The Official UKFF RAW Thread...

[LaGoosh]

I reckon it's probably a case of there being about 30-40 people all sticking their oar in with every written segment/skit to the point that it because a complete mess and waste of time to do it. Writer 1 comes up with a skit for Sheamus for example, writer 2 thinks they can improve it, writer 3 thinks it's shit, wrestler 4 wants to cut it down so he has more time for his diva segment, Michael Hayes wants to go a different way, Road Dogg thinks writer 1's original idea was best, everyone argues to the point that Vince just thinks "fuck it, let's just do Sheamus vs Orton again".

[Mr_Danger]

I'd take Triple H filling up RAW for 2 hours every week over what I'm watching just now. His run on top is underrated - he was fantastic.

 

I think a lot of the matches and angles were great but even with the retrospective Trips love in that's all the rage these days I can't block out the repetition and his long arse boring promos at the start of every show. But yeah, it probably compares favourably to the current crop of shite we get every week.

[UK Kat Von D]

There's more focus on the wrestling over skits to make it easier to market in non English speaking countries, not catering to fans who moaned on the Internet 12 years ago.

[Yakashi]

There's more focus on the wrestling over skits to make it easier to market in non English speaking countries, not catering to fans who moaned on the Internet 12 years ago.

But wrestling doesn't draw money. Only a minuscule amount of fans pay for wrestling because they think a match will be good. Characters, storylines, angles, feuds, personal issues etc. That's what draws money. The three biggest stars ever weren't stars because of their matches. It was the stories surrounding the matches and the bond that their character had with the audience that made people pay to see them.

 

So as much as you say that there's more focus on wrestling to market the product overseas, it doesn't matter because those markets are given no reason to spend any money. When you offer about 8 hours of wrestling for free a week, what incentive is there to buy a PPV or an overpriced ticket to a live show? Why buy the merchandise of a wrestler with no character or likeable traits when all they do is wrestle the same three people every week in the same match up with the finishes reversed for no reason?

 

Us lot are the absolute last people they should be trying to please.

[UK Kat Von D]

Wasn't my idea to put more focus on wrestling, just explained why WWE are doing it.

 

I think Smackdown should be used for more character development. Stick all the skits and video packages on there, few squashes and a solid main event. Do some dark matches for the live crowd/foreign markets/network exclusives. Use it to explain why Neville will be fighting Stardust for the millionth time next week on Raw

[Mr_Danger]

They should use Smackdown as a prototype for how they want to develop Raw. KInd of a middle ground between NXT and Raw.

[simonworden]

 

There's more focus on the wrestling over skits to make it easier to market in non English speaking countries, not catering to fans who moaned on the Internet 12 years ago.

But wrestling doesn't draw money. Only a minuscule amount of fans pay for wrestling because they think a match will be good. Characters, storylines, angles, feuds, personal issues etc. That's what draws money. The three biggest stars ever weren't stars because of their matches. It was the stories surrounding the matches and the bond that their character had with the audience that made people pay to see them.

So as much as you say that there's more focus on wrestling to market the product overseas, it doesn't matter because those markets are given no reason to spend any money. When you offer about 8 hours of wrestling for free a week, what incentive is there to buy a PPV or an overpriced ticket to a live show? Why buy the merchandise of a wrestler with no character or likeable traits when all they do is wrestle the same three people every week in the same match up with the finishes reversed for no reason?

Us lot are the absolute last people they should be trying to please.

 

 

Thats just not true, the markets are given plenty of reason to spend money, just not enough opportunities. Many of my students love WWE they have the network and watch it on TV. However they can't get much in the way of licensed products or go see live shows etc because it just isn't available.

 

However the idea that more angles make it less digestible is so silly as well. I've heard it before and assume it could be wwe's real stance but. Most spoken parts are dubbed or subbed its what the kids do remember. I don't get them tell me about moves and work rate but they do ask his the undertaker appeared from nowhere and keep saying catchphrases. If it is the case as to why we get less engaging angles then if they think they cant use them in all markets take them out and play dark matches instead.

[tiger_rick]

Raw's format has been the same since 1997. Just with different people in the different roles. I've been reading the Power Slam ebook, and its interesting when it gets to the point how Vince McMahon didnt want to change his ways. In 1995, that is the way he felt wrestling should be presented. The Kliq, famously held meetings with him to tell him that matches where wrestlers get put in nappys and hog pen bouts werent the way to do wrestling in that era. And he was so stuck in his ways, he would only go so far. Until 1997 when they went "fuck it." It was only WCW forcing them into it that he eventually threw his hands up and began to change everything. From the set to the length of the show to the characters to the characters. Who is forcing him into doing that in 2015? WWE is in such a comfort zone, and nothing is forcing them into trying new things. Maybe if the ratings fall below a 2.0 and the Networks numbers fall, we may see some change. But the numbers will no doubt bounce back into the comfort zone.

 

Seth Rollins has been taken apart by this company this year. I've never seen someone I've liked so much that I've got no interest in watching. He's an amazing wrestler. But he's not a star to me. He's a bloke in leather trousers carrying a belt around.

Great post, Ian. I think it sums things up nicely. It's not just WWE either. It's a prelevant attitude in anything that makes money without needing to be revolutionary. I was thinking similar just a few days ago when Punkstep posted about the new WWE game and how he thought they'd recode the game play. Why would they? So many people are happy with a new career challenge, up to date roster and some different legends. It's easy money. FIFA was exactly the same for years until PES started to push them for market share.

 

WWE makes enough money worldwide doing what they're doing. They've been more concenred about building their talent production line and the network than the TV product. Smackdown has been a C show for years and no-one cares enough to try and turn it around.

 

In some ways, it's a positive. We don't want them kneejerking to every drop in ratings like WCW in 1999 or like they did in 2002/03 when they'd react to the drops with outlandish shit. A measured response is desperately needed though. They are drifting badly, the pattern's been set in for years now.

 

 

There's more focus on the wrestling over skits to make it easier to market in non English speaking countries, not catering to fans who moaned on the Internet 12 years ago.

I agree. There's no way they are catering entirely to the "smart" audience. It's laziness.

[Sphinx]

The style of wrestling is catering towards the "smart" audience. These hardcore fans may be the most likely to subscribe to the Network.

[King Pitcos]

While that's true, there surely aren't many people in the "ZOMG NEVER THOUGHT I'D SEE STEEN VS JERICHO" camp who don't already have the WWE Network. Tailoring Raw to the people who are already likely to be subscribing to their network (and watching Raw every week) is incredibly counterproductive when it puts off anyone who isn't like them. It's got to be coincidence.

 

It can't just be laziness either because on whose part would it be lazy? There'll be some writers that are happy to put Ziggler vs Cesaro on and get 15 minutes out of the way without writing anything, but given the turnover and size of the staff, there'll be loads who are constantly trying to get ideas onscreen too. And if Jim Cornette and teenage morons are to be believed, Vince and Kevin Dunn passionately hate wrestling, so they'd jump at any chance to do more non-wrestling on the show. It doesn't make any sense that the show is the way it is unless they really do think the foreign networks would kick off if it wasn't. Maybe he does think that's all most of his current roster are good for is overlong filler.

[Briefcase]

But aren't ratings lower these days in a world where there are thousands of channels, lots of different platforms to watch shows and what not?

 

I know The WWE Network is aimed to solve part of that problem but TV Ratings for most shows seem much lower in this day and age than 15-20 years ago. 

 

The product may not be as hot as it once was, but would the ratings be that much higher if the attitude era was now? (by that I mean with more channels, tablets, on demand, online and via other means of watching programmes. 

[Yakashi]

But aren't ratings lower these days in a world where there are thousands of channels, lots of different platforms to watch shows and what not?

 

I know The WWE Network is aimed to solve part of that problem but TV Ratings for most shows seem much lower in this day and age than 15-20 years ago. 

