as far as pure workrate is concerned. The problem is that no one cares about a lot of the guys on it. They have screwed up just about everyone thus far - Eddie for example. Angle doesn't even strike me as interesting anymore. The only guy that is fresh is Cena.

 

The question I have is why does WWE keep bringing up guys that aren't ready. Paul London is stuck in Velociy hell while Matt Morgan gets a PPV match in his first 2 weeks.

 

On the bright side, I like that they actually gave some exposure to the cruiserweight division this week.

[Guest Repo Man Reborn]

They forgot about the A-train turn didn't they?

Isn't A-Train still turning?

That guy is so fat, by the time he turns, I'll be a year older.

 

 

PUSH HHH!

[ChrisMWaters 0]

The biggest problem about having things happen on Smackdown, in my opinion, is that it's pre-taped. If it were live, it would be easier if you ask me.

[Guest Goodear]

I personally think that Smackdown has the overall better roster as far as pure workrate is concerned.

 

I agree with this.

 

 

The problem is that no one cares about a lot of the guys on it.

 

Also true. Look at RAW and you'll see just about everyone has some sort of program running (including Stevie Richards?) where things happen on a weekly basis. On the other side, The FBI and A-Train are doing the same things every week against the same people with the same results. Everything on Smackdown is about the same it was a few weeks ago.

[2GOLD 0]

Wasn't Smackdown considerably better even when taped before we all heard the rumor that the WWE wanted Smackdown to be a lot like RAW?

 

Since that rumor, Smackdown has been tanking and RAW has been it's usual dead self.

[Guest Goodear]

RAW is world's better than Smackdown now. SD has taken the repetitive nature of the SD6 era and started running everything into the ground, good and bad. How many matches did Los Guerreros have against WGTT again (and again and again)? How many times has A-Train jobbed to Cena and Benoit?

 

The show is caught in a deadlock while Raw moves people around a lot more and a lot more effectively (except for RVD, who might as well be on Smackdown).

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

Stable? More like inert to me.

 

I mean, here's some more proof as to what you're saying. From 1bob:

 

This week's edition of Smackdown did a relatively strong 3.6 broadcast rating, with a 5 share, according to Nielsen Media Research. That is up from last week's 2.8. The highest quarter hour was a tie between the 8:45 to 9:00, 9:00 to 9:15 and 9:45 to 10:00 segments, which all did a 3.7 rating.

 

Like I said a few days ago, Smackdown usually has little in the way of ratings variance from quarter hour to quarter hour. RAW, on the other hand, will often see a big jump in the overrun or at the top of the first hour. I mean, the highest quarter hours were only 0.1 from the average? Doing some quick calculations, that means that the other five quarter hours averaged around a 3.43 at the least and 3.63 at the most. This shows to me that the size of the audience remains the same throughout the two hours. It's stable. Uninsipiringly stable.

[SamoaRowe 0]

IMO, Raw is the less tedious show these days. It's more enjoyable as a whole, has a better pace, and makes better use of MOST of the roster (with noteworthy exceptions).

 

Smackdown, on the other hand, has the potential to be so much more but totally squanders it. This alone makes Smackdown the more tedious show, because there is so much that you want to happen that never does. Before, Smackdown was getting by okay by featuring the SD6 and featuring smaller, less obnoxious servings of Stephanie and Vince. Now Smackdown is the most depressing thing the WWE has going for it.

[Guest Anglesault]

I STILL can't watch a whole SD!.

 

And no, Bob Holly in the ME is NOT tempting me.

 

But that's besides the point.

 

There is not ONE interesting storyline on the show.

[Guest Your Olympic Hero]

How many times has A-Train jobbed to Cena and Benoit?

Just be thankful that it's not Benoit or Cena jobbing to Train.

[Guest wildpegasus]

I can't watch Raw as nothing interests me there. I don't feel any connection to most of the wrestlers. Smackdown meanwhile has a bunch of wrestlers I can actually watch plus they don't have Jr and King holding the telecast down.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I find both rather horrid.

