The Dart Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Two big differences this time around. Â They've hyped it for 2 months, unlike the 1 week last time. Â I imagine a lot of fans didn't even know what was going on when they tuned in one week and half the roster wasn't there last time. Â And Smackdown being live makes a huge difference now. Â I do wish they wouldn't have two world titles, especially if they are gonna have the Women's champ appear on both shows, and I think single brand PPVs probably isn't the best idea, but I suppose there is the 3rd big difference - the Network. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted June 29, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted June 29, 2016 I'm a fan of the split brand concept but Raw is so fucking dull at the moment that the thought of Raw but with half the roster kills me. Appreciate there'll be call ups from NXT but apart from Enzo & Cass the recent ones have been underwhelming. Â I'm looking forward to seeing what Smackdown is like post-split. Hopefully that becomes a fun couple of hours and I can just sack Raw off. Â Not bothered whether it's one World Champion or two. A single champ probably means a tiny bit more but two gives each brand a big focus and it didn't work badly last time so doesn't bother me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cutting Edge Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 I'm looking forward to it, just hope wwe are 'all in' and commit to it all the way, we've seen them start all guns blazing then loose interest after a few months sometimes less.  They've got a great mix of guys from nxt, the recent past (if rumors of Rey, Carlito or whoever are true) and current names to make good tv.  I hope for two different looking shows, I know people in the past have said 'no-one cares about the sets so why would wwe pay' etc but I think it adds to it and a reboot of sorts to each show adds to it, new set, music, announcers, angles, the lot  I'd keep it the way it was with Raw as the classic wwe of sorts with Cole, JBL but SD have Ranallo and Graves as the fresher hipper show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bus Surfer Posted June 29, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted June 29, 2016 Two world titles... Eugh,. Â There's no way you can keep the two of them on level pegging, so inevitably, 1 of them will become a 'the shit title' within a matter of months. Doomed to be defended in the first match on next years Wrestlemania. Â I fully understand why they'd do it, but you can't hide the fact that one of them becomes a turd shortly after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.E Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 I still say 1 world title, 1 tag title, 1 women's title, with the US and IC being on a separate show each, would make the "main" titles seem more important, especially if the champions are essentially lifted up to "above brand" status, like a touring champion of sorts. Â Much like before, if you have 2 world titles, one of the belts essentially would become another mid-card belt, much like how the WHC became the "gateway" title for mid-card guys like Swagger/Ziggler etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 The brand split was finished by the time Ziggler won the belt (not counting the earlier time he sort of had it given to him for an hour by Vickie). The only thing that makes one belt the lesser belt is if it's booked that way, and that all depends on how serious they are about parity between the shows. With Smackdown being live for the near future, they should be quite serious. Even before, the two titles were relatively even for most of the time. The world title only really became the definitely-weaker one after the Swagger win, didn't it? And that was eight years into the split. Undertaker going part time and Edge retiring didn't help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ElCece Posted June 29, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted June 29, 2016 If WWE are still after veterans, I want to revisit this partnership:- Â God I would live a repeat for these 2. Great chemistry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJM Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016  If WWE are still after veterans, I want to revisit this partnership:-  REGAL & TAJIRI GIF God I would live a repeat for these 2. Great chemistry  What is that gif from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merzbow Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 I was saying in the SCG thread that they should be the lackeys for whoever is running Smackdown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Â Â If WWE are still after veterans, I want to revisit this partnership:- Â REGAL & TAJIRI GIF Â God I would live a repeat for these 2. Great chemistry What is that gif from? It was posted on a wwe twitter account today, quick one minute video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackpot Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 The biggest problem with 1 World Title is from which "brand" does the number one contender come, especially on the shows where both "brands" are represented. And say Extreme Rules is a RAW event, the World Title is defended but at SmackDown's Payback it isn't, does that instantly say SmackDown isn't capable of providing a number one contender for the biggest title in the business. Â I would love them to give control of SmackDown to The Rock. After all, it is his show - as he'd constantly point out when it first debuted. Not seeing the person in control on screen every week would be a refreshing sight. Though I'm fully expecting it to be Steph and Shane to be in charge of both shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dart Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016  If WWE are still after veterans, I want to revisit this partnership:-  God I would live a repeat for these 2. Great chemistry   You can tell even though Regal "hates" Tajiri, he has a lot of affection for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members PunkStep Posted June 29, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted June 29, 2016 You can tell even though Regal "hates" Tajiri, he has a lot of affection for him. Definitely, and Regal is brilliant in that sort of role. Like when Bischoff ordered him to look after Eugene against his wishes, which eventually turned Regal face. More over than he's ever been as a face, probably. Wasn't he about to have a big feud with Trips until he ballsed it up somehow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 The rumoured Regal-HHH feud was a few years later, when Hunter was babyface champion and Lord was evil King of the Ring GM. Then he got caught on the PEDs, suspended, and came back a couple of months later in a shit swimming costume thing and that was the end of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bus Surfer Posted June 29, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted June 29, 2016 The biggest problem with 1 World Title is from which "brand" does the number one contender come, especially on the shows where both "brands" are represented. And say Extreme Rules is a RAW event, the World Title is defended but at SmackDown's Payback it isn't, does that instantly say SmackDown isn't capable of providing a number one contender for the biggest title in the business. Â Â Â Â I get that, but I don't think it's an issue, especially as these shows are now on the Network and not PPV. It's not a case of a fan saying "This show has no champion on it, so I'm not paying for this shite" Â Having one Champion floating over 2 brands with the top guys on each gunning for a title shot sounds a new, refreshing format to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.