Dave Meltzer comments on WWE's problems

[Enigma 0]

In all the time I've been a fan of pro wrestling, I've never been more concerned, or more scared, about its future. Not that the business won't be around, because WWE has so much money, but that pro wrestling, unless the problems are addressed, will end up at a lower level of popularity than at any time in recent memory.

 

To look at the 1992-1995 period in the U.S. and say things were far worse, and in ways they were far worse, misses a major point. Yes, revenues were far lower, and about the only promoter in the U.S. running at a profit was Jerry Jarrett with the USWA. And while his company hadn't started losing money because he had guys working five nights a week for $125 per week, it eventually did and by then was already headed down the path that would end up as extinction. But it felt like there were people interested in wrestling, and more, there were so many things about wrestling being done internationally, in particular in Japan and Mexico, that were revolutionary at the time. There were many great wrestlers around who, often because of size, had not been exposed to the U.S. fan base. There were ideas that could shake things up, such as the UWFI vs. New Japan feud in Japan that Eric Bischoff saw at a sold out Tokyo Dome which led to the NWO angle that was one of the things that started the ball rolling. There was ECW as a cult favorite, using both ideas from Japan, creating new talent, and some new ideas that started getting a cult following. Today, there is none of that. While Mexico is doing fine, the smaller guys doing incredible high spots that was one of the new innovations of the late 90s, has already been done in the U.S. Ultimately, for a number of reasons, some due to people who didn't understand the style or thought it was wrong, or who thought small guys couldn't get over in the U.S., and on some points may have been right, it wasn't booked to succeed. And that can kill anything. Today, the public has seen every great high flying move and due to so many injuries, WWE has shied away from "holy shit" moments, so it has not been booked as something important, and it isn't. The ECW hardcore, taken from FMW in Japan, with the table breaking and heavy usage of weapons and blood, came, was hot, but has been passé for some time. Long-term, it becomes numbing and worse, both WWE and WCW turned it into a comedy feeling rather than a brutal deal, and naturally, that killed it dead. But what that period had was so many stars, and with new match-ups on the WWE side, and dream match-ups on the WCW side, every week, the hotness of the product enabled others pushed to become big stars. There is no new style, new angle, or new wrestlers making their mark overseas that can be imported to make things fresh.

 

The worst thing done by WWE over the past three years is not only not really making new stars, although they have tried and even came close with Brock Lesnar, but he was victimized by being flip-flopped from heel to face too quickly, but for reasons that sounded very good at the time, they took people who were stars to the fans, and portrayed them as being fake stars who weren't really big-time. Whether it was Rob Van Dam, Diamond Dallas Page, Booker T, or Bill Goldberg, it doesn't matter now, because the damage has long since been done and time will tell if the very expensive lessons of opportunities squandered has been learned from. In 2001, when things started declining, any fan with a halfway decent understanding of booking could have come up with money scenarios that somehow the professionals couldn't, or wouldn't, see. Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero were pushed as mid-carders for so long that it was going to be difficult, even with Benoit getting a huge booking push early this year, for them to be able to carry the top. Others, Triple H and The Undertaker, who are portrayed the strongest, are stale from so many years at the top and people not believing in their opponents as real challengers. Within the front office of the company, they've been told by management that Randy Orton on the Raw brand and John Cena on the Smackdown brand are being groomed, it takes time, but they'll be the new stars to turn it around, and that things are six months to a year away from turning around. That was also the line about the brand extension, a few steps back but ultimately steps forward, and now, two plus years in, there have been no steps forward. A few new stars have been made that would have been made anyway, and PPV is weakening due to less talent depth on shows and weaker and repeat main events. The only benefit is I believe it slowed up the inevitable burning out of talent by being in angles once a week instead of twice, and with two brands, allowed more people to work house shows and thus speed up their learning curve for new guys. It also has created so many titles that NOBODY knows who the champs are, NOBODY cares. All belts are meaningless, and that is not a good thing.

