WWE Smackdown: The Recipe for Disappointment

I can't believe WWE has gone this long wasting everyone's time with Friday Night Smackdown.

Smackdown is referred to as the “B” show for the company and it always will be. RAW is the flagship show, has the history and is a large part of what made WWE. The problem is, Smackdown is referred to a as the “B” show, but it isn't that high up in the alphabet when it comes to the overall product.

I can't say the show is a total failure, because it competes well for its night and time slot. It's a bigger fish of variety for a younger audience in a smaller pond of nothing on Friday night television. WWE has to decide if they want to win small battles of 2.5 ratings on Friday nights or better the overall product to add 100,000 on every pay-per-views buys. Last time I looked, PPV buys are where the real money is at.

This is one of the two roots of the problem. WWE likes being able to put up the “Did You Know” stat every week with how successful Smackdown on Syfy was compared to its competition.

A big issue with Smackdown is the fact that it's taped. Wrestling content and fans on the Internet only grows as time goes on. Every Tuesday night, spoilers are all over the web. Even if you don't read the spoilers, the track record of what Smackdown gives you on a weekly broadcast, you can tell it lacks that anything-can-happen environment.

I can turn on RAW with an excitement of who could show up or what could go down. If I turn on Smackdown I get distracted by the audience that is sitting very still and making a lot of noise.

Canned crowd audio, re-taped matches—it's all amateur hour. I'm not knocking the performers on Smackdown. Some great talents have been on that brand over the years, which makes this topic all the more frustrating. I'm knocking the progression, or lack thereof, in stories. It lacking the overall quality of stories.

Sure, RAW can have some poor weeks but at least you can view those poor weeks in an exciting, live environment with the rest of the world watching. Watching a poor Smackdown that was taped three days earlier is like someone playing a joke on you. The reality is I get paid from pro wrestling, so I can at least justify watching a boring taped episode. it's the general fans I feel bad for.

The other root to the problem with Smackdown starts at the top: it isn't viewed and treated as a top show.

Former WWE writer John Piermarini joined me on “Wrestling Reality” on TribLIVE Radio on July 13, 2011.

Piermarini said:

"Stephanie and Vince feel like the creative team is a team—it's not. The creative team is Brian Gewirtz, doing what he wants to do. He takes your ideas and if you're lucky he uses them. There were times he wouldn't travel, Dave (Kapoor) and I would write the show and that's when we got our stuff on TV. You got SmackDown, which was a little more of a team atmosphere. Everyone throwing their ideas together sitting at a table and then going with what they all agree with is the best product. At a certain time, SmackDown was a lot better than RAW and that's the reason."

Piermarini was speaking of a time from a few years ago, but that quote shows the importance in, the mind of the McMahon's, of RAW over Smackdown. As Piermarini said, the creative team getting to work as team favored the substance of wrestling, but the top people had their eyes on Monday nights.

There needs to be some consistency in effort. Either let the creative team be a team for both shows or get rid of having a 16-person team. Favoring RAW is fine, it will always be No. 1, but at least give Smackdown every chance to be the best it can be.

Air it live on Tuesday night—live every week on Tuesday will help. Not just one random week where we get a Christmas special in November, every week. It can't be live on Friday because for TV production, having RAW on Monday, packing up and then going back out for a Friday production would be a nightmare, especially on weeks of a Sunday pay-per-view.

Live Tuesday night on USA Network—Syfy is too small, too niche. Everyone knows dating back to the Monday night wars that you can find wrestling on Monday nights on USA. So have wrestling now on Tuesday nights as well.

WWE is finally moving toward ending the brand split. RAW is a “SuperShow” and features stars from both brands. This is great for guys like Daniel Bryan, Sheamus and Mark Henry. The trouble is, their stories can be furthered on the big time show of RAW, magnifying how Smackdown is that much more inferior in the overall content they deliver.

Stars appearing on both shows needs to go both ways. The brand extension made sense when WWE bought out WCW. ECW was created and there was large crop of talent to fit in. This isn't the case anymore. WWE doesn't need to to try and have two solid, separate rosters. It's hard enough to get one.

Trying to create brand loyalty and manufacture competition between the two brands doesn't get the job done. Screw bragging rights, screw the battle royales with red shirts and blue shirts.

No matter how many drafts they do, where they try to have Smackdown come out on top, it never lasts. Injuries, releases and eventual switches happen and the Friday night show is always suffering from a thin roster.

The first couple years, Smackdown was very entertaining. It was taped for Thursday night but still had big stars and big moments. This was during a time where WWE just couldn't miss. The business was hot and there were major stars. Smackdown could afford to swim on it's own and compliment Monday Night RAW. Today, it can barely tread water.

With the current situation of a taped Friday night Smackdown for younger kids and minorities—WWE might serve that demographic, but Smackdown being a new word in the Urban Dictionary is more meaningful than any of the week-to-week content.

Follow @JustinLaBar