The Harsh Reality Of WWE's Recent Improvements
Old habits die hard. About as hard as Ricochet.
Depending on your disposition, you might read that headline and groan - so cynical! - or wonder what improvements WWE have actually made.
In an effort to determine what makes a pro wrestling promotion function effectively, consider this brief criteria: an effective wrestling promotion should position marketable, over talent as important players in compelling week-to-week storylines that don't make the audience want to die.
Under that criteria, RAW has improved. Drew McIntyre is on a tear. Randy Orton and Edge are delivering a nuanced, believable, dramatic and harrowing programme that bleeds through the sheen of thick marketing polish. Erm. That's about it. But it's significantly better than Wild Card Rules and two-out-of-three falls matches and Ucey Hot and Shane McMahon, and so WWE has created quite the curve for itself. Genius. It's genius.
Look: RAW is an easier watch, the 50/50 repetition isn't quite as bad, Rey Mysterio and Kevin Owens are honest-to-God over babyfaces, and the dumb sh*t has been dumber. But really, this is infinite monkey theorem byproduct. WWE's roster is so stacked with unique generational talent and boasts such obscene resources that it is in fact a disgrace that the flagship shows are best described as "It's a lot better than last year - it's good a lot of the time!"
The general consensus is: SmackDown is at best coherent, if dry and lame, while RAW under Paul Heyman's watch has become an earnestly good wrestling show. Mostly.
WWE promoted Super ShowDown on Friday aaaaaaaaaaand it's gone.
CONT'D...(1 of 5)