Thread Tools

PAULHEYMANGUY · 10-12-2012, 08:02 PM

I've wondered this for a while, why isn't Smackdown live?

I would take an educated guess that its because of the time it takes to put up and bring down the set, which is why Smackdown is recorded the next night on the Tuesday.

Im pretty sure though that WWE could benefit greatly from Smackdown being a live event. The roster is already spread thin through RAW, Smackdown, Main Event, Superstars, PPVs and Saturday morning slam.

As much as a like Smackdown sometimes it can wear thin and be a struggle to watch.

1. WWE struggles with multiple story lines on their A show RAW, so watching Smackdown to me usually seems like a random assortment of nothing matches.

2. Smackdown has become so stale and repetitive, I remember years ago watching major story lines unfold that included The Rock, CM Punk, Batista, The Undertaker, RVD, Edge to name but a few.
Now I'm a mark of some of the following but how many times can we see Alberto Del Rio, Randy Orton, Dolph Ziggler and Sheamus go around in the same circles over and over again.

3. For once it would be nice if they had something amazing happen on Smackdown something that would rival RAW, just once in a while, something that would draw us in or give us a total shock value.
I could miss Smackdown every week and still no that I probably missed nothing. Some of the greatest WWE moments have happened on Smackdown I cant remember one half great moment from the last 2 years on Smackdown.

4. Watching a show when its prerecorded just doesn't have the same effect that watching a live RAW does, you watch RAW and are sometimes excited by the possibility of something crazy happening, and you are watching it live, im sure thats what most of us fans live for in wrestling is great memorable and shocking moments. Fair enough RAW is the A show but once in a while it would be nice for a shake up.

Surely a live Smackdown could at least inject a little more passion and energy into Smackdown.

**Silent KEEL** · 10-12-2012, 08:15 PM

Because Stone Cold said so....and they don't feel like doing all the work to tape 2 shows live every week.

SinJackal · 10-12-2012, 08:23 PM

There's several reasons for it, one of which you already guessed (the time it takes to set everything up and air it live. It costs extra money).

Other reasons are less obvious, but should make sense.

Smackdown is the "B" show. Not the "A" show. It's filled with guys who are less over than the Raw guys. It's practically the AAA league, to Raw being the majors. FCW being like single A league. They put a few guys there to spicce it up and get people to watch, like Orton, Sheamus, Big Show. . .but the rest are pretty much just guys they're trying out.

They also retape certain parts of matches due to botches (again, more botches happening since it's newer, greener guys coming up).

Finally, it'd be dumb to air wrestling monday then tuesday. You gotta break it up. So they just air it friday. Start and end the week with wrestling. Works pretty well.

x78 · 10-12-2012, 08:25 PM

Smackdown has been pretty difficult to watch recently, it just seems like a show for guys to go through the motions on. Any feuds that are developed on the show are extremely formulaic and uninteresting and the rest of the time it just seems to be random matches involving the same guys over and over. Barring the odd good episode, there is no excuse for it to be so uninteresting, it's like the writers don't give a shit.

#PushKofiKingston · 10-13-2012, 01:04 AM

Smackdown is fine in my opinion. More entertaining than "Cena & friends show" on monday most of the time. The only thing it needs is some fresh main event faces.

Geeee · 10-13-2012, 01:06 AM

I think the main reason is that live television is a lot more expensive to produce.

citricopinions · 10-13-2012, 01:46 AM

Even if it wa live it'd still be repetitive and predictable. They just don't have as many well developed characters to create those exciting moments on both shows, so they save it for Raw ad let the wrestling purists get their fix on Smackdown and the other shows.

paqman · 10-13-2012, 02:27 AM

SD needs to be live and the brand split needs to be enforced. Nothing ever happens on SD because Raw's 3hrs and they save their nut to blow on Mondays now. It takes me all weekend to get done with SD on my DVR becuase it's just boring to watch. I'm fast forwarding and can figure out what's going to happen without audio with their backstage segments.

1. Heel walks in GM's office, complains, GM is angry, Heel in match later tonight, heel gives upset look at camera

2. Fast forwarding through match, about to hit play, notice an outside spot happen, which means commercial break is coming up ("CAN REY MYSTERIO GET BACK IN IT? FIND OUT AS SMACKDOWN ROLLS ON!"), continues to fast forward this time on 2x

3. Two faces and two heels in the same segment in the ring = a tag team match. Fast forward.

SD in 2009, 2002, and 2003... I miss thee lol

kobra860 · 10-13-2012, 02:29 AM

It's not live because of money issues and it would be taxing to have a crew do 2 live shows in 2 days (with one show being 3 hours).

Quote:

Originally Posted by paqman

SD needs to be live and the brand split needs to be enforced. Nothing ever happens on SD because Raw's 3hrs and they save their nut to blow on Mondays now. It takes me all weekend to get done with SD on my DVR becuase it's just boring to watch. I'm fast forwarding and can figure out what's going to happen without audio with their backstage segments.

I agree that the brand split should be enforced. It gave midcard wrestlers a chance to shine. Do we really need Ryback squashing people on 2 shows?

**-trav-** · 10-13-2012, 02:31 AM

Its a production thing. Its easier to keep TV together at some point in the week because its a massive shift in gears for production between house shows and TV.