 

It's still very early in the game for Orton, and he's got a great look and for his age and experience level, is a great wrestler, but his first taste at the top and his face turn were not successful. Even the most optimistic realize there is nothing on the horizon that is going to change things, and as many have stated since the summer of 2001, the best thing to do is plan long-term (which they are doing to a degree with HHH vs. Orton's Wrestlemania rematch, and Kurt Angle vs. The Undertaker, which no hints have even been started on) and hope that brings anticipation. If you look at the company's most successful shows in the past three years, they have all involved either long-term angles or old stars returning.

 

Cena has not crossed over to teenagers like they expected, even though his rap skills and charisma says he should. They are taking a big gamble with Cena, and the odds are against it succeeding, but at the same time, sometimes you just have to roll the dice. Using Mike Tyson was a huge financial gamble. Wrestlemania I was an even bigger gamble, as it could have killed the company, and instead, made the company. If Cena's movie flops, it will be very difficult for him to be the superstar they want him to be. The gamble is, if it catches on, he'll be seen as a much bigger star and cooler personality. Given WWE's track record with non-wrestling ventures (which is beyond awful), and that when wrestling was "in," Hulk Hogan, the biggest draw in wrestling, and Roddy Piper, who was near the top, both went into film careers. Hogan survived being a joke on the screen, but he was already an established super draw in wrestling. Piper maintained stardom until the end at WCW, but his movie career didn't make him a bigger star in wrestling, and his drawing power peak was all before he went to Hollywood. Neither were big stars in Hollywood, and they were the coolest wrestlers with huge followings when wrestling was in. Cena, like Kane, are stars with no drawing power within wrestling, when wrestling is cold. As far as the 2005 bottom line, the expansion into doing three movies next year has a lot of people concerned. The time is wrong to put wrestlers in movies when wrestling itself is so cold. The stars involved aren't even selling tickets when they wrestle, so how can they be expected to sell tickets in a movie theatre? And movies are a high risk venture and, while these aren't big budget movies, they are still $10 million investments that can easily be next year's version of WWF New York.

 

We've already seen the WCW pattern. Ratings fall. House shows fall greatly. PPV falls. Suddenly, even the live Nitros, Thunders, and PPV live events can't sell tickets. And things continue to fall. You shoot angle after angle and nobody cares. You bring back legends, but it doesn't work. Then you find good-looking muscular young guys as your new stars and even have the old stars put them over, but you're so deep in the hole that nobody cares, but the old stars know how to lose without putting people over. Morale is horrible. Long-term creative is thinking a week ahead. Angles that should draw are done with such frequency that they are killed, and nobody believes or cares about anything. Sound familiar?

 

Like a live Raw a few weeks ago in Madison Square Garden drawing 7,000 paid. Or a PPV live event in a city that was on fire like Portland, OR, drawing 6,500. Or a PPV hyped with a huge local media blitz, Taboo Tuesday last week in Milwaukee, drawing barely 3,500 paid, by far the smallest paid attendance for a WWE PPV show in history, and even at the end of WCW's run, their PPV shows were doing as well as that. The word from Cleveland is Survivor Series, one of the "big four," is on the verge of tanking. For a while, it appeared the declines had leveled off. But even in previous bad periods, the PPV events were always a hot ticket. Over the past year, the house show business has been consistently bad, but Monday Raws were a hot ticket and PPVs often sold out, and until recently, always did well. Now, aside from Wrestlemania, there is nothing guaranteed to be able to sell out a major arena. The idea of a sellout in North America for a house show is becoming an endangered species. PPV has not fallen like WCW, because the company has a long-time history of presenting better shows, most notably the main events that have more often than not delivered. Also, they are the only game in town, so there is no real PPV wrestling competition, only competition from big boxing and UFC as shows that do any real business, and neither have any affect on purchases of a wrestling PPV. The "bare minimum" of 260,000 buys has fallen to 190,000, and it won't get better until shows are of the caliber they once were. The big drops in the bottom number each took place during the period when they were promoting more than one PPV per month, over the summer (base falling to 225,000) and this month (dropping farther to 190,000). If there is one change that is really clear to me, it's that the experiment of doing two PPV shows certain months is going to be, long-term, a major mistake. Once people start skipping a show, and that is happening with sizeable numbers, it becomes easier to just save money unless something really strong is promised, and that's hard to do when you have the same headliner roster every month. You'd think with so many TV viewers, that just on a percentage basis, it will always be above the 100,000 buys range to where it's healthy, and with good TV and good shows, it probably would. But the lessons of WCW, falling to as low as 55,000 buys while still doing 2.5 ratings, tells you bad shows and bad booking can sink things quite a bit lower.

