WWE to leave Spike TV

[razazteca 0]

If Spike and Viacom still wanted wrestling, why let Vince get away? Because they'd rather have TNA? I think you guys are clutching at straws here.

 

So does this mean that Smackdown is done at UPN once that contract runs out?

The Network is letting WWE go so they can give UFC a 2 hour weekly show.

Highly doubt it. MMA doesn't lend itself well to a weekly format because the top stars couldn't compete more then once a month if that. It might be used as a platform to give new and lesser known fighters some exposure to build them up for PPV matches.

 

Which would make sense in terms of the Tuesday Night Fights boxing format Dana White envisioned for UFC...

What if they used the King of the Cage talent to build up for the big PPVs?

[AnonymousBroccoli 0]

That's a big kick in the nuts for all 5 of us Canadian B-show fans.

[justcoz 0]

Spike should put TNA on at 8pm to 9:30 at least. Perhaps a UFC show within the Raw timeslot as well.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

That's a big kick in the nuts for all 5 of us Canadian B-show fans.

Yeah. Fuck RAW, but now I won't be able to watch Velocity!

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

RAW in HD whee..

 

at least a better shot at it then on SpikeTV.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

Even if SpikeTV were to bring in something like TNA, why would they put it on at the same time as RAW? I know the most markish of internet fans cream themselves at any suggestion of the "Monday night wars" being reborn, but that's a poor business decision. Why fight with the WWE for a declining audience when you can run unopposed at some other time.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Are you saying 8 because you're in central time?  Stop trying to confuse me!

 

My point wasn't that RAW needs a lead in to attract viewers, my point is that these channels could make better use of that built in wrestling audience.  They know people will tune in at 9 (est ) for RAW, so there's no reason not to book something that might appeal to them before it, get the viewers who are trying to kill an hour before RAW.  The stuff they stick before RAW, IMO at least, wouldn't make many wrestling fans tune into the channel earlier than 9.  Put something cool like Ultimate Fighter at 8 and they've got me tuning in an hour earlier, thus increasing their ratings.

1. No, I'm saying 8 because I'm 18 years old and haven't learned to tell time yet. Of course I'm in central time you dumbshit.

 

2. No, they're better off capitalizing on the follow-up, because people who are so drained from watching a horrible Raw will be too demoralized and burned out to bother getting up to change the channel, and they'll sit through whatever comes on after the overrun. Trust me. I've done this. Raw is a two-hour+ show, I don't think there's any purpose for a one-hour lead-in.

[Precious Roy 0]

No, they're better off capitalizing on the follow-up, because people who are so drained from watching a horrible Raw will be too demoralized and burned out to bother getting up to change the channel, and they'll sit through whatever comes on after the overrun. Trust me. I've done this. Raw is a two-hour+ show, I don't think there's any purpose for a one-hour lead-in.

 

Jesus Christ you're retarded. I wasn't saying one is better than the other, stop trying to make it into a comparison. I said it was beneficial to the network to capitalize on BOTH, no dispute on the follow up being the better spot, stop harping on a point that isn't in contention. And learn to fucking read.

[reign 0]

Agreed..that UFC show is actually good...that's why I'll watch it sometimes...sounds like Spike is maybe upset that WWE wanted so much money...maybe they'll try to show WWE what a little money can do...imagine what Spike could do with half of the money they spend on WWE...TNA could come in and make a big impact...if they promoted the shit outta of their first show as something huge then they'd challenge RAW for at least one night..but that could be all they need...and people would come in...since it's NWA related the stars could come in from everywhere..sorta like what Vince did all those years ago...I for one could never resist the temptation of switching from Raw during commercial or Tomko vs. Kane for a chance to see Styles wrestle a match...and the only way TNA could survive would be to go against Raw as people are already watching wrestling and the flip aspect would be a welcome addition to my Monday nights...done on any other day and people might forget as wrestling isn't as addictive as it once was...

[Guest JMA]

I must admit, I was something of a Silk Stalkings mark back in the day.

Same here.

[The Czech Republic 0]

No, they're better off capitalizing on the follow-up, because people who are so drained from watching a horrible Raw will be too demoralized and burned out to bother getting up to change the channel, and they'll sit through whatever comes on after the overrun. Trust me. I've done this. Raw is a two-hour+ show, I don't think there's any purpose for a one-hour lead-in.

 

Jesus Christ you're retarded. I wasn't saying one is better than the other, stop trying to make it into a comparison. I said it was beneficial to the network to capitalize on BOTH, no dispute on the follow up being the better spot, stop harping on a point that isn't in contention. And learn to fucking read.

What the fuck. You idiot, nobody is going to sit and watch four hours of Spike TV from 7 to 11. They wouldn't benefit from a Raw lead-in at all. No. God I miss being suspended from the WWE folder because of dumbfucks like you.

[LessonInMachismo 0]

Not that there's much correlation, but the fall in business began when they moved from USA to Spike.

I never found arguments that they were better off on USA to be that convincing.

Neither do I, but USA is associated with the glory days and Crazy Vince insists that they lost a good chunk of their audience who didn't have/didn't know about TNN.

 

The fact that this opens up the possibility of TNA going head to head and rekindling the Monday Night Wars really makes me excited. I just hope Spike still wants wrestling and TNA is capable of getting a deal done...both are questionable...

 

If TNA could get on Spike, which odds aren't in their favor, and get PAID to air the show...that can only be a good sign for wrestling. If they can keep the TNA IMPACT show, that is just double the positives for all sides.

 

As for RAW, does this mean USA Network has outbid Spike or that Spike just didn't have interest in giving the WWE an increase in money to sign a new deal?

Cause what happens to the WWE if USA NETWORK announces they have no interest in the World Wrestling Entertainment?

I don't feel like reading every single post in this thread, so I don't know if this angle's been covered yet, so here it is.

 

WWE wouldn't let negotiations end like this unless they had an ace in the hole. Even if they don't have an ace in the hole, they will relent and stay on Spike if USA doesn't have a better offer.

 

As for a new Monday Night War, TNA is populated with a lot of ex-WCW guys. "WCW sux," remember? Maybe if they pulled JJ and pushed someone like Styles and other newer faces, it'd catch on. But if they keep it as it is, people will just look at it as a subpar show. And least in my opinion.

[Guest MikeSC]

Not that there's much correlation, but the fall in business began when they moved from USA to Spike.

I never found arguments that they were better off on USA to be that convincing.

Neither do I, but USA is associated with the glory days and Crazy Vince insists that they lost a good chunk of their audience who didn't have/didn't know about TNN.

 

The fact that this opens up the possibility of TNA going head to head and rekindling the Monday Night Wars really makes me excited. I just hope Spike still wants wrestling and TNA is capable of getting a deal done...both are questionable...

Hmm, a show that draws, to be generous, shit ratings on FNC isn't exactly going to be of the utmost importance to Spike.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

No offense, but WWE would slaughter TNA in ratings.

Until people that like watching actual wrestling find out what TNA offers.

Namely, not usually all that good wrestling.

-=Mike

[BUTT 0]

No offense, but WWE would slaughter TNA in ratings.

Until people that like watching actual wrestling find out what TNA offers.

Namely, not usually all that good wrestling.

-=Mike

Wow, just like WWE!

[Guest MikeSC]

No offense, but WWE would slaughter TNA in ratings.

Until people that like watching actual wrestling find out what TNA offers.

Namely, not usually all that good wrestling.

-=Mike

Wow, just like WWE!

So, it's like WWE with less talented workers.

 

Yeah, great idea.

 

Well, I suppose Spike could get TNA to pay them for a timeslot.

-=Mike

[Styles 0]

Come on, Mike. I'll admit the main eventers of TNA can not come close to the workrate and drawing power of WWE's main eventers, but the depth of the midcard and utilisation of tag team and cruiserweight (X division) wrestling far surpasses WWE which has become land of the muscleheaded guys who do full nelson's as finishers.

Let's put it this way, when WWE puts on a weak show, if their main event doesn't deliver, the show will crash because their undercard is going to be a disaster (this is especially true of Smackdown), mostly because of the terrible workers but also because of the boring, homogenous style they work.

With TNA, even a percieved "weak" show like Against All Odds with Kevin Nash in the main event featured the concensus match of the year so far in AJ Styles vs. Christopher Daniels Iron Man.

I'll admit TNA's booking and pushing decisions aren't always great (then again, are WWE's?!?) but TNA's undercard depth, match variety and working styles smoke WWE's.

[Guest Failed Mascot]

Did anyone really stick around for Silk Stalkings, Tek Wars or that beach cop show with Slater back in the USA days?

 

I must admit, I was something of a Silk Stalkings mark back in the day.

Murder She Wrote was better than all of those shows and forgotten about. That was your original after Raw program.

[Guest Jack Potts]

Off topic but: AnonymousBroccoli's signature really cracked me up! That was the funniest thing I've seen in a long time!

[King Cucaracha 0]

When TNA is good, it's very entertaining. I remember Mike himself saying he thought Final Resolution was decent. But while the PPV shows have been mostly entertaining (IMO at least), the TV product tends to be hard to sit through.

 

The look TNA have is different fromt he WWE. So they MIGHT be able to draw in viewers. But they won't do it with boring squash matches. They need to give an alternative, which would mean less emphasis on the old guys and more on guys like Skipper, Daniels and Dutt.

 

Not gonna happen.

 

EDIT: They might stand a better chance if Spike put Ultimate Fighter on at 8 against Raw. If that's a decent ratings draw, then you pull viewers away from the beginning of Raw. And if people miss the beginning of Raw and then have the choice of Raw Hour 2 or all of TNA, they might just choose the latter.

[Mystery Eskimo 0]

With TNA, even a percieved "weak" show like Against All Odds with Kevin Nash in the main event featured the concensus match of the year so far in AJ Styles vs. Christopher Daniels Iron Man.

That match was decent, but its far from a MOTY contender.

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

If they wanted to, could they talk RoH into doing shows for them? I don't really know how they run their shows, but if TNA for some reason wanted to stay with FSN, I'd think RoH might be interested in expanding, and they'd be cheaper I'd think.

Edited March 11, 2005 by Masked Man of Mystery

[Styles 0]

With TNA, even a percieved "weak" show like Against All Odds with Kevin Nash in the main event featured the concensus match of the year so far in AJ Styles vs. Christopher Daniels Iron Man.

That match was decent, but its far from a MOTY contender.

I tend to judge these things by how the Observer and Torch views it, and both rated the match ****3/4 and give it the lead so far for MOTY (I'd personally put Ultimate X from Final Resolution above it though).

[Guest MikeSC]

I'll go ahead and say it --- wrestling is not a hot enough property for cable channels to take chances on right now.

-=Mike

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

I'll go ahead and say it --- wrestling is not a hot enough property for cable channels to take chances on right now.

-=Mike

Probably so, but if you put on a nice indy fed, people like us will at least try to watch, and it probably won't cost THAT much. Thats part of TNA's problem, they love those God forsaken lasers too much and of course the pyro. They'd save quite a bit of money if they gave t up, and most folks wouldn't mind I'm sure.

[Kizzo 0]

I can almost gurantee that Viacom did not want to pay a higher price for WWE programming.....remember the last time negotations went on...the WWE was having record buyrates and ratings as well....so when negotations went on last time.....WWE had a very big advantage....that's the reason Viacom was paying WWE almost 500K a week for the rights to the programming....

 

Things are very very different now...

[Sass 0]

USA could so fuck Vince and the WWE in the cornhole right now. He's lucky the former USA suits who he dealt with left the channel. The way I understood it, there was some major bad blood carried over by the Barry Diller and the 2nd-in-command female in-charge who helped keep RAW on the air.

 

Sooooooo fucked. Not even *FOX* will negotiate with the WWE. That says a lot if a company run by chimps won't even deal with hillbilly trash like Vince and Co.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Regarding Spike's announcement that it was pulling out of negotiations for the WWE contract, here is what we know:

 

*There is a lot to this story, but both sides are pretty much on a gag order regarding the details, although I'm pretty sure they'll come out at some point

 

*WWE was blindsided by this announcement, which badly hurts whatever negotiating leverage they may have had with USA Network. However, we'd been given the impression for months that if they had their way, they would go to USA. WWE was attempting to get a rate increase of $28 million per year to $40 million, even though the cable package as a whole is way down from early 2000 when the $28 million deal was negotiated

 

*As mentioned in our previous note, TNT, TBS and FX all turned down WWE overtures to open negotiations. This doesn't bode well for another wrestling group, because nobody is going to come in with more of an established name and legacy in this business than WWE, and the stations you'd think would have interest wouldn't even open negotiations.

 

*As of this morning, there had been no talks whatsoever between anyone from TNA and Spike TV

 

*UFC has not even decided if it wanted to do a second season of Ultimate Fighter even if Spike did (and it's expected based on info we've seen that Spike in fact, did want to continue for a second season). When the first season filming ended, Dana White had told people he never wanted to go through it again, but he may have changed his opinion due to the strong response

 

*With the purchase of "CSI: New York," for September, Spike is of the impression adding that show 5 nights per week would do more for the network than one strong night of Raw and two weak prime time shows (Heat & Velocity).

 

Credit - WO.com

[Sass 0]

USA can basically stick it to Vince and the WWE here. They have no leverage to lean on with them.

[Secret Agent 0]

USA could so fuck Vince and the WWE in the cornhole right now. He's lucky the former USA suits who he dealt with left the channel. The way I understood it, there was some major bad blood carried over by the Barry Diller and the 2nd-in-command female in-charge who helped keep RAW on the air.

 

Sooooooo fucked. Not even *FOX* will negotiate with the WWE. That says a lot if a company run by chimps won't even deal with hillbilly trash like Vince and Co.

 

USA can basically stick it to Vince and the WWE here. They have no leverage to lean on with them.

 

Where are your sources for all this USA bad blood? I think that if WWE were leaving Spike TV they'd already have finalized plans with the network where they're going.

 

I don't know where you come off with this Fox won't negoiate with the WWE stuff either. No matter what network, if they think they can make money off it, and it fits in there vision of what the network should show, they'll put it on. That's just bussiness - it's all about the dollar.