Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

WWE TV 10/14 - 10/20 Randy Orton is the Tom Brady of WWE


KawadaSmile

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Mad Dog said:

Heyman is old too and his booking post ECW has been vastly overrated. 

Agreed. The infamous Smackdown 6 era was basically "we have a bunch of great workers, let's have some great matches", which is not very hard to do, really. The ECW redux booked by Heyman was putrid. Hell, Heyman during ECW was toasted by 1998.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 308
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 minutes ago, Rocco said:

RAW will always be a slog as long as it's three hours IMO.  

This is the conventional wisdom, but how come three-hour PPVs were never a slog back in the day?

A good three-hour show, while never ideal, is attainable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two hours is fine if it's the only show the promotion has for the week. A two hour show a few days after a three hour show (and a few days before a 3-4 hour ppvs once a month) is way too much of a time investment for anyone who hasn't already spent years following the company. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, C.S. said:

BTW, did anyone catch the amusing Bix-Satin fight on Twitter last night about writing teams?

I think Bix won handily, but that's just me. 

I did. The rap on Satin was that he was angling to get a WWE gig, and I never really saw that until after he did the PR tour of the Performance Center. Ever since he's been 100% shilling everything related to WWE to the point I thought he was doing a bit. Before the Bix thing he was raving about the WWE2K20 game, and was fighting with people who were pointing out it's been a buggy piece of trash that looks like a budget PS2 game for years. 

Arguing that the thing AEW needs is more TV writers who don't know about wrestling is a pretty galactic brain take though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stephanie reading off draft picks with her Marketing 101 tag lines for each WWE Superstar was like finding out that hostage you've been waiting to be saved took a bullet to the head.  As long as the company speaks and presents itself and its characters in that fashion I don't see how they ever reverse the current trajectory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The Architect™," "The Kingslayer™" Seth Rollins... and he's going to BURN IT DOWN~!

Just makes them sound fucking stupid to be honest. Which is probably why they can't connect with younger viewers. It's like your dad trying to talk to you about music & still name-dropping AC/DC & Metallica.

Of course, the new Smackdown theme song is an AC/DC song, so... yeah.

For the sake of full transparency however, NWA Power last week opened with Dokken & I marked out, so I'm obviously just a hypocrite. (I'm also 38 years old).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sek69 said:

So the most low-key entertaining act in WWE, Truth and Carmella, got broken up because the 24/7 title is a USA invention and Carmella is on SD because Corey is over there.

That's confusing to me. I doubt Corey is on the road when there isn't TV. And the shows are days apart. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Mad Dog said:

That's confusing to me. I doubt Corey is on the road when there isn't TV. And the shows are days apart. 

New company mandate after they got heat a while back for splitting up IRL couples with the draft.  It's why Andrade is on RAW (both for him and Charlotte and Zelina/Alistar Black).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the "significant promises" that were alluded to in the post above were:

- Strong ratings. They lost what? 25% from Week 1 to Week 2? And, while they did well 18-49, they still came in 3rd in total viewers. That's not too great for what is often touted as "DVR-proof" content that "reaches all ages." After two weeks, we know: there are still more Americans who'd rather watch Tom Selleck (on Blue Bloods) and a Tom Selleck-adjacent property (the Magnum P.I reboot) than the WWE. 

- Separate rosters. The first episode featured RAW superstars heavily. And while one could argue that some of those guys would be drafted a week later - Braun Strowman and Bray Wyatt, for example - the clear demarcation between rosters was probably something FOX would've liked on Day 1 because...

- Many of the biggest stars on the first episode of SD were not full-timers. The Rock. Lesnar. Cain Velasquez. Hell, the first two segment on the Fox debut featured four characters - Vince and Stephanie, Becky Lynch, and Baron Corbin - who are all RAW characters. 

- Pair the above fact with the way that WWE is marketed and promoted to potential advertisers and investors, with a HUGE emphasis on stars of the past, and you can see why Fox might've thought that working with the WWE was going to be a HUGE deal. I mean, based on the advertisements, how could a weekly show featuring The Rock, Stone Cold, The Undertaker, John Cena, Brock Lesnar, and Hulk Hogan not be a huge hit? 

And before people jump at me and say, "Well, the Fox execs were smart enough to know those guys aren't weekly performers anymore," hold on a sec. How many TV execs are even casual wrestling fans? Probably not many. Even fewer would admit it. Even when it was popular, it wasn't "cool" or seen as high brow entertainment. There are also everyday people who still think Tina Fey and Will Ferrel are on SNL. If you ask a non-NBA fan to name some famous players, they might still say Kobe Bryant. Did you know Cameron Diaz retired from acting 5 years ago? PLUS, as explained above, if you watched the promotional materials that the WWE produced, you would reasonably assume that all those stars of yesteryear would at least appear in cameos every week. Its not like SNL advertises next week's show with clips of Opera Man and Jon Lovitz' "That's The Ticket" guy. You can't sell Cavs tickets by showing clips of LeBron hoisting the trophy in 2016 but that is exactly what the WWE did. 

- Lastly, the "sports-like presentation." It still looks and feels like the same ol' WWE. And there are still lots of corny gimmicks that sports fans will roll their eyes at.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, DMJ said:

I wonder if the "significant promises" that were alluded to in the post above were:

- Strong ratings. They lost what? 25% from Week 1 to Week 2? And, while they did well 18-49, they still came in 3rd in total viewers. That's not too great for what is often touted as "DVR-proof" content that "reaches all ages." After two weeks, we know: there are still more Americans who'd rather watch Tom Selleck (on Blue Bloods) and a Tom Selleck-adjacent property (the Magnum P.I reboot) than the WWE. 

- Separate rosters. The first episode featured RAW superstars heavily. And while one could argue that some of those guys would be drafted a week later - Braun Strowman and Bray Wyatt, for example - the clear demarcation between rosters was probably something FOX would've liked on Day 1 because...

- Many of the biggest stars on the first episode of SD were not full-timers. The Rock. Lesnar. Cain Velasquez. Hell, the first two segment on the Fox debut featured four characters - Vince and Stephanie, Becky Lynch, and Baron Corbin - who are all RAW characters. 

- Pair the above fact with the way that WWE is marketed and promoted to potential advertisers and investors, with a HUGE emphasis on stars of the past, and you can see why Fox might've thought that working with the WWE was going to be a HUGE deal. I mean, based on the advertisements, how could a weekly show featuring The Rock, Stone Cold, The Undertaker, John Cena, Brock Lesnar, and Hulk Hogan not be a huge hit? 

And before people jump at me and say, "Well, the Fox execs were smart enough to know those guys aren't weekly performers anymore," hold on a sec. There are people who still think Tina Fey and Will Ferrel are on SNL. If you ask a non-NBA fan to name some famous players, they might still say Kobe Bryant. Did you know Cameron Diaz retired from acting 5 years ago? PLUS, as explained above, if you watched the promotional materials that the WWE produced, you would reasonably assume that all those stars of yesteryear would at least appear in cameos every week. Its not like SNL advertises next week's show with clips of Opera Man and Jon Lovitz' "That's The Ticket" guy. You can't sell Cavs tickets by showing clips of LeBron hoisting the trophy in 2016 but that is exactly what the WWE did. 

- Lastly, the "sports-like presentation." It still looks and feels like the same ol' WWE. And there are still lots of corny gimmicks that sports fans will roll their eyes at.

 

All I could think of reading this post is that Tom Selleck is getting the belt at the next Saudi Blood Money show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...