 

Worse, at this point, they aren't recognizing the problem. The 2005 PPV scheduled starts 1/9 with New Yew's Revolution in San Juan, a Raw show. Royal Rumble is 1/30 in Fresno. No Way Out, a Smackdown show, is 2/20 in Pittsburgh. Wrestlemania is 4/3 in Los Angeles. Backlash, a Raw show, is 5/1 in Manchester, NH. Judgment Day, a Smackdown show, is 5/22 in Minneapolis at Target Center. Bad Blood, a Raw show, is 6/12 in Detroit. Great American Bash, a Smackdown show, is 6/26 in Las Vegas, so that's three shows in seven weeks and I expect them to achieve a new bottom point at that time. Vengeance, a Raw show, is 7/24. SummerSlam is 8/21. Unforgiven, a Smackdown show, is 9/18. No Mercy, a Raw show, is 10/9. The plans for a second Taboo Tuesday have been changed, and they will have an as yet unnamed Smackdown show on 10/30, which almost has to be a Halloween theme (Havoc?). The year will end with Survivor Series on 11/27, which goes to Thanksgiving weekend for the first time in years, and the Raw Armageddon show on 12/18.

 

International is still strong, and it may be for a while. Even when business was weak in North America in the 90s, most of the international tours did great business, and WCW, even at the end when they were a joke, drew huge crowds in England and Australia.

 

But I've never felt such a malaise and lack of interest, and saw less that could turn things around. In that bad period, there were far more stars people cared about than today. The stars created in the late-80s were far younger. And while a new group of stars was created in the late-90s, the nature of so much in the way of television main events and not protecting stars in booking and portrayal has stripped most of them of the kind of marketability needed in a star-driven business. The excuses that The Rock and Steve Austin are gone, and reality shows have cut into ratings (the latter I think is total bullshit and the former misses the point that while things would be better with Rock and Austin around, we'd still be in a decline right now because they also would be stale from so many straight years if they were around all the time) sound good to outsiders, but the reality is different. By not elevating enough talent, and not creating enough new talent, combined with overexposure, things got stale. Anyone could have seen this coming three plus years ago, and many astute people in the business saw it in 2000, when numbers were still hot and the next generation was getting positioned as guys who were cool because business was hot, but no threat to the top, exactly how things were two years earlier in WCW. We're paying for not being able to follow the crazy falls and high spot oriented matches with a toned down work style. We're paying for running through so many ideas and angles so fast years ago that nobody cares about anything. We're paying for stopping people's ascension to where people stopped having an emotional attachment to them, which is needed for the top guys to do business. We're paying for people seeing so many variations of wrestling and now, when most of the variations are shunned and you only see the basic WWE style, things become too similar, even when they are done well. And wrestling, at least the North American version has always thrived on variety of characters and it's become a business of conformity. And there's always the humane reasons regarding talent that often result in declines after success. Successful companies don't want to put the people who worked so hard and so well for them on the unemployment line, since there are no territories to ship them out to. Success and stability breed an attitude where it is hard for newcomers to break through or to drop stale performers, because the stale performers have a track record of drawing and are better performers, but a fresh business needs to constantly turn over talent anyway.

 

WWE is still profitable, because of increasing prices, so what is happening is a far smaller base of fans is being asked to spend far more per person, higher house show prices, higher PPV prices, and more PPV shows, to support the machine. The 24/7 project is not going to be supported by a new fan base, although it will be interesting to see if they can garner interest from the departed fan base for nostalgia. But nostalgia has a short shelf life. What is happening with the loss of popularity and decline in numbers of fans and the reasons for the decline mirror similar circumstances after great success for Jim Crockett Promotions and WCW. The talent is largely a pat hand for years. And it's charismatic talent that was on fire during the good years. But it's the same guys against each other, and the only changes are babyface-to-heel switches, that often involve situations the public doesn't accept and don't work. Yes, Crockett ran up big debt expanding nationally and paying for so much TV time, but the crowds in the core cities were also dropping. WCW ran in even bigger debt with insane expenses, but what killed the company was revenue dropped when people stopped buying the PPVs, and going to the arenas. WCW's decline was sped up by producing horrible television, and also going against a cooler competitor with a new generation of younger stars that was blowing them away in competition. Crockett's decline came when there was a competitor that simply had more exposure and bigger stars, and the U.S. usually doesn't support what it considers a minor league brand. The fact WWE, with no competition, is losing interest every year is far more unsettling.