 

I don't care about a single thing on RAW - Austin bores me, and I'm a bit of an Austin apologist (at least was, I jumped sides JUST NOW!). Bischoff is on cruise-control. And the fact that they are the two "stars" of the show doesn't help matters. I hate HBK. I don't care about HHH. Jericho is dead to me. Orton I don't hate and I could see myself sorta kinda digging a feud with Foley, but it's been bad thus far and there's no signs of it getting better. The Tag Division is barely there. The IC division is Orton, Booker, Christian, and Mark Henry YIPPEE! They keep putting focus on the announcers. The Womens division never pays off so I don't care. And the wrestling sucks. There's nothing for me here. If I miss a show, I shrug my shoulders and smile cause I didn't _really_ "miss" anything.

 

Smackdown has wrestlers that I somewhat care about - mainly Brock and Benoit. But, as mentioned, they keep delaying everything and there's never really a sense of satisfaction when watching the show. Building is good, Building for the sake of Building without a plan for an ending isn't. The Tag Division is horrible. How hard is it to make a good tag division? Seriously? There's many combinations to work, many formulas to use - it's fucking real simple. Their use of the crusierweight division is baffling - why should I bother watching the matches when there's nothing unique about them? They keep putting the belt on Rey but do they ever do something with it? OR HIM? They have this policy of only using so many crusierweights, which is annoying. Smackdown is just like RAW, I don't have to watch it. There's no need to.

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

At least with RAW there's the humor factor in their silly storylines or the wrestlers that are frequently on there. For example, watching Steiner and Test falling down the card, Goldberg's facial expressions, the ineptitude of the Jericho/Trish storyline, etc. Smackdown doesn't even have that. More wrestlers I like watching are on Smackdown but I recognize SD's weaknesses. And at the same time there are wrestlers on that brand (ex: Bradshaw, Holly, Gunn) that if they're being featured, they suck the enjoyment right out of me. No one on RAW does that.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I can't find that funny. It's frustrating, seeing really stupid things on tv. Now, talking about it - that's fun and funny; which is probably why when Smackdown or Raw is on I'm more likely to be on-line talking about it rather than watching it.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

JR and King don't suck...

 

... the enjoyment out of the show for you?

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

Well, they're announcers. It's not the same as with wrestlers. (Most of the time) they don't get special video packages or the focus of recaps at the beginning of the shows like the three I mentioned above. Besides, Cole and Tazz have been annoying the hell out of me for more than a month now.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

It's actually worse, since the Announcers are featured _at_all_times_ on the show(s).

 

I haven't watched Smackdown in a while (not a full one since Benoit/Brock), caught a few solitary matches here and there, but unless anything has changed in the past month, I'll take Cole and Tazz over JR and King any day of the week. Cole isn't very good, but he at least tries to improve (actually focusing on matches, referring to Tazz) whereas JR continues to be trash. Neither are really "good", but Cole at least hasn't been played out for 5 years (Cole having *improved* in 02). The difference between teams is Tazz and Lawler - Tazz is heads and shoulders above Lawler...and JR... and Coach... and Al Snow... Tazz talks about strategy, a wrestlers history (albeit limited, at least he doesn't go on about their football history), and actually sometimes says what a move does, rather than just what a move is (or in JR's case, looks like).

[Guest Anglesault]

Cole's main strength is immediately asking Tazz what a move should do when he isn't sure. It almost makes him seem smarter, as he refers to the expert rather than make something up.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Yeah, plus it makes it seem more conversational and natural rather than the seemingly programmed JR and King. It also treats it more like an athletic contest,

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

I've learned to tune out JR and King every so often.

 

Anyway, what started my annoyance for Tazz and primarily Cole was the Benoit/Brock SD where Jamie Knoble used Nidia as a pawn to beat Sakoda. Cole *immediately* did a 180 on the face Noble, condemning him for actually trying to win a match. I know Noble is one of those 'blink and you'll miss him' roster members, but come on. It's not like it was HHH pedigreeing Lita or something. Then there was this week where Cole was criticizing Cena's act and just sounding like a total loser. Tazz has now been distracted from his explanations of strategy, moves, and history so that he can berate Cole's geekiness. That annoys me. But I am in 100% agreement about Lawler. I despise him.

