Right now, the roster split is saving the WWE. There are some commonly held and often stated ways in which the brand extension benefits the WWE but I’ll resist the temptation to reprint them and pass them off as my own. One of the more prevalent of these is the fact that, with two (and some could argue three) ladders of opportunity leading new talent from rookie status up to the main event circle, it increases the chances of a wrestler being given a push and getting over with the fans. In many respects that’s true but it is more than just a circumstance of being given more time and more space in which to develop the skills necessary to progress. Vince knows that desire thrives on competition and, even though the majority of fans still rightly perceive the three WWE brands as one company, the rivalry between the respective rosters and creative departments should produce an ambience akin to that which existed during the Monday night wars, albeit not one directly discernible by viewers. Also, with no equal external competition the WWE has lost the capacity to profit from pilfering someone else’s roster. The extension has meant that talent traded/moved from one side to the other is endowed with a sense of novelty renaissance without requiring that they are repackaged or rested.
As much as I would like to think that I am too sharp to fall for such an obvious marketing ploy as mere aesthetics, I have noticed the subtle effects the brand distinction has on the senses. Whether it is the visual difference between Smackdown’s blue/white and Raw’s red/black or simply the contrast of commentary styles across the three shows, it is vital for the maintenance of the division that its components appear to exist in disparate environments. But I feel it is in the style of wrestling endorsed by each brand where the WWE has temporarily dropped the ball, something that goes against the edict of the roster split. I stated recently that the WWE has a “well-established ring style”, which is applicable whether you are a high-flyer or a monster, and I still think that’s accurate regardless of which show is identified. But the way in which the action is presented can be tailored to create a unique atmosphere for each brand. Most fans would conclude that Raw is a vehicle for ‘soap opera’ type storylines whereas Smackdown is predominantly for those who want straight wrestling but, in truth, there is little to separate the two in terms of content. Add to that an unwillingness by management to imbue ECW with the hardcore consistency it so desperately needs and you are left with a product that, whilst entertaining, has a repetitious tone from one brand to the next.
The tangible excitement surrounding many of this year’s Wrestlemania matches is thanks to the ‘inter-promotional’ uniqueness created by the brand extension. Except for the inclusion of Austin in a guest referee capacity the WWE has, to date, been unable to tap into its former glitterati for the biggest night of its calendar and it looks unlikely (if never impossible) that Hogan, Rock, Hart, Piper or Foley will be involved in the event. Add to that several absent performers who have been PPV stalwarts for McMahon in previous years (HHH, Show, Mysterio) and you end up with a card that could have suffered greatly from problems not of its own making. Granted, Vince and Donald Trump’s weird conclusion that anyone gives a crap whether one of them gets their head shaved or not seems to have made some play with the mainstream press and the eventual depilatory catastasis will unfortunately be included in any ‘classic Wrestlemania moments’ packages we are presented with in years to come. But it should be noted that the feuds involving Cena/Michaels and Batista/Undertaker have benefited from the cross-brand association they have been accorded over the last month, even though they are both single-brand matches. Even the aforementioned Lashley/Umaga match and the ‘Money in the bank’ ladder match have been spread across several programmes to accentuate their exposure. And that donation towards the television market has resulted in increased ratings for the three flagship WWE shows and led to what should be a very healthy buy-rate for the PPV. Berate the brand extension all you want but when that pyro goes off and Wrestlemania begins ... it’s thanks to the roster split that has made it so special.
Lee
Hang on, this is a little embarrassing. Even though there is no requirement for me to write a certain number of words per column, I usually like to produce about 2,000 words or so (give or take the occasional Warrior insult) but somehow I’ve managed to run out of points already and I’ve only written 751 words so far. Anyone for shadow puppets for the next ten minutes? Game of Buckaroo? Tell you what, I’ve got a second piece of roughly the same length if you’re interested?...
NOTHING IS BETTER THAN THE SPLIT...
