WWE Raw - The Truth! (WWE Raw)

Member Name:

Product:	WWE Raw
Date:	15/08/03 (169 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: WWE still is fun to watch, The comedy moments still exist, The WWE have got the most talent roster than they've had for years

Disadvantages: They still have the roster split, There is not enough time given to matches and too much given to long winded promos, WWE need to improve DRASTICALLY!

Its Friday night, its 10pm. Am I out partying at the local bar? Course I m not Friday night is 'rasslin night! Sky Sports 1 is Raw!

In its hey day WWE Raw was one of the best TV shows around and was a real focal point of Sky Television, now its not even in the top 10 shows (by means of viewers), not by a long shot.

So what went wrong?

Firstly yes I know everything gets popular and eventually trails off (proof of that is Buffy the Vampire Slayer or South Park) but I don't think that the main reason Raw just isn't the show it used to be....

Firstly I would say lack of competition really is not helping the WWE. Just look at the facts in 1999 WWE Raw was pulling 6&7 million people in US and WCW Nitro was pulling 4&5. That?s roughly 11 million people a week watching wrestling in 2002 WWE Raw (by 2002 WCW had been bought out by WWE) was pulling 3 million a week, are the other 9 million just all switching off their tvs or missing their favourtie show each week by accident, course they're not!

Here are my three problems with Raw, how the WWE can quick fix them and how they can long term fix them.

1. WWE are using their older performers too much in the main event. This year (2003) the WWE are plugging millions of dollars into old performers like Rowdy Roddy Piper, Hulk Hogan, Kevin Nash, Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair... the list goes on. Now I m sure their entertaining to watch and can OCCASIONALLY perform on a really high standard but where does this leave the wrestling world in 2 years? Already most of the old guys who headline the PPV's and are the focal point of WWE Raw aren't delivering and putting people off. For example Kurt Angle vs Brock Lesnar was far less hyped than Stone Cold vs. The Rock, who both only wrestle about twice a year!

Quick Solution: Bring younger talent into the storylines involving the older talent (which I know the WWE have begun to do) BUT then drift the older tale
nt out of the lime light at the same time.

Long Term Solution: Easy. Invest more into the younger talent and give them more pushes.

2. Raw hasn't got the attitude is used. This is a very strange issue but I think its because of two things that are very similar, one Vince McMahon cannot think up a new direction for the company (which it needs) and because of this old storylines are being dug up (just look at Raw its the same Boss vs Worker feud each week).

Quick Solution: Hire new writers with REALLY good skills to sort out the mess thats the WWE is.

Long Term Solution: Just as Vince McMahon did on national tv in 1997 the WWE needs a turn around. It needs a new image, and alot of money to be invested into it.
It may take 6 months before any drastic results are seen but it needs to be done so as in the long run WWE will boost the rating back up to 6.0?s and 7.0?s

3. The WWE are being lazy! I mean that. Senseless booking takes up more air time than anything else. Unmasking Kane! Where was the sense in that? For six years we have been told Kane's face was hideously burnt, then he whips off the mask and he has a face of any other 40 year old!

Quick Solution: Send the writers on a common sense and motivation course.

Long Term Solution : Go back over existing story lines making sure that all unanswered questions or mistakes are corrected. Also if needed admit to the audience (preferably in one go) they have made a mistake.

Conclusion:

Despite all these negatives Raw still is one of my favourite shows on TV, and I watch it every week. If you do like wrestling, comedy, sport or live entertainment then this is still a good show to view, but unless drastic measures are taken WWE will never reach the mainstream heights it did 5 years ago.

Summary: