10 Reasons a WWE Brand Split Is Both a Bad and Good Idea

The idea of the brand split returning to WWE has been a topic of conversation among fans ever since management did away with it, and the argument intensified when Shane McMahon returned to the company a few months ago.

It's one of those ideas where everyone has an opinion, and fans are usually split down the middle on whether or not Raw and SmackDown should return to being separate entities.

There are many arguments on both sides, but every point has a counterpoint in this debate. What some see as a positive, another fan will see as a negative. That's usually how it goes in pro wrestling.

This slideshow will look at both sides of the topic and lay out why bringing back the brand split would be both a good and bad idea.

Good: No More Overexposure

One of the biggest complaints that fans have about Roman Reigns is how WWE is shoving him down their throats, and part of the problem is how he often appears on both Raw and SmackDown in multiple segments.

By limiting him and other controversial stars such as John Cena, WWE would have to come up with better material for them so that each appearance carries more weight.

Some fans will never like certain Superstars no matter how hard they work or how good they are, but if someone isn't being force-fed to them twice per week, it would go a long way.

A lot of people on the roster have suffered from being overexposed too early. If they only have one show to appear on each week, it would make every appearance more special.

Bad: Less Exposure for Young Talents

The flip side of overexposure is some people not getting enough exposure. Countless deserving Superstars are being wasted when there are two shows they could be appearing on.

If WWE puts everyone on one specific brand, some of these people would have even less of a chance to get screen time.

Think about a guy like Tyler Breeze. He has a great heel gimmick, legitimate wrestling ability and enough charisma for two Superstars. If he can't get on TV every week now, how is he supposed to do it when the opportunities are cut in half?

There are always going to be benchwarmers who fans feel deserve better treatment, and splitting the brands could make the situation worse.

Good: Storyline Possibilities

WWE has been in need of a huge, game-changing storyline for years. It's been too long since we witnessed something change the face of the company, and splitting up Raw and SmackDown could be the answer.

The original brand split was OK, but it always felt like WWE never fully capitalized on the idea. The drama between the people running Raw and SmackDown fizzled out quickly.

Imagine what would have happened if Shane McMahon had defeated The Undertaker for control of Raw. The Authority would have been forced to make SmackDown its home.

We've seen McMahon vs. McMahon feuds before, but it's been a long time, and there isn't much time left. Vince is getting up there in years, Shane has other priorities and Stephanie might not want to be on television forever.

Giving the McMahon family one last war to fight would be a great way to pass the torch to a new generation.

Bad: Fewer Opportunities for Fresh Feuds

While separating Raw and SmackDown into two separate rosters would open up a few storyline possibilities, it would also end up limiting them.

Right now, Kevin Owens can feud with anyone on the roster, but if he is stuck on Raw with only half the roster, it cuts the number of possible storylines in half.

While the draft would likely return with the brand split, it only creates so many opportunities for new storylines on each show. How many times can John Cena and Randy Orton face each other?

Having the freedom to pair any two Superstars together for a program gives WWE nearly unlimited possibilities, even if management doesn't always take advantage of the situation.

Good: Possibly Adding More Titles

When WWE combined most of the titles in 2010, it solved the problem of not having enough talent to justify having two different world, women's and tag titles.

Nowadays, there are more than enough capable duos on the roster to fill two tag team divisions, and the women's division is in a lot better shape to handle two titles than it used to be.

That's on top of all the main event-level talent who could fight for a WWE and a world championship again.

The more titles there are to fight over, the more people get pushed. As long as WWE can find a way to make every championship important, having more belts will benefit everyone.

Bad: Too Many Titles Devalues Them

The downside to having two different titles for Raw and SmackDown is that one of them will eventually play second fiddle to the other.

The world title never felt as important as the WWE Championship. WWE tried everything, including putting the world title on Raw and the WWE title on SmackDown, but it never worked.

Whoever held the WWE Championship was the big dog, and everyone else was fighting for second place. The Undertaker, Batista and a few others made the big gold belt feel important, but guys like Jack Swagger and The Great Khali made it feel like a midcard title.

More titles might mean more Superstars being pushed, but it also means each title feels a little less special.

Good: Brand vs. Brand PPVs

One of the best things about the original brand split was watching Superstars from Raw battle the SmackDown roster for supremacy.

Shows like Survivor Series and WrestleMania would often feature these bouts, but there was one show that was devoted to Raw vs. SmackDown matches, and it was called Bragging Rights.

The pay-per-view was quickly replaced by Vengeance, but in the two years it aired, we saw some great matches between the company's top stars.

John Cena and Randy Orton headlined the first event with a memorable Iron Man match, and the next year saw Kane and The Undertaker add another chapter to their saga with a Buried Alive match.

Bragging Rights was a good concept with poor execution. Giving the winning brand a meaningless trophy we would never see again did nothing to increase the stakes, but if the PPV came back with the brand split, WWE could find a way to make it more exciting.

Bad: Brand-Specific PPVs

Splitting up Raw and SmackDown led to WWE making most of its PPVs exclusive to one brand, and it was one of the worst parts of the brand split.

At the time, we were paying roughly $50 every month to watch PPVs, and knowing we were only going to see half of our favorite stars made it harder to justify the cost.

That may not be the case anymore thanks to the WWE Network, but it would still suck to see some of the best wrestlers in the company only get a spot at every other PPV.

If the brand split returned, this is one of the few things nobody should even think about bringing back. It's just a bad idea.

Good: The Draft

The WWE draft took place almost yearly during the brand split, and it was one of the most interesting nights of the year because you never knew what was going to happen.

Everyone was shocked when Triple H went from Raw to SmackDown, and who could forget when Kurt Angle came to the new version of ECW?

Even the announcers were drafted from one brand to another sometimes. It was one of the few times WWE was able to shock the crowd during the brand split.

Shuffling Superstars around opened up the possibility for new feuds every year. In a time when originality was always an issue for WWE, being able to create new storylines once per year was vital to keeping the product fresh.

Bad: Raw Will Always Be the Priority

No matter how many big stars moved to SmackDown and no matter how much effort management put into making the show feel important, Raw was and always will be WWE's top priority.

It gets more viewers every week, is shown live instead of being pre-taped and is known as WWE's flagship brand.

This means anyone who appears on SmackDown will be looked at as less important than the Superstars who appear on Raw, and that doesn't help anyone.

WWE has done a good job with SmackDown since moving it to the USA Network from Syfy, but it still hasn't come close to reaching Raw's level of importance.

The brand split wouldn't help SmackDown become more important, especially if fans can continue reading spoilers online before the show airs.

All of these points could be made in the argument over whether a brand split is a good idea, but there are so many more. Do you think WWE should separate Raw and SmackDown? Why or why not?

Thanks for reading and follow me on Twitter: @BR_Doctor.