Source
I REALLY hope this is the preshow they've been talking about. Three hour shows are always a stretch for them and making it a regular deal would be a very bad idea to me.
Thoughts on this?
I REALLY hope this is the preshow they've been talking about. Three hour shows are always a stretch for them and making it a regular deal would be a very bad idea to me.
Thoughts on this?
Can't imagine anyone thinking this is a good idea.
ReplyDeleteIn theory this could lead to a greater focus on the wrestling, but that'd make too much sense.
ReplyDeleteIf the extra hour is just a pre-show I am fine with it, but the creative team can barely make a 2 hour show good most weeks, 3 hours? Bad idea.
ReplyDeleteI can't imagine a worse period of time in the modern era for this idea. On the one hand, they typically deliver the goods over the summer, but still, Superstars has descended into a completely missable show. NXT is unwatchable. And Smackdown is near missable (and that's perhaps being generous). And over the past few weeks, it's been a struggle getting through 2 hours of Raw. I wish they had learned the mistakes Nitro had made. It's much better to do an action packed 2 hour show that leaves your audience wanting more than to do a marathon 3 hour show.
ReplyDeleteAnd WCW was smoking hot in early 1998 when it went to 3 hours. Raw today is...the opposite of smoking hot.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing I could think of is if Smackdown was going away then 1 3 hour show would make sense. But that's not happening, is it?
ReplyDeleteAnd in an unrelated move, Scott's regular Raw reviews will be finishing up on Jul. 16 (IMO).
ReplyDeleteI'm glad I stopped watching Raw.
Great. So this way we're practically guaranteed longer COOHHH and Cena promos, more Hornswoggle skits and even less coherent stories given the writers certainly won't have a clue how to handle 3 hours of airtime.
ReplyDeleteI actually think if they run it three hours and don't waste the time with stupid repetitive hype videos (like re-airing the same Big Show footage THREE times in the first hour last Monday) and fill it with forward momentum in storylines and longer matches, it could be exciting. Everyone bitches about the roster being small, yet there's a million mid-upper carders who don't get enough time to really have decent feuds or get over. I think a pre-game show would just be a long waste of time that everyone would skip over anyway.
ReplyDeleteFrom the press release: "The expanded WWE Monday Night Raw will transform television to an unprecedented level of viewer interaction. Fans will have new ways to get involved in the show through WWE.com and social media by deciding matches, stipulation and new character development. WWE will brand this unprecedented fan interaction as “#RAWactive.”
ReplyDeleteSo you thought the Twitter-pimping was bad before...
God it's like this is their resolution to everything. "Hey guys, our ratings keep dipping every fiscal year. I have a great idea. We need moar programming!"
ReplyDeleteTo be fair, it might have been USA's idea/desire more than WWE. The network has long had a hard-on for the three hour shows, and often had to pressure Vince into doing them.
ReplyDeleteEven though wrestling's ratings have been moving downward for years, it still brings in better numbers than a lot of cable shows. Our standards have just been pretty high;)
What an awful idea. They do not have the depth for this and three hour live weekly shows did nothing for WCW but oversaturate the market, which was at least hot at the time.
ReplyDeleteTodd Martin had a great point in his RAW review this week when he compared Vince's current handling of the WWE to Al Davis's ruining the Oaklan dRaiders in the last years of his life.
Interesting. So it sounds like the plan is to have fans voting for matches, stipulations, etc via Twitter and their website during the first hour?
ReplyDeleteCould be intriguing as a special one time sort of thing, but every week? I'm imagining this sort of format: intro, give twitter info, run 5 video packages, give voting update, have a short match, interview, give voting update, repeat 51 more weeks a year.
The topic of Smackdown being "missable" below made me think how SmackDown used to be such a good, go-to show. Even as recently as last year with Orton/Christian/Henry, the "SuperShow" has turned Smackdown into Thunder. SmackDown will likely no longer exist in the next five years and WWE programming will consist of 3-hour RAWs and bunch of stuff on the internet.
ReplyDeleteA preshow could be fun.
ReplyDeleteIf it's not a preshow (probably won't be), then there are ways to do it and make it work (I still wouldn't suggest it but there are ways to make it work). Focus more on the undercard having actual storylines and not the crap they give them now (which is usually no real storylines beyond for no apparent reason these two are fighting each other and now they're going to fight each other for a month). More focus on the Tag, US, and IC titles...have those titles defended on TV more to make them a bigger deal, the guys who hold them a bigger deal, and give you an ongoing storyline with them (they're barely ever defended on PPV anyway, build to a big Raw match). Don't overdo it with the top guys, some of whom are already seen way too much...obviously they'll still be on virtually every Raw, but don't have them appearing in even more segments than they are now just because there's an extra hour. Give GOOD matches more time...don't use the extra hour as an excuse to give us an extra Khali VS Show match or some awful thing nobody wants to see, give us a longer Ziggler/Someone good match.
I think this is a terrible idea because I have no faith in WWE making it work, and there's already too much TV, frankly. There are ways to make it work if that's the route they feel they have to go, but I have no faith in WWE following through. Most of their 3 hour Raws are terrible and this will probably continue that trend.
Sigh...what you're saying about more storylines and longer matches would be ideal...but we both know it's gonna be more video packages and John Cena promos.
ReplyDeleteNo, that's AWFUL. Oh god, if they plan to do that I might outright quit watching. It SOUNDS like a good idea...it SOUNDED like a good idea when they had "Viewers Choice" Raws, except they didn't give you a single good choice. It wasn't "What awesome match with a great stipulation would you like to see", it was "Do you want to see Khali/Big Show/Kane VS Mark Henry in a "Dance off/arm wrestling contest/farting contest"? All shit choices. If that's the template they're going for, I might hurt my arm trying to change the channel as quickly as I will.
ReplyDeleteI know I don't! I can't even get through two hours!
ReplyDeleteI have such a bad feeling about this.
ReplyDeleteI have such a bad feeling about this.
ReplyDeleteSo, more time for WWE to try and guilt the older fans into liking John Cena.
ReplyDelete"Look guys, he does Make-A-Wish, please cheer for him?"
Another hour of talking. Yay.
ReplyDeleteI agree, the first hour should be squarely focused on the undercard with none of the main eventers appearing. This would give the undercard a chance to get themselves over.
ReplyDeleteIf it's not USA's doing then I still don't understand it. I realize they do decent ratings considering but why add more programming to your product if you're on a decline? The only way I'd be fine with this is if they got rid of NXT or shortened Smackdown to one hour and utilized the extra Raw time to get developmental talent over in a match or something.
ReplyDeleteIf they waste time with hype videos in a 2 hour show, you can bet they'll be just as bad with 3 hours. Those are not going away.
ReplyDeleteI agree if it was mainly WWE's idea, it was not very prudent. We just haven't heard much about it yet.
ReplyDeleteOf all the weeks to announce this, they pick the week featuring one of the worst-received RAWs in recent memory.
ReplyDeleteAs noted, this might make sense if they were getting rid of ThunderDown, but they're not. And if USA is indeed forcing this on them, well, that doesn't bode well for that relationship either. So we're looking at another hour of weekly television from a creative team already strained beyond its absolute limit in terms of ability to produce compelling product. Sure, they could just let guys go out and wrestHAHAHAHAHA! Sorry, I couldn't finish that thought with a straight face.
Yup, that's what I would do. Have the announcers occasionally bring up things that will happen later in the show (big matches, appearances, etc.) but aside from when it's absolutely necessary, don't use the top guys til later.
ReplyDeleteIf the additional hour is good or interesting, we win. If it's seven kinds of awful, we really don't have to watch. We can just skip that relatively inconsequential first hour and watch the last two hours as usual. Heck, half the people that comment on the internet about Raw don't actually watch it.