 

WWE is in no danger of disappearing with its huge war chest and well run financial side. But as WCW showed, having all the money in the world can't make a disinterested public care, or keep revenues from falling. Wall Street, which WWE has to answer to, will get very negative since it wants to see company expansion into new fields, and WWE never does well with that. They also want to see revenue growth, and doing so by adding to the number of PPV events is going to work against them in the long run. TNA is spending real money, and they can't even make 10,000 of the staunchest wrestling fans in the U.S. care. What concerns me the most is, in the past, so many people would come up with so many ideas to turn things around, and there were far more "wrestling" fans that enjoyed "pro wrestling" as opposed to simply WWE fans, losing interest in that product, and so few with any interest in anything else. While most wouldn't have worked, the fact was, some of them did.

 

Now, nobody is coming up with any ideas other than copying the past. When the New York audience booed the car crash angle at Unforgiven, you could see special effects is not what is wanted, and is being rejected. Well, especially when we've seen guys in car crashes many times over the years, and somehow, they survive without much more than a scratch. When great match after great match early this year on Raw didn't help ratings, you could see great wrestling matches wasn't going to turn this around, but at least people don't reject that. The company, whenever business is down, turns to big men, as we've seen by the new hiring policy, and who is being brought in. This happened in the 90s with the efforts to replace Hulk Hogan with Lex Luger, and using people like Kevin Nash, Yokozuna, King Mabel, Sid Vicious, Ludvig Borga, and Papa Shango in main event positions, none of whom drew, and with the exception of Nash, none of whom is even remembered well today, and none of whom was part of the company's turnaround (Nash was part of WCW's turnaround). The people who turned around the company were, for the most part, the great performers. They'd be better off secretly funding TNA to be a competitor, and slipping real talent to them that is stale, and helping them get real television and giving work and experience to young wrestlers, who could then be brought up having made at least a small name. They did some of that with ECW, but not in a way to help ECW much, and that's not happening today. When TNA went to McMahon a few years ago with that idea, they didn't call back. And as a public company and with a smarter fan base, it's hard to keep something like that on the down-low.

 

Is there a Mike Tyson or even a Dennis Rodman in sports today? No to the former, but as far as the latter, there is Shaquille O’Neal (a huge fan, like Karl Malone was), Kobe Bryant (a controversial figure who makes the news with everything he does, more than Rodman), and others just as big. Shaq & Orton vs. Kobe & HHH would be bigger than the Rodman-Malone show WCW put together and would get the public into it. But those guys aren't hurting for money, and would have to endure tremendous criticism for doing it (way more than Malone and Rodman took because wrestling was far more accepted by the public in 1998). It's not happening, but it would at least make WWE a topic of conversation again, but even that idea is a rehash of something from the past. And when they are done, it's still the same product. Rodman & Malone didn't help WCW one bit long-run. Tyson did, because Austin worked so well with him, and immediately had the program with McMahon to follow up with.

 

