WWE Draft

[Jazzy G]

There's too much expecting the belt to make the person holding it, rather than the person holding the belt making the belt feel special recently.

The attitude for a while seems to have been: You want to get somebody over? Stick a belt on them. That'll get them some attention. Don't change the way you book them, but make them come to the ring with a belt. That'll do the trick. 

 

[tiger_rick]

2 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

To continue the Thor's hammer analogy

Don't, it's ludicrous.

[Devon Malcolm]

Can't even fucking escape superhero films in on-topic these days.

[air_raid]

36 minutes ago, jazzygeofferz said:

There's too much expecting the belt to make the person holding it, rather than the person holding the belt making the belt feel special recently.

I think Styles being US champ was what you’re looking for. Ricochet being US champ meant not much, losing it to and running with Styles might have simultaneously elevated both him and the belt if he’d been booked to regain it. But he wasn’t. That would have made too much sense from the company that wasted the Cena rub with the same title on fucking Del Rio.

Edited September 23, 2019 by air_raid

[Accident Prone]

I'm a big fan of the brand split providing it's done properly, and WWE usually get it right for eight or so months before they initiate their usual self-destruct sequence.

The brand split offers the massive benefit of giving more of your roster a proper spotlight and more time to build meaningful stories. I've spoke of this before, but 2002-2004 and 2015-2016 are two of my favourite WWE periods, and it's due to Smackdown having a killer roster and an emphasis on getting people over. RAW has it's fans too but they're kept away from the regular folk..

Here's the simple rule behind a successful brand split: KEEP THE TWO BRANDS SEPARATE. Build each show as unique, almost polar-opposite to each other. You can have a main champion of each show and you won't fall into any issues with one trumping the other or one having more importance, because they'll only matter to that particular show's roster.

Bring back single-brand PPV's and have both rosters for the traditional Big 4; Rumble, 'Mania, SummerSlam and Survivor Series. We'll anticipate the Rumble more as we'll see both brands mix it up. Make Survivor Series a really special occasion by having two main events; women's RAW squad vs women's SD squad, and the same for the men. Summerslam and 'Mania should feature only one or two inter-promotional matches, if any at all.

KOTR should be worked into a RAW block and a SD block, with the final being SD vs RAW. There should only be two MITB matches; womens and mens, and yes you've guessed it, both have a half/half mix of SD and RAW competitors. 

It's been said a lot on forums and message boards going back to the beginning of time, and it's the traditional stance of hundreds of thousands (possibly millions) of basement dwelling armchair bookers, but this should be so fucking easy to do. Make both shows unique and highlight the really special occasions when both rosters do battle with each other. I cannot stress enough this enough. But it's WWE so I'm practically shouting into a black hole at this point.

 

[air_raid]

4 hours ago, Accident Prone said:

Here's the simple rule behind a successful brand split: KEEP THE TWO BRANDS SEPARATE. 

....

We'll anticipate the Rumble more as we'll see both brands mix it up. Make Survivor Series a really special occasion by having two main events; women's RAW squad vs women's SD squad, and the same for the men. Summerslam and 'Mania should feature only one or two inter-promotional matches, if any at all.

KOTR should be worked into a RAW block and a SD block, with the final being SD vs RAW. There should only be two MITB matches; womens and mens, and yes you've guessed it, both have a half/half mix of SD and RAW competitors.

This is still way too many instances of cross brand interactions. If Survivor Series can be Raw vs SmackDown as a USP then SummerSlam is too close to it and dilutes from the appeal and should feature just the biggest matches possible from each brand that have developed since Mania. Survivors and the Rumble by their nature can set up any cross-brand shenanigans to build those matches for Mania to make both cross brand singles/tags AND Mania more special. If you persist with the MITB gimmick AND a dedicated brand split then each World title can deal with a briefcase ex machina to keep things interesting between Mania and Survivors, and it’s probably better to dilute MITB than the brand split if that’s where our priority is. KOTR simply needn’t exist at all.

[King Pitcos]

The Money in the Bank briefcase is just a prop now anyway.

[Accident Prone]

43 minutes ago, air_raid said:

If you persist with the MITB gimmick AND a dedicated brand split then each World title can deal with a briefcase ex machina to keep things interesting between Mania and Survivors, and it’s probably better to dilute MITB than the brand split if that’s where our priority is. KOTR simply needn’t exist at all.