ReplyDeleteI think it's a smart move to do during the summer with less competition. I also think we can finally see some of the undercard characters get some depth. I've actually been impressed with the clips I've seen from FCW and NXT over the last year, and the younger guys could benefit from action similar to those shows being on USA.
If it continues past the summer, then we'll probably run into issues. ON THE OTHER HAND, maybe the writers get so burnt out that they quit, and the wrestlers can actually cut their own promos.
Ever since the "Supershow" pretty much killed the brand extension, it's seemed harder and harder to give a lot of guys time. Ideally, this would help accomplish this.
ReplyDeleteLook at guys like Ryback and Cesaro. They need to be on TV just about every week to get over, and have major promise, not to mention upper-mid-card guys who wind up doing jobs because they're stuck in a Catch-22 of having to be on TV every week, but with nothing to do.
This promotion needs a guy like that Chris Creski, or whatever his name was, who would chart every talent in the promotion and gave everyone a role, like no one's business. I'm not holding my breath, though.
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/005/545/OpoQQ.jpg
ReplyDeletehttp://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/184/961/tumblr_lnvvueuSsj1qcj56b.png
ReplyDeletehttp://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/wtf-is-this-shit.jpg
ReplyDeleteIf we hated the show enough to not watch at all, then we wouldn't watch. The fact that we DO watch means we're not just going to "skip an hour". The issue is they'll make it so if you don't watch the first hour, you're going to miss stuff...but they'll fill that extra time with garbage throughout the show, most likely. Because that's what they've done during every other 3 hour Raw they've done, spread out the good stuff more and fill in more crap.
ReplyDeleteHello DVR.
ReplyDeleteJust get it over with already and make it 8-10p est. This may be a slow move into eventually change the timeslot anyways. Their target demo is mostly asleep by 1030pm as it is.
ReplyDeleteI guess they are trying to compensate for the delay of the WWE Network?
ReplyDeleteHow would that make this any different than Superstars?
ReplyDeleteBad enough to say that three times?
ReplyDeleteWWE stockholders looking forward to an extra hour's worth of advertising income?
ReplyDeleteScott stole the line I was about to post. Kudos, sir.
ReplyDeleteI doubt USA would be forcing it on them because the NCIS show they run at 8pm now does a better rating than when Raw runs at 8pm. Though maybe that would change with a regular 8pm start time.
ReplyDeleteThe fans will pick up on that and it won't get any ratings, so they won't do that. I'm fine with starting with a big angle, but then give us some good matches with the undercard to round out the hour (like Nitro used to) and it will be win-win.
ReplyDeleteI will maintain an open mind -- hoping for something a little different to freshen things up and give some ring time to some other folks.
ReplyDeleteBUT, given the company's recent track record, I'm not getting my hopes up that they will do that just to be disappointed in the end.
Exactly!
ReplyDeleteIt's been said for years, but if they're really trying to cater to a "PG" audience, then air at a time that actually corresponds to that philosophy.
Major cable network in a prime-time slot.
ReplyDeleteAs a long time fan, 3 hour Raw’s, especially at this point, is NOT a
ReplyDeletegood idea and although the show has been mostly good throughout its
history, it was never THAT good for it to be a 3 hour show every week.
When Raw started at 1 hour, most of the time I wanted more. I was happy
as hell when it went to 2 hours, and even during the Attitude Era, I
never once said, “man, this is one show that should be 3 hours”. (And we
all remember that WCW Nitro being 3 hours did NOT help that show
whatsoever.) Overall, considering all the other TV they have to fill
each week, 3 hour Raw’s are not a good idea.
