No More Switching Brands in the WWE

Jared Farver@Farver24Correspondent IDecember 17, 2016

Before the WWE 2009 draft the superstars roamed freely. They could show up on whatever show they felt like.

This really defeats the purpose of having a draft, other than to get higher ratings.

Well, I guess superstars are acknowledged as either a Raw, SmackDown, or ECW superstar when they walk down the ramp and into the ring. That is the only time you can tell where they are from.

WWE really seemed to push the idea of where the superstar ends up after the draft is where they will stay. They went as far as having "last match on this show" matches. This left with either sentimental moments or some superstars ridiculing the fans and telling them they are leaving to a better place.

After the draft, WWE seems to have actually stuck to the idea of the superstars staying on their certain brand.

Although I hear that some superstars have been on other shows during "Dark Matches".

I think this is a really good idea for WWE to use. I hope they aren't just using this style for a couple of weeks and then go back to the old style.

Here are a few of the reasons for keeping the brands separated:

First, it would give a good opportunity for up-and-comers to make a name for themselves. They have to compete with a dozen veteran superstars to get in front of the cameras.

Everyone on B/R wants at least one mid-carder moved into Main Event status. This would be a great way for them to reach that kind of stardom.

Guys like Shelton Benjamin, MVP, The Miz, The Colons, and John Morrison could get a lot more time, both on the mic and in the ring, with the brands being separated.

Secondly, it would make a stronger chance for better and more interesting feuds.

Superstars could would work with their opponents longer and make it more believable. The feuds would also be more thought out and developed.

Instead of throwing together matches, Kane vs. CM Punk at Backlash, many more feuds would have a good build up to them.

We wouldn't have to watch a recap of a feud on the other shows because they would need to use time for building up their own feuds.

Thirdly, the PPVs would be better than now.

I believe that the PPVs would go to the old style, where one brand has their very own PPV and the next month it belongs to the other brand.

Raw would get a PPV full of just their superstars with a few matches from ECW once a month. Then the next month SmackDown would have a PPV with just their superstars and a couple matches from ECW.

This would give some superstars more PPV experience.

ECW superstars would get more of a chance to make a name for themselves and be seen by more of an audience.

Of course for the top PPVs every show would send some of their superstars to it.

My fourth and final reason is simple. It would make the superstars want to be on the better show.

Every superstar wants to be on the highest watched show. So, if they can only be on one they would try to make it the best show for the WWE.

This would lead to each show trying to get a better rating and it would be entertaining to watch another ratings battle.

This would then lead to every superstar giving it their all and having great pride in their brand.

What do you guys think of the WWE keeping the brands separated? Is it a good idea or do you like seeing the top superstars three times a week?