Has the Brand Extension Ran its course

[Guest Chris Xtreme]

After the WCW buyout, the WWF/WWE roster became even more inflated than it already was. It became neccessary to split the company into two rosters in order to create faux competion and give the talent equal time to try (and to find the next big thing). The brand rxtension hasn't been perfect but a lot of young talent has been built or allowed to shine.

 

However, now that a few years has passed the roster has become much more thin. Many of the old guard are gone and have been replaced with younger (and sometimes greener) wrestlers. Instead of hold back young talent like they did during 2000-2002, young talent is now often posed down our throats(even when they are not quite ready for their pushes). Its quite clear that the rosters are so thin that PPV's come off as being no better than the TV shows at times.

 

Is it time to re-combine the rosters? It clear that one roster would not be hard to manage now with all the young wrestlers they have. WWE would be able to book better TV with access to more talent per show. Also Pay-Per-Views would have more sizzle. Young wrestlers would not have to carry the load and would be allowed to develop in the midcard before they were ready to main event. The tag team division and crusierwieght division would beneifit from this. With four hours of television it wouldn't be hard to give each talented wrestler an adaquate amount of TV time. Ratings might even go a bit higher. And its clear that Macmahon sees SD has the inferiour brand ( untrue or not), which defys the very concept of a brand extension anyway.

 

I was a big proponent of the brand extention when it first was discussed. But it has run its course and I think the time has come to re-combine. With Smackdown soon to be canceled by UPN ( and it wouldn't surprise me to see SD gone for good ) the decsion would almost be forced seeing as how WWE would only have Raw left. I forsee the end of the brand extension when this happens.

[NoCalMike 0]

The brand split/extension PERIOD has run it's course..... a long time ago.

[tekcop 0]

Have these threads run their course?

[muzz 0]

I was about to make a thread on that very subject, Tek.

 

And I agree, it's definitely run it's course. I don't have an arguement against it, I just get that feeling whenever I (rarely) watch the WWE.

[Adam 0]

Friendly word of advice Chris Xtreme: go back and look at previous threads. The topics you want to discuss have been talked about elsewhere, so just add to that conversation instead of starting new topics.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

People who talk about ending the brand extension aren't really thinking things through. One, they have more PPVs now. Two, the run more shows now. Three, RAW and Smackdown writers can't even do 2 hours per week of cohesive storytelling, how can you expect them to do 4? Four, who the hell could take 4 hours of WWE storytelling a week? I can't even take 1 hour.

[Foshi 0]

After the WCW buyout, the WWF/WWE roster became even more inflated than it already was. It became neccessary to split the company into two rosters in order to create faux competion and give the talent equal time to try (and to find the next big thing). The brand rxtension hasn't been perfect but a lot of young talent has been built or allowed to shine.

 

However, now that a few years has passed the roster has become much more thin. Many of the old guard are gone and have been replaced with younger (and sometimes greener) wrestlers. Instead of hold back young talent like they did during 2000-2002, young talent is now often posed down our throats(even when they are not quite ready for their pushes). Its quite clear that the rosters are so thin that PPV's come off as being no better than the TV shows at times.

 

Is it time to re-combine the rosters? It clear that one roster would not be hard to manage now with all the young wrestlers they have. WWE would be able to book better TV with access to more talent per show. Also Pay-Per-Views would have more sizzle. Young wrestlers would not have to carry the load and would be allowed to develop in the midcard before they were ready to main event. The tag team division and crusierwieght division would beneifit from this. With four hours of television it wouldn't be hard to give each talented wrestler an adaquate amount of TV time. Ratings might even go a bit higher. And its clear that Macmahon sees SD has the inferiour brand ( untrue or not), which defys the very concept of a brand extension anyway.

 

I was a big proponent of the brand extention when it first was discussed. But it has run its course and I think the time has come to re-combine. With Smackdown soon to be canceled by UPN ( and it wouldn't surprise me to see SD gone for good ) the decsion would almost be forced seeing as how WWE would only have Raw left. I forsee the end of the brand extension when this happens.

 

Just out of curiosity, is it fact that UPN is going to cancel Smackdown or just speculation?

[Prime Time Andrew Doyle 0]

Why would UPN cancell SD!? Have the numbers gotten bad or are they just feed up with the 'E

[The Czech Republic 0]

Blatant grammatical errors in the thread title. Chris may be Xtreme in a lot of things, but he's not an Xtreme proofreader.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

--Lots of outlets have given favorable coverage to WWE's strong quarterly report. Multi-Channel News reported on WWE's claim of a 4.7 rating for the debut of Raw on 10/3 (actually 4.4), and touting the success of the move of Smackdown to Friday (which has been a big success for UPN).