I'll echo what a few others have said:
ReplyDeleteIn THEORY, this could be fantastic, if only for two simple reasons: more guys would get TV-time, and there could be more long matches. Anything that would allow guys like Justin Gabriel, Tyson Kidd, and Yoshi Tatsu to actually show what they're capable of can only be a good thing. Hell, just last Friday, we saw Damien Sandow's only bit of TV-time be a minute-long backstage promo, when the company really should have built upon his debut by allowing him to come to the ring (so that we could once again witness the character's completely pretentious entrance) and cut an in-ring promo that the fans could give more heat towards. That right there is an example of how just a few extra minutes could have greatly benefited a new guy; the extra hour could, theoretically and potentially, be put to great use.
In practice, though... well, I can't predict the future, but their track record over the last ten years isn't all that spectacular. Remember how "Raw" and "Smackdown" were going to be treated as two separate companies, with two equally talented rosters, and with the two Heavyweight titles being treated with equal prestige? [Well, I guess they kinda have fulfilled that last part over the last month - both titles are taking a back-seat to friggin' Johnny Ace - but that's beside the point.] Didn't take long for one show to clearly become the "B-Show".
I'm willing to keep an open mind, but my expectations are low.
As someone who PVRs the show this isn't a huge deal for me. If the extra hour helps gives some underexposed guys some love, great. If it means more fluff and 5 Big Johnny segments instead of 3, then I'm gonna fast forward.
ReplyDeleteI'm with the guy below (or above if you're one of those FREAKS who read "oldest first") in that when it was 1 hour I was always left wanting more. But once it was 2 hours I *never* felt like I needed an extra hour, no matter how great the show was.
But hey, it's the dog days of the WWE 'season' so something like spikes my excitement level a little (I said a *little*). I know the feelings are mixed, but I'm excited that HHH is more "in charge" now. Between this and the NXT thing, it feels like stuff is HAPPENING, and the company wants to take some risks.
And I just want to note, to all the WWE writers who peruse this blog, that 3 hours of Raw means there is NO excuse to leaving out Bowtunga. He deserves a stand alone segment of his own each week where he actually speaks and/or wears his swaggerrific jacket.
The thing is, they're probably just adding another hour of the same format, heel authority figure, etc. They really need to freshen things up by changing things up creatively.
ReplyDeleteYeah, as an 8 year old I would never be allowed to watch TV until 11:15 on a school night.
ReplyDeleteThe best thing about three hours RAW is that this opens the door for the occasional four hour RAW special.
ReplyDeleteThis will suck and the show will be worse.
ReplyDeleteOf course, it this means getting, say, Justin Gabriel versus Tyson Kidd for 5-10 minutes in the first hour, it'd be great.
ReplyDeleteBUT YOU KNOW THAT WON'T HAPPEN.
ReplyDeleteJust to be clear, I "liked" your comment, not the idea.
ReplyDeleteYou _know_ it will be endless wwe.com and twitter bullshat. You know it will mean more segments with people acting like cartoons, and more commercials-for-the-product-you-are-already watching, and more 20 minute in-ring promos with authority figures, and more meaningless divas fluff, and etc and so on.
ReplyDeleteIn the words of Bad Santa, "the three Bs."
So you write horror films for a living? Because only a truly disturbed mind would come up with such a terrifying concept.
ReplyDeleteI think if someone did that now they'd be called a fag and someone would poop in his gym bag.
ReplyDeleteOh, and good luck to them if they think this is going to be "permanent" - I think everybody on here would be surprised if it lasted six months.
ReplyDeleteOn the bright side, I am totally psyched for the 1000th episode - "Raw XV" was fantastic, and I expect something similar.
YES. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
ReplyDeleteSeriously, you nailed it. God it'll be bad.
Unless this is a pre-show then the show, this won't last. They can barely fill 2 hours, how can they fill 3 hours on a weekly basis. If they want this to succeed their gonna have to bring up some fresh faces because a 3 hour John Cena show just isn't gonna cut it.
ReplyDeleteHaha that's hilarious. I hope this 3 hour idea fails so badly that they have to reformat the way they currently produce TV. Its so bad and stale now. It will fail...all the 3 hour draws lowered the ratings.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what everyone was saying back when they expanded RAW from one hour to two?