 

The product may not be as hot as it once was, but would the ratings be that much higher if the attitude era was now? (by that I mean with more channels, tablets, on demand, online and via other means of watching programmes.

 

All that means though is that people would rather watch something else. If there's one or one thousand things to choose from, people are actively deciding not to watch because there are things they'd rather watch instead. Before the network came about, the PPV numbers were in a constant downward spiral since the glory days before getting stuck in the fewer than 100000 NA buy zone. That means they were also choosing not to spend money on the shows unless it was something that was new and different, like Ryback at HIAC.

 

It's like when they complain that it's football season and that effects the numbers. The only reason it effects the numbers is because people would rather watch football. If they produced a show that people would prefer to watch over football or the Kardashians or American Idol etc then they'd watch it. It's the same as UFC. People find something else to spend their money on instead of a Demetrious Johnson fight. But when Ronda fights, they'll happily plonk down the cash because they want to see it. WWE doesn't have anything people want to see.

 

I like Game of Thrones for instance. But if Raw had something good on it like the setup to a Lesnar Austin match or they made a must see star or Cena turned heel...something that was exciting and different, then I'd watch. As it is, Raw is the same show for 45 weeks of the year and you can generally avoid it from April to February and miss nothing.

[DraxSpago]

While that's true, there surely aren't many people in the "ZOMG NEVER THOUGHT I'D SEE STEEN VS JERICHO" camp who don't already have the WWE Network. Tailoring Raw to the people who are already likely to be subscribing to their network (and watching Raw every week) is incredibly counterproductive when it puts off anyone who isn't like them. It's got to be coincidence.

 

It can't just be laziness either because on whose part would it be lazy? There'll be some writers that are happy to put Ziggler vs Cesaro on and get 15 minutes out of the way without writing anything, but given the turnover and size of the staff, there'll be loads who are constantly trying to get ideas onscreen too. And if Jim Cornette and teenage morons are to be believed, Vince and Kevin Dunn passionately hate wrestling, so they'd jump at any chance to do more non-wrestling on the show. It doesn't make any sense that the show is the way it is unless they really do think the foreign networks would kick off if it wasn't. Maybe he does think that's all most of his current roster are good for is overlong filler.

Genuinely interested, what do you think the overall problem and/or solution is?

[Guest]

I don't think there needs to be any great adjustment to the in-ring/workrate aspect, up or down. Though a 90 second Neville/Stardust showcase does nothing for anybody, give them the build to a big show instead and people might not be yawning when they fight at MSG. Just that what we have should be structured with more care/sense so you don't have storylines that make more sense when watched in reverse, and flip-floppy crap at the top that's void of hype or excitement. That's what I meant by wrestle-sense, wasn't making any point about workrate

 

Goes without saying that Raw's just the build to the big shows, so ideally every match should have it's own narrative and bigger purpose and if a match happens to be hot/PPV quality that's just a bonus. If you want stand-alone in-ring showcases, you can watch Superstars/Main Event - which is why nobody watches that. We watch PPVs to be blown away by exciting wrestling action and we watch Raw (and Smackdown if you're unemployed like me) to be emotionally hooked in, but they're failing to do that with any real consistency. You have neutered-seeming characters all over the place reading uninspired scripts, not reaching their full potential, many of whom showed their true potential on another WWE-branded show, which you have to imagine will catch up to them. Most of Raw atm is either crap or just alright, the last thing they did to stir proper genuine excitement on a Raw was the Kevin Owens/John Cena thing, or maybe the Taker/Brock brawl. It's like listening to a pop song where you have to sit thru 15 minutes of monotonous verses to get to the catchy hook.

Edited October 5, 2015 by sj5522

[LaGoosh]

Ugh Stephanie is just the absolute fucking WORST. Can you imagine how entertaining a Vince/New Day skit would have been? The Authority and Stephanie in particular are going to be looked back on as the worst main event heel stable probably ever.