Also, unlike in the early and mid-90s, international isn't looking much better. New Japan is compared by Japanese in the know to WCW, with the frequent direction changes and no ideas, as well as now operating in the red. All Japan is a glorified independent with many wrestlers way behind on pay. Women's wrestling is almost dead now, and will be deader by the end of next year when the biggest women's group, Gaea, is no more. Pride doesn't have the drawing cards to make next year as successful as the past few, as the money players (Ogawa, Yoshida, and Sakuraba) aren't going to be major factors. K-l had business success with the Bob Sapp and Akebono freak show, but you can't follow that, and its strength now looks to be its middleweights. NOAH seems stable, as it does well on big shows, but its nightly business isn't strong. But its big shows have been carried by Kenta Kobashi, who in many ways is reminiscent of a 2001 Keiji Mutoh as the guy whose knees are shot who is gutting out great matches. But the long-run of that isn't pretty, as the 2004 Keiji Mutoh shows. They have a good product that satisfies its fan base by putting on largely strong big shows, but they have set the bar high, and have gone through every marquee match on top and have to look outside for fresh big show main events. Some look at NOAH's success in at least maintaining its level during a general downturn world wide as an example that if you don't insult your audience and give them a good product, you will do fine. Sadly, that's only the case when you've got stars, and Japan's future when it comes to new stars is bleak, partially because the TV audience is down, and the network shows, at 30 minutes airing after midnight, makes it difficult to create new fans and without lots of people seeing you on television, you don't create mainstream stars. Plus, PPV looks like it will never become a lucrative revenue stream in Japan for pro wrestling. Additionally, American culture can be exported all over the world and it's seen as a big deal. Japanese culture doesn't play well outside that country, making huge international business that is propping up WWE right now, next to impossible.

 

In 2005, if nothing else, the TV situation looks stronger for U.S. competition. TNA is at least on TV, but the TV hasn't caught people's interest. UFC will have some TV, a reality show right after Raw, and at least one live special on Spike TV although it will be two reality show fighter matches. The rating of that special is going to be very important to the company's future, as well as how the reality show goes over. UFC is a PPV driven business, and there are so many PPV events, that very few become special. Aside from Randy Couture vs. Chuck Liddell, there is no UFC money fight people care about for next year until they make new stars, and even that one is one that has been done before. Real Pro Wrestling will be on PAX, but that network averages a 0.5 in prime time and I shudder to think what it gets on a Sunday afternoon. And in what will be among the biggest news stories of next year, WWE will have some interesting TV negotiations.

[UseTheSledgehammerUh 0]

*** To look at the 1992-1995 period in the U.S. and say things were far worse, and in ways they were far worse, misses a major point.***

 

1992 was one of the greatest years for wrestling ever, in terms of entertainment. So how about 1993-95.

 

*** There was ECW as a cult favorite, using both ideas from Japan, creating new talent, and some new ideas that started getting a cult following. Today, there is none of that. ***

 

Because there's nothing left to steal.

 

You know what, I've read this piece. There's not one remotely new idea on here. Thank you Meltzer, for wasting 2 minutes of my time.

 

Now stop copying and pasting opinions that are years old.

 

John Cena isn't the next Hulk Hogan? SHOCKING!

Brock shouldn't have turned face? MY GOD!

There's no ECW?

"Hardcore Matches" are passe'?

 

SIGN ME UP FOR THE OBSERVER!

[Stephen 0]

Between Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania, there is plenty of time to really build some good matches on the raw side.

 

Smackdown has about a month and a half, which is still good.

 

Wrestlemania may be the only PPV worth buying in 2005.

[Guest The Winter Of My Discontent]

The solution is easy. Very easy.

 

And they've partially been doing the right thing so far by cutting the extra fat. Dumping Billy Gunn and A train was the right thing to do. Now they need to dump the rest: Rosey, Hardcore Holly, Hurricane (face it, he'll never be a big star), Johnny Stambolli, Nunzio, Funaki, Shannon Moore, Kidman, Stevie Richards and so on. Those characters have been killed and will never be worth a damn on WWE TV.

 

Now

 

Kill the Brand Extension. I've said this for years. Now they can have all of their stars on both shows, can cut down no PPVs, and not over saturate their product with weak stars no one cares about. That is the main problem here. No one reacts to Snitsky because he'll just beat up losers. Have him fight actual competitive matches with real stars. That can't be done because there are so many finite stars that are available to fight on a show. If the shows merge, it'll give them a lrager talent base plus the ability for fans to have the chance to see all of their stars in one night. It'll sell more tickets and PPVs.

[Black Lushus 0]

Eliminate the Brand Extension...plain and simple...put the bigger names on Raw and Smackdown, have fueds carry over to both shows, put the smaller names on Heat and Velocity until they are ready to step it up to the big shows...combine the world/wwe titles, the IC/US titles and the two tag tiles, keep the cruiser title and bring back the TV title...I think there are good matches/fueds we're missing out on because certain guys are only on Smackdown and certain guys are only on Raw...I've never liked the brand extension and now wrestling is watered down...