ReplyDeleteIf the WWE changes their whole philosophy on how to run a wrestling TV show, this could work. People complain about the 3 hour Nitros, but those 3 hour Nitros gave us some great matches with the luchas, Benoit, Malenko, Jericho, etc.
ReplyDeleteSo if this is a chance to get Tyson Kidd & Dean Ambrose more air time, maybe an extra angle or ten minute match, this is a good thing for wrestling fans. Unfortunately I don't see the WWE going that route. We'll probably get one more actual wrestling match per week, along with several recaps, highlight music videos, and talking head segments with Lawler & Cole.
In the end, if the WWE decides to invest more time in its mid- to low-card wrestlers, this might work.
Most people were pretty excited when it moved to two hours AFAIK. It made logistical sense. Part of the problem with Raw was how the one hour format was too restrictive. Nitro had already been two hours for 7+ months up to that point, as well. Basically: one hour is too little, 3 hours is too much. 2 hours is the perfect format.
ReplyDeleteI guess it depends on what happens with that extra hour.
ReplyDeleteA couple months ago I sent an email to Scott about a "pregame" show that would have former wrestlers talk up storylines and go more in depth. It could have interviews and analysis similar to what the NFL, NBA and MLB do now. Scott never answered, so I'm not sure if he saw it, but if they go through with this, it should be noted that I CAME UP WITH IT FIRST.
They do a "post game" show on The Score in Canada that has a former WWE ref on the panel where they do what you're talking about.
ReplyDeleteI'm warning you, mock the WWE juggernaut at your own peril!
ReplyDeleteEveryone mocked such bold initiatives as the WBF, the XFL, and IcoPro too, and look what happened!
The sad fact is, three hours with average 2.5 rating per hour will bring in more advertising revenue than two hours averaging 3.0.
ReplyDeleteStocks go up and down based on performance and good ol' speculation, not revenue per say. I guess if this extra hour brings in enough returns and increase ppv buys and all that other good stuff, yes. If it falls on its face, no. Well, we'll wait and se.....
ReplyDeleteMy favorite was the match where you would vote for Evan Bourne's opponent, and somehow the voting got "screwed up" and instead of the obvious Sin Cara vs. Bourne match we got Mason Ryan instead.
ReplyDeleteThe WCW All-Nighter shows were pretty cool...and those were six hours long!
ReplyDeleteI think that got posted to the blog.
ReplyDeleteBlood, Breasts and Beasts?
ReplyDeleteI agree, but I'm not sure we've been given any reason to think they will. The 3 hour Raws we've gotten (which I grant you are spread out) haven't given any real focus to the midcarders...they spread out the upper card stuff and then filled in the time with a bunch of crap.
ReplyDeleteGood point. Even when the show is great, after 2 hours I'm never sitting there saying "Boy, I could really use another hour". For PPVs, yes. For Raws, no.
ReplyDeleteYES. Also I like that the same 6 people liked both.
ReplyDeleteFor me it'd be different in two ways: #1, you can have the announcers talking about the rest of the show (not to the Nitro extent, just mentioning who might appear, matches, etc.), and #2, in this ideal world, you're giving these guys actual storylines, not just throwing them out there for an hour to wrestle a few matches and nothing else.
ReplyDeleteEven Mason Ryan was like "Wuh huh?"
ReplyDeleteInstead of a 15 minute take on Ace Ventura, you get a 45 minute reenactment!
ReplyDeleteI actually kinda like NXT. I probably wouldn't go way out of my way but since I can just watch it whenever online, I'm actually kind of enjoying it. Some weeks it's crap but other weeks we've gotten some really good matches, and I quite enjoy Regal on commentary.
ReplyDeleteRight, they've spent more time recapping and less time in the ring. If this gives a rub to up and commers, I'm all for it. But I'm skeptical.
ReplyDeleteI'm also feeling the feeling that you're feeling. Feeling me?