 

Da Meltz

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

If you cancel the brand extension, you immediately increase the workload on the all the employees. Weren't we worrying just two weeks ago that the schedule was too hard already?

[cabbageboy 0]

Not to mention the fact that there are simply guys I don't want to see twice a week on a regular basis. I don't really want to see HHH, Bradshaw, or Randy Orton on my TV twice a week. I guess we are seeing Big Show and Kane twice for now but it's just a temp angle (not to mention they have totally different roles on the shows).

[NoCalMike 0]

If you cancel the brand extension, you immediately increase the workload on the all the employees. Weren't we worrying just two weeks ago that the schedule was too hard already?

 

 

Not necessairly. I thought in the early days of WCW Thunder, they did a good job of showcasing talent that was underused on Nitro, without having to completely make it it's own brand. Thunder was definately the "B" show, but there was still enough of the top guys on it so that it was not a different brand.

 

The reason the brand extension NEVER worked in WWE, is because both brands are run, booked, and played out the exact same way. If WWE wanted to do a brand extension, then instead of having Stephanie book everything, why not have two completely DIFFERENT creative minds run each show, so that it might come off different. All you get now is a second show, booked the same old way, with different faces.

[Guest Coffey]

Has the brand extention run it's course? I'm not sure. Locally, my cable provider doesn't provide UPN so I can't watch Smackdown unless I download it. I have to admit, I don't download it that often. I do know that when WWE run interpromotional matches, they seem like a big deal to me. Partially, I'm sure, that's because I don't get UPN so a lot of the Smackdown stuff seems fresh to me. I'm not even sure who's on each roster anymore since Eddie's death, though I'm sure things will return to normal shortly. WWE seem to make a ton of money from all the extra PPV's they can run each year because of having two "brands" so it doesn't look like the extention is going away anytime shortly.

 

Now, as a fan, I'm greedy. I want the best and the freshest at the same time. Each year, for the last couple years, on the Raw after Wrestlemania, I anticipate trades or drafts. I want to see each show change a little bit. At the same time, however, I also would like to see certain matchups that aren't possible because the wrestlers are on different shows. To me though that just means that there's something to look forward to in the future.

 

I don't think the extention is a bad thing unless one show is drastically better than the other. Without the two different brands, I'm not sure we'd have ever seen Lashley, Kennedy, MNM, Eugene, Cade & Murdoch, The Mexicools, Chris Masters, etc. You can be the judge of how many of those are good and how many of those are bad however there's a chance we wouldn't have had any of them. JBL would probably still be plain old Bradshaw since WWE would have enough main eventers. The main eventers would still be Angle, HHH & The Undertaker. No HHH/Bastista program. No "I Quit" match between Cena & JBL.

 

I think the brand extention has given us, as fans, a lot of good. I just think it's easy to overlook what it has given us by looking at how much more it could've given us.

[David Blazenwing 0]

If WWE wanted to do a brand extension, then instead of having Stephanie book everything, why not have two completely DIFFERENT creative minds run each show, so that it might come off different. All you get now is a second show, booked the same old way, with different faces.

 

But then you run the possibility of another person exposing Steph for the horrible booker she is, and we can't have that.

[SuperJerk 0]

I think what a lot of people don't realzie about the brand split is that not all the same people watch both shows. I think I read that only about 1/3 of the audience watches both Raw AND Smackdown every week. Thus, the WWE is reaching more fans than the ratings suggest because probably about 2 1/2 million people are watching on Friday that weren't watching on Monday.

[Guest slmon]

Why would UPN cancell SD!? Have the numbers gotten bad or are they just feed up with the 'E

 

 

It's not so much the numbers, which are pretty good for a Friday night. It's a question of direction, as the network is kind of promoting itself as "where the girls are." And a WWE show, which sees women as only T&A, doesn't fit into such a place.

[SuperJerk 0]

It's a question of direction, as the network is kind of promoting itself as "where the girls are."

I thought they were promoting themselves as "where the minorities are".

[Guest Coffey]

I see UPN as a "black" station not a "girl" station. Has that changed?

[Scroby 0]

Have these threads run their course?

 

Oh God yes!

[Guest The Z Man Tom Zenk]

I have enjoyed the brand extension from when it started right up to the present. I like the different look and feel of each show being a separate brand. Although the current storyline with RAW vs. SmackDown has made for interbrand matches, I still like the fact that even though both shows are WWE, it is as if both shows have separate identities. Lately, SmackDown has gotten back to the wrestling show it was when the brand extension started. I have been enjoying SmackDown more lately than I have RAW. Last year, I enjoyed RAW more. I've been a fan since 1990, so I've seen everything since then, and I am still as much a fan now as I was then.

 

I don't think WWE tries to make people believe RAW is a superior brand to SmackDown. I think they do it not to persuade people it's the truth, but to make people think and think for themselves, "is smackdown really better? at least I don't think so" which is my stance on it. I think it's more of a "trying to get people to formulate an opinion as to what they think is better." It is not as good as the nWo angle, but some of the RAW vs. SD stuff lately has entertained me, especially the SS match. Let's not forget, SmackDown was the better show during the brand extension from when it started in 2002, until late 2003 into early 2004. I think when Benoit came over to RAW after the 2004 Rumble, that's when RAW became better. Now I think SmackDown is better.

 

 

All in all, I liked the idea of the brand extension and still do. I just think it's time for a revamping of both shows, different themes, sets, but I think the ring is fine. I think the black turnbuckles and red ropes are pretty awesome for RAW, same with the silver apron and blue ropes for smackdown. It looks much better presented on TV. I think it is just a matter of putting together the best creative team, which WWE has not done since 2002, when Smackdown was blowing RAW out of the water.

[Mystery Eskimo 0]

I wish the real Z-Man did post here. That would be great.

[Guest slmon]

"thought they were promoting themselves as "where the minorities are".

 

--------------------

 

"I see UPN as a "black" station not a "girl" station. Has that changed?"

 

******

 

They already had that "minorities" or "black station" status. And, frankly, SD doesn't have a lot to offer the network in that regard either, what with the death of Eddie and the tradings over the past couple of years of people like Shelton, Carlito and Chavo. (If Lashley continues to make an impression, he will be shipped over to the "flagship show" as well, no doubt).

 

As to the "girl" thing, I'm sure I saw a quote somewhere from Dawn Ostroff - the UPN President - on wanting to make UPN more of a woman's network. (Maybe it would be a female counterpart to the male-oriented Viacom network (Spike)? Check out what replaced SD on Thursday night (besides "Everyone Hates Chris") - sitcoms featuring black female leads.

 

And most importantly, Viacom Chair Les Moonves said about a year ago that SD might not fit into the network's plans. Could have been just a ploy to try to drive down Vince's asking price, but maybe not.

[SuperJerk 0]

They already had that "minorities" or "black station" status. And, frankly, SD doesn't have a lot to offer the network in that regard either, what with the death of Eddie and the tradings over the past couple of years of people like Shelton, Carlito and Chavo. (If Lashley continues to make an impression, he will be shipped over to the "flagship show" as well, no doubt).

 

Rey, Booker T, and Batista (a Fillipino-Greek guy from Virginia with the Hispanic last name).

[SuperJerk 0]

Damn server foul-up making me double post...

Edited December 5, 2005 by Mister Jerk

[Guest JMA]

I think we're seeing the beginning of the end of the brand extension right now. Or maybe the tag team champions and women's champion will just become floaters again.

 

In any case, I'd be all for the brand extension ending--provided it was done right.

[Spaceman Spiff 0]

They already had that "minorities" or "black station" status. And, frankly, SD doesn't have a lot to offer the network in that regard either, what with the death of Eddie and the tradings over the past couple of years of people like Shelton, Carlito and Chavo. (If Lashley continues to make an impression, he will be shipped over to the "flagship show" as well, no doubt).

 

Rey, Booker T, and Batista (a Fillipino-Greek guy from Virginia with the Hispanic last name).

Mexicools add 3 guys to the mix.

 

As to the "girl" thing, I'm sure I saw a quote somewhere from Dawn Ostroff - the UPN President - on wanting to make UPN more of a woman's network.

Do Lifetime/Oxygen/whatever other cable "women's networks" get good ratings? Seems kind of an odd direction to take.

[SuperJerk 0]

Do Lifetime/Oxygen/whatever other cable "women's networks" get good ratings? Seems kind of an odd direction to take.

 

I don't know if those networks have a lot of first-run programming, but I can tell you that first-run shows like "Desperate Housewives" and "Sex in the City" (back when it was on) seem to get huge ratings.

[Spaceman Spiff 0]

Yeah, but chances of UPN putting on stuff like that would be very low.

[SuperJerk 0]

Yeah, but chances of UPN putting on stuff like that would be very low.

 

Low, but not impossible.

 

Veronica Mars, for example.