Pro Wrestling Since 1997


Branded WWE house shows to end this month


An interesting note when it comes to WWE house shows. After the end of this month, the house shows will no longer be called “Raw” and “Smackdown,” because after years, they’ve never been able to get the Smackdown events numbers up. I (Dave Meltzer) had figured they would just be advertised as WWE, but it looks like they are all being advertised as Raw.

Post Category: News

Tags: , , ,

6 Responses

  1. Jempires One says:

    I think it has more to do with stars than branding. The Cena house shows do well and the Alberto Del Rio ones don’t. It isn’t rocket science.

    What it does mean is WWE does a lousy job building stars and booking. Too much TV, and too many good main event matches given up on free TV.

    The 1980s were great- seldom had great TV matches and just did angles and interviews to build house shows and PPV.

    Nitro vs Raw was he beginning of the end. In the old days, bad guys got boo’d. Piper and Orton were verbally assaulted each night. Now guys like Punk get as many cheers as the top-end babyfaces.

  2. Mattyman says:

    I disagree there. Maybe it might be something to do with the feed you got in the 80s, but I remember seeing Kerry Von Erich take Flair on TV for the title. Flair was the master of the 60 minute matches. I saw better TV matches then than I do now.

  3. Deathedge says:

    Hm, maybe i the numbers would not be in the crapper had WWE not moved all of SD’s top stars to RAW (or show them on RAW or whatever) and didn’t make it the B-Show of WWE.

    Honestly, the “brands” are a joke now. They should just do away with them completly.

    @Jempires One

    Though the Monday Night Wars did popularize heels getting cheered, this sort of thing has been an occurence in wrestling since the 80s, with heels like Jske Roberts and Ric Flair getting the occasional cheers. That was what led to Jake’s face turn in fact. Really, it is WWE’s fault for having a stale face at the top, and proof that Punk is a great performer.

    TV can help build up if used correctly, just look at Hogan-Sting in 97 for proof.

    There is, however, too much TV. WWE has 4 (5 if you count NXT) TV shows… Way too much. It’s oversaturating a market that is already losing interest.

  4. Deathedge says:

    I meant TV in a modern day format, by the way.

  5. truthbrand says:

    i am actually glad they did this, i feel like the branding is hurting the product, has been for years. we as wrestling fans understand the difference between the WWE championship and the Heavy weight championship. there is no real reason to have too different products, fueds would be best served carrying on into later in the week, maybe moving smackdown to thursdays to compete with TNA, i mean it would be interesting. fact is seperate shows delutes the product alot, but in the same sense they are in a tough spot with the amount of talent on the roster.

  6. Bolivwx says:

    From the way I see it, WWE ought to put more effort into Smackdown because a long time ago, Smackdown was truly considered WWE’s alternative show. At this day and age, Smackdown no longer has its quality of being available on local TV stations, and if it means anything it is one hour shorter than Raw.

    A long time ago, I mostly remember being a Raw fanatic because I simply regarded myself as being “too lazy” to watch Smackdown. Not long later I moved to an area that didn’t get UPN (or the equivalent station for Smackdown) so I often regarded it as the WWE show that I just never watched. As what other people are saying, Smackdown is too much like a B show, and watching a show that still has that baggage of being prerecorded in addition to numerous other factors is very unappealing.

Leave a Reply



Matt Hardy wins the TNA World Heavyweight title

Vote View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Is Seth Rollins over rated?

Loading ... Loading ...

Should Demolition be inducted into the GERWECK.NET Hall of Fame?

Loading ... Loading ...