 

EDIT: banky beat me to this point...

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

They need some dead weight, otherwise the talent that can get over and draw will have to do more jobs. A little fodder with some name recognition is a good thing.

[Guest The Winter Of My Discontent]

They need some dead weight, otherwise the talent that can get over and draw will have to do more jobs. A little fodder with some name recognition is a good thing.

Fodder is good for Velocity not Raw or Smackdown.

[Black Lushus 0]

Raw/Smackdown Roster:

 

HHH

Benoit

Angle

Edge

Jericho

Batista

Benjamin

UT

JBL

Eddie Guerrero

Chavo Guerrero

Rey Mysterio

The Dudleyz

RVD

Booker T

Orton

Flair

Heidenreich

Regal

Eugene

La Resistance

Kidman

London

Carlito

Cena

Christian

Snitsky

Kane

Hardy

 

Velocity/Heat Roster:

everyone else until the fans like them enough to go to the bigger shows, and for those already on my bigger show list, as their popularity weens, they would go to Velocity/Heat...

 

It works out perfectly, make Raw 3 hours, it worked for Nitro for awhile...that way big stars shine and smaller stars aren't totally left in the cold...it worked so well for them in the 90s, why do they feel the need to change it with stupid brand extensions?

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Raw is barely getting it done with 2hrs to use. Giving it 3 would be horrible.

[Guest Loss]

Sledgehammer, you totally missed the point, I think. Often times, you'll see people on here claim that WWE is still profitable and that the state of the company isn't anywhere near as bad as it was from 1992-1995, but there were ideas that both the WWF and WCW could steal and use on a national level to create another boom, and there is no top star in the wings or big angle that's going to turn things around if it ever happens. The future is more bleak because there's no easy answer for a way out. The answers were far more clear in the previous downturn.

 

Also, Hunter's Torn Quad is right. If you have nothing but big names and hot stars on your show, who's going to be doing jobs? You have to have some expendable guys around that can put people over.

[Black Lushus 0]

How would it be horrible, if there are more than the same 10 guys on the show it would be better...

[Brett Favre 0]

Raw is barely getting it done with 2hrs to use. Giving it 3 would be horrible.

They would have more to work with though. Everyone should get on the show. It's the reason RAW's barely doing shit today. No one gets on the show, except for like the same 10 people each week.

[Black Lushus 0]

Exactly!

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

How would it be horrible, if there are more than the same 10 guys on the show it would be better...

Because in order to give everyone time on just one show, the talent that could get over would have time taken away from them, thus reducing their chances of getting over. At least with two shows, the talents that could get over are likely to get the air time they need.

 

You really think WWE could get things done with 3hrs ? If Raw went to 3hrs, we'd get more of the same, just over 3hrs instead of 2.

[Brett Favre 0]

Also, Hunter's Torn Quad is right. If you have nothing but big names and hot stars on your show, who's going to be doing jobs? You have to have some expendable guys around that can put people over.

Those guys would have to be the midcarders. Seeing people beat up jobbers isn't what it once was. No one cares if you beat Funaki anymore. Not saying that all the stars have to job, but select a few who will do more jobs than others. If the bigger stars are beating the somewhat solid stars, it will make it more believable.

[Black Lushus 0]

Dude, that's why i said KEEP Smackdown and carry fueds/stars over...for example, Booker T may be on Raw tonight, but not Smackdown this week, but possibly both shows next week...they did it once before, just like WCW did with Nitro and Thunder...

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I know how to turn it around, and it hasn't been mentioned here once.

 

*walks away and whistles.*

[Guest The Winter Of My Discontent]

There's no purpose for the Rosey and Hurricane tag team on RAW. Maven on RAW. Its just filler. It turns people off. Put them on Velocity. But when I sit down, and I see them, I change the channel. I'm sure most do the same. And with our generation's attention span, we probably don't even change back.

[Brett Favre 0]

I know how to turn it around, and it hasn't been mentioned here once.

 

*walks away and whistles.*

Kill Triple H?