 

But, when it comes down to it, they're announcers, and I treat them as secondary characters.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Cole isn't nearly as bad as JR on moralizing with heels and faces.

 

Quite frankly, the "No one on RAW does that." point keeps getting weaker, especially when they force you to "tune them out".

 

Announcers *on raw* certainly are not secondary characters. Shall we count how many angles they've been in in the last year? I don't think I have to, you know it already. Announcers are *integral*, they are performing during the whole show, they influence fan response (or try to) and guide the fan through the show - they effect each storyline with the way they call it. If they call it poorly, then the match/wrestler/feud will be lessened because of it.

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

Cole isn't nearly as bad as JR on moralizing with heels and faces.

The quality of his work is dropping. Dramatically. I'm not saying that JR is getting better, because he isn't, but Cole is losing points with me, dropping to Ross's level.

 

Quite frankly, the "No one on RAW does that." point keeps getting weaker, especially when they force you to "tune them out".

 

Then maybe I should have added "to that extent"? Because I know that a stupid JR line won't ruin a RAW show as much as a Bradshaw win would for a SD one.

 

Announcers *on raw* certainly are not secondary characters.  Shall we count how many angles they've been in in the last year?  I don't think I have to, you know it already.

 

Please don't. At any rate, for most of the last year I detested RAW, thus I almost always missed the announcer-centered angles.

 

Announcers are *integral*, they are performing during the whole show, they influence fan response (or try to) and guide the fan through the show - they effect each storyline with the way they call it.  If they call it poorly, then the match/wrestler/feud will be lessened because of it.

 

I never said they were not integral. What I mean is that I'm not going to rank one show above the other simply because of the announce team. It will almost always primarily be based on which wrestlers are being focused on. That's what I watch for - to see the wrestlers I want to kick ass do just that. The announcing is a supplementary aspect to it. It's not neglected in my view, but it's not the highest priority either in evaluating or comparing the shows.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

The Announcing is a big reason as to why I don't feel the need to watch RAW. I think it's insulting and tends to detract from the already bad wrestling. Bad Announcing won't necessarily break a great show, and it won't necessarily make a bad show, but it can tip the scales on a "eh" show - which RAW tends to be a lot.

[Guest wildpegasus]

The Announcing is a big reason as to why I don't feel the need to watch RAW. I think it's insulting and tends to detract from the already bad wrestling. Bad Announcing won't necessarily break a great show, and it won't necessarily make a bad show, but it can tip the scales on a "eh" show - which RAW tends to be a lot.

Foley was quoted as saying something along the lines of Ross could make a good match great and a great match a classic with his announcing. The problem is announcers also have the ability to make a good match poor and a classic match just good or very good. They also have the power to make fans react strongly or poorly to certain wrestlers.

[Hektik 0]

I have came to the conclusion that the WWE will never let Smackdown surpass Raw. If Smackdown were to get really hot the WWE will try to find a way to cool it down. By that I mean switch the hottest wrestlers to Raw.

 

To this day the WWE still considers Raw the A show. Even Ross will still comment on how Raw is the flagship program of the WWE, even though there are supposed to be equal. A good amount of the time in the WWE goes to Raw, while Smackdown is treated like the bastard child.

 

If the WWE would put more time working on Smackdown they would better. They will do better because they have more talented wrestlers who are fresh. Just the very fact that HHH, Shawn Michaels, and Goldberg are the top contenders for the World title shows the sorry state of Raw.

 

Think about it, you have Triple H who has proven he can not draw without Rock or Foley. Shawn Michaels who was never a draw. Then Goldberg who can only draw for short periods before becoming stale.

 

It all comes down to the WWE, but unfourtunetly they want to focus on a show full of washed up wrestlers then a show full of talent that is ready to shine.

[Mystery Eskimo 0]

The question I have is why does WWE keep bringing up guys that aren't ready. Paul London is stuck in Velociy hell while Matt Morgan gets a PPV match in his first 2 weeks.

Morgan was brought up because he's a hoss.

 

London is ready but small and not Rey Mysterio, so he'll never get pushed, even as far as the CW title. I don't know why they bothered signing him and Spanky.