Right now, the roster split is killing the WWE. Ask anyone that has paid good money to see the majority of single-brand PPV’s over the course of the last year and you’ll get the same response. ECW December to dismember and Cyber Sunday 2006 are just two of the events in the last twelve months that have left audiences feeling disenfranchised in the wake of the WWE’s current product. Whatever multi-brand excitement that has been generated in the run up to Wrestlemania will dissipate in the months between now and Summerslam and, unless the WWE can swallow its pride and admit that the rosters need to be reunited in act if not in name, it will go right back to wafer-thin cards that deliver only slightly more on the night than they do on paper.
One of the issues inherent with the roster split is that it doubles the chances of negative affect when aspects of the output are neglected. Despite the tag team scene experiencing a limited resurgence on Smackdown, the respective Raw combinations have been left adrift in the undercard with little or no time to build interest in their matches, which would render their feuds meaningful. And the mild consideration that has been applied to the women’s division on Monday nights hasn’t bled through to the females on Fridays who look set to remain purely ornamental for the foreseeable future. And if you think the roster split has worked in creating a justifiable women’s title match at Wrestlemania that blends a talented worker with mainstream media attention then you obviously don’t see the shallowness in allowing a WWE championship to be overshadowed by an airbrushed minge. It is no coincidence that fan enthusiasm in the undercard has cooled since Vince stopped running specific storylines for his lesser stars. Why aren’t London/Kendrick stealing Deuce/Domino’s car and destroying it? Why aren’t Haas/Benjamin trying and failing to out-hustle Cryme Time with hilariously funny or awkwardly stupid consequences? It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that, if the WWE continues to extol the virtues of sports entertainment, then it should be providing that luxury to as many of its active wrestlers as possible.
A week may be a long time in politics but it’s a lifetime in televised pro-wrestling. You can tell that Vince feels the same way because, in the weeks after the Royal Rumble when Undertaker was busy choosing his Wrestlemania bitch, the storyline was spread across all three relevant shows to maximise the cross-brand momentum. And that’s probably as good an example as you’ll find that the WWE knows it is hurting its own product by disconnecting the brands. Not only does it lose impetus having to invest in a comparatively weaker forum twice a week but the current number one draw in the WWE, which would be Cena, can’t use his popularity to drag others temporarily out of the mid-card whilst maintaining a primary feud at the same time (something at which HHH was always very good). The WWE gets a tiny window of opportunity to milk a performer at the peak of their abilities and Vince needs to be saturating his programmes with whatever draws the biggest reaction from the crowds, even if it means that audiences tire of them twice as quickly.
So why is the WWE persisting with the split if it knows the output is suffering as a result? Because it understands that the extension isn’t to blame ... the roster is. At the moment, the WWE roster is the lightest it has been in a very long time. The main event picture is thin, with a definite fan distinction between those who have the legendary requirement to be there and those who are guilty only by association. The mid-card has stagnated, presumably because the superstars most likely to break through into the long-term title picture (Orton, Edge) have slowed to a crawl once again and several performers who should have emerged from the pack (Kennedy, Carlito, RVD) have taken varying steps backwards in recent months. I’m not damming anyone for this, it’s just something that has to be accepted. Performers like Hogan, Rock and Austin, who somehow managed to become more than the wrestlers they were, don’t come along everyday or every generation and the expectation that someone backstage can flick on a switch and the next WWE franchise player is there in front of a manic crowd is a complete fallacy. I have been guilty in the past of recanting just how great the WWF was back in 1997/98 and again in 2000/01 but I would never declare the current scene to be worthless or uninteresting. Right now, the roster split IS the WWE. And, for better or worse, it has made the Wrestlemania card what it is on paper. But when that pyro goes off and the PPV begins ... it’s down to the roster to make it special on the night.
Lee
Copyright © 2005; TheWrestlingVoice.com & Douglas Nunnally.
All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer & Privacy Statement
| What Did You Think About WWE Backlash 2008? |
|
|