Yeah, sod off the KOTR then, and have the MITB take place at 'Mania again (which is where it always shined the best). 

I want this to work, as a rejuvenated brand split with concrete guidelines could be excellent and might make me interested in the product enough to follow month to month (or even week to week!).

Edited September 23, 2019 by Accident Prone

[Vamp]

I like the idea of making both shows polar opposites but they want their audience to watch both shows. Inevitably they're just going to blend into each other. 

[air_raid]

1 hour ago, Vamp said:

I like the idea of making both shows polar opposites but they want their audience to watch both shows. Inevitably they're just going to blend into each other. 

Ah, memories of ludicrous Linda McMahon explanations in a conference call to shareholders that the first brand split would work because viewers would decide which ONE show they’d like and watch it, then they’d market one to the viewers of another. Seemingly oblivious to the fact the hardcore viewership not driven away by The Invasion going wrong and Rock and Austin disappearing were sad twats like me who’d just watch all of it regardless. 

Its stunning that it takes NXT call ups to answer homegrown “what would X vs Y match be like” questions when a well-managed brand split could have been generating the intrigue (and paying it off on a regular/annual basis) for 15 years now. The constant need for drafts/“shake ups” is such a paradox as if they were more disciplined with the split as it is, it wouldn’t feel like everyone’s wrestling everyone all the time and they wouldn’t need to create artificial excitement by “shuffling the deck” so often. Yay, The Miz is back on a show he left a year ago creating fresh feuds with... the same guys he was wrestling a year ago.

Most depressing is the deja vu I have making these points, so apologies to those of you feeling like you’ve experienced this period of time before, sir. I’ve never seen one before, no one has, but I’m guessing it’s a white hole.

[BrodyGraham]

Move KOTR to the NXT brands and use it as their equivalent to the G1 with the winner getting a title shot at the Summer Takeover.

Or do the same on the big two with a bracket or block for each show, the winners facing off for the big title shot at either SummerSlam or Survivor Series.

[HarmonicGenerator]

How many tag teams do we reckon are getting split up in this Draft? I bet they break up the Usos just for the hell of it.

[BrodyGraham]

4 minutes ago, HarmonicGenerator said:

How many tag teams do we reckon are getting split up in this Draft? I bet they break up the Usos just for the hell of it.

Look forward to Jimmy Uso's repackaging as the Polynesian Scott Hall, for 3 months.

 

[Loki]

On 9/23/2019 at 7:50 PM, air_raid said:

Its stunning that it takes NXT call ups to answer homegrown “what would X vs Y match be like” questions when a well-managed brand split could have been generating the intrigue (and paying it off on a regular/annual basis) for 15 years now.

I have NEVER understood why they do the Drafts every year.  It's not like the NFL mixes up ALL the players for all the teams every year.  It completely negates all sorts of interesting storyline possibilities as well - people's contracts expiring and becoming "free agents", unexpected jumps from one show to another.

For me, the brand split has never worked but it probably works less well now than at any time in its history.  You have Smackdown Women's champion on Raw every week.  Nakamura who is a Smackdown champ (I think?) was in a match to become a contender for a different Raw title.  It's complete shit.

 

[tiger_rick]

2 minutes ago, Loki said:

I have NEVER understood why they do the Drafts every year.  It's not like the NFL mixes up ALL the players for all the teams every year.  It completely negates all sorts of interesting storyline possibilities as well - people's contracts expiring and becoming "free agents", unexpected jumps from one show to another.

For me, the brand split has never worked but it probably works less well now than at any time in its history.  You have Smackdown Women's champion on Raw every week.  Nakamura who is a Smackdown champ (I think?) was in a match to become a contender for a different Raw title.  It's complete shit.

The thing is because they have the development system in place, they could easily do an actual draft every year. Put the NXT, NXT:UK and peripheral guys from Evolve, etc along with some legends who are still working and use it as a way to get guys onto the main roster. It could make for great TV as well as giving them something to do in the weeks ahead as they give the back story on the best "rookies" (JR or Skiavone would have been great in that role). They could make a couple of trades a part of it and shake things up to create new matches in a legitimate and established format.