[Guest MikeSC]

People, without the brand split, there is almost NO chance of new guys reaching the top. You have HHH, UT, HBK, Angle, etc on top --- who in the hell will knock them off?

-=Mike

[Brett Favre 0]

There's no purpose for the Rosey and Hurricane tag team on RAW. Maven on RAW. Its just filler. It turns people off. Put them on Velocity. But when I sit down, and I see them, I change the channel. I'm sure most do the same. And with our generation's attention span, we probably don't even change back.

Exactly. Even if we see people like Booker T jobbing or what not, it's still something people will watch because he is someone you know. No one gives a fuck about Maven.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Dude, that's why i said KEEP Smackdown and carry fueds/stars over...for example, Booker T may be on Raw tonight, but not Smackdown this week, but possibly both shows next week...they did it once before, just like WCW did with Nitro and Thunder...

So, you want to give them 5hrs a week, 3 for Raw and 2 for Smackdown ?

[Guest Loss]

Also, Hunter's Torn Quad is right. If you have nothing but big names and hot stars on your show, who's going to be doing jobs? You have to have some expendable guys around that can put people over.

Those guys would have to be the midcarders. Seeing people beat up jobbers isn't what it once was. No one cares if you beat Funaki anymore. Not saying that all the stars have to job, but select a few who will do more jobs than others. If the bigger stars are beating the somewhat solid stars, it will make it more believable.

That kind of thinking is what made Chris Benoit and Chris Jericho look like B-show stars.

[Brett Favre 0]

People, without the brand split, there is almost NO chance of new guys reaching the top. You have HHH, UT, HBK, Angle, etc on top --- who in the hell will knock them off?

-=Mike

That's something the WWE should know how to do by now. Each guy that you want to push to the top should face midcarders (Booker T, JBL, Rey, Flair, Christian)first, and eventually take their spot when they the midcarders are done, or they are ready. Each step to stardom shouldn't start by beating the HHH's and Angle. If the WWE can't do that right, well, they probably can't.

[Black Lushus 0]

Sure, it worked for WCW until they got too silly, why wouldn't it work for the WWE?

[Guest Loss]

Going an extra hour would kill RAW. We already have a historical precedent that proves that doesn't work. WCW started losing viewers right around the time they added Thunder and added an extra hour to Nitro.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Sure, it worked for WCW until they got too silly, why wouldn't it work for the WWE?

Because it would first require the fixing of problems that Vince and co either cannot see or refuse to see.

[humongous2002 0]

According to Da Meltz Pro-wrestling as you know it is doom.

[Brett Favre 0]

Also, Hunter's Torn Quad is right. If you have nothing but big names and hot stars on your show, who's going to be doing jobs? You have to have some expendable guys around that can put people over.

Those guys would have to be the midcarders. Seeing people beat up jobbers isn't what it once was. No one cares if you beat Funaki anymore. Not saying that all the stars have to job, but select a few who will do more jobs than others. If the bigger stars are beating the somewhat solid stars, it will make it more believable.

That kind of thinking is what made Chris Benoit and Chris Jericho look like B-show stars.

But you can always shuffle them around. A company this big should know that some people like Jericho and Benoit shouldn't job more than people like JBL. It obviously isn't working now with the Mavens. A show will more stars would probably draw more, of course, if you have those guys you want to push for the future, at the bottom. Waiting for their turn.

[Guest MikeSC]

People, without the brand split, there is almost NO chance of new guys reaching the top. You have HHH, UT, HBK, Angle, etc on top --- who in the hell will knock them off?

        -=Mike

That's something the WWE should know how to do by now. Each guy that you want to push to the top should face midcarders (Booker T, JBL, Rey, Flair, Christian)first, and eventually take their spot when they the midcarders are done, or they are ready. Each step to stardom shouldn't start by beating the HHH's and Angle. If the WWE can't do that right, well, they probably can't.

The WWE's problem is that HHH, UT, et al won't put people over. Actually, Hunter is INFINITELY more willing to put people over than UT.

 

The brand split doubles the chances of finding a break-out star.

 

Without the brand split, WWE would become WCW. A really big, talented mid-card with NO real chance of advancement. Too many of the WWE top draws have become absolutely impossible to deal with.

-=Mike