ReplyDeleteYeah, I was DYING for Raw to go to 2 hours. They had a bit of an extention, starting at 8:57, but that just wasn't enough. So they finally went to 2 hours, and I was through the roof about it. Of course, this was at the age when I'd record things like The Raw Bowl and watch it over and over, so perhaps my frame of reference wasn't very stable.
ReplyDeleteBut let us remember Raw X...
ReplyDeleteShit happens when you party naked?
ReplyDeleteI truly don't know what's more sad, the WBF, or because I'm such a bodybuilding enthusiast, I watch old WBF shows on youtube.
ReplyDeleteBut that's because we had Dusty Rhodes stuffing chips into The Brain's pants.
ReplyDeleteLook, they say the line in each of the Star Wars, and things ended up fine. So, here's to CM Punk getting his legs cut off, set on fire, and coming back as a bad-assed cyborg.
ReplyDeleteWCW All-Nighter: 5 1/2 hours of classic matches within those six hours.
ReplyDeleteWWE Raw: 2 1/2 hours of in-ring contract negotiations and poopy jokes in three hours.
Tough choice.
They really should label all the RAWs with Roman Numerals.
ReplyDeleteComing up next...RAW CMLXXXVIII!
They should make Raw 18+ so the wrestlers could say the f word and divas could show their breasts and RVD could be shown backstage having a toke. It would be way better.
ReplyDeleteYes it will. But the match will end in a no contest when Big Show comes out and chokeslams them to "keep his heat"
ReplyDeleteIf that worked so well, then Vince would be the one asking Paul Heyman for a job.
ReplyDeleteI hope they bring back Clarence Mason to spend each 8:15 to 8:30 segment giving his legal interpretation of all these contract negotiations.
ReplyDeleteBut . . . but. . . that gives them one less hour to write the show. How will they ever get their work done?
ReplyDeleteThey are making the show "interactive" So the fans will write the show for them!
ReplyDeleteThey should do what Nitro used to do with the 800 numbers. Pick one wrestler from the heel side and one wrestler from the face side.
ReplyDeleteI always loved that...theyd have like 6 jobbers & Sting in one room and 6 jobbers & Flair in the other...brilliant!
At the time RAW was a phenomenon and was exciting to watch. The extra hour was an added bonus, now RAW is a chore to sit through. I think they need to re-evaluate the idea, three hour RAWs have been horrible lately. Seriously, if you watched all the WWE first run shows that's six hours a week, which is too much. Back in the 80s we had WWF Superstars and Challenge, each only an hour and that was perfect. One was Saturday and one was Sunday. I'm surprised they didn't decide to do a new one hour show on Thursday just to screw with TNA.
ReplyDeleteThey can just rewrite the shows as it airs. Picture it, Sicily, 1932....wait no that's not it. I can actually picture someone running down to the ring during a promo to hand Show a new script due to the rewrites. It's gonna be a Natural Disaster with three hours of Cena/JL/Cole/Lawler/Vickie, etc. There will still be no time left for Tyson Kidd/Tyler Reks (yes I'm a huge Reks fan)/Natty/Justin Gabriel/Usos/etc/
ReplyDeleteIs it any good? I was thinking of maybe Shawn Michaels, Mick Foley, Kevin Nash (loljk) doing the roundtable thing.
ReplyDeleteThat assumes they'll get a 2.5 average rating. I have no reason to believe they will.
ReplyDeleteI'm a part of the "we" watching Raw, by the way. I have no problem skipping an hour IF the show is poor and takes on a pattern over several weeks. Anything interesting will be shown in "moments ago" or "earlier tonight" replays.
ReplyDeleteThey struggle to fill 2 hours as it is. Raw is 40% recaps of things that happened earlier in the night.
ReplyDeleteI'd go for that, since I live in the Central time zone and due to my work schedule, I basically have to be asleep by 830pm. I could actually see a bit of the show before my wife bitched too loudly...
ReplyDelete