Skip to main content

Why three hours?

Simple one: why is Raw so damned long? It has clearly stretched the thin talents of the writing crew and burns out crowds, wouldn't it be easier to cut back it are they forced to maintain this awful practice by network insistence or for the extra ad revenue the hour gives them? It's just such an absurdly long time. Insight?

​USA wants three hours, so RAW is three hours.  Period.  There is literally no benefit for WWE at this point because they don't see the ad revenue anyway, and their entire business model as far as TV goes is based on TV rights fees.  So basically they have to bend over and take it.  ​

Comments

  1. This is why I don't watch raw any more. Three hours is a hell of a long time to watch one show, especially on a weekly basis. I usually just ff through it but then what's the point 'watching' a show you skip through the majority of. I just read the results and 9 times out of 10 don't feel like I've missed much.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's a shame that they are painted into this corner because three hours is too much for a non-sporting event; however, they could do a better job taking advantage of the time allotted.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Three hour thing aside since it's understood...why is there still an overrun? Is three hours not enough?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Competing against the Nitro overrun.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Three hour RAWs further paint WWE in a corner because it's impossible
    for them to do RAW/Smackdown tapings on the same night before an
    extended holiday break and/or overseas tour. Who is going to sit through
    5+ hours of wrestling on a Monday night?

    I think Scott nailed it when he said an hour and a half is a perfect time for a flagship wrestling show. Unfortunately, WWE would still make room for wacky skits in that hour and a half.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Someone should totally write about this.

    http://placetobenation.com/pro-wrestlings-disease-of-more/

    ReplyDelete
  7. We all moan about three hours of RAW, and rightly so, but what they really need to do is just ditch Smackdown altogether and just give NXT its own full television. I can't think of a single match, event, or moment of any consequence on Smackdown in the last two years. Completely pointless show, and they would probably save a shitload of money.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well, it's ONE of the reasons I FF through most of RAW anyway. I wonder how much it would actually improve the product if they went back to two.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Only if they could generate the 2-3 million viewers they get on Friday night, and I doubt NXT would be able to do so. Don't get me wrong, I'd LOVE to see that and I haven't given a shit about SM for almost a decade, but I don't see it happening.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thanks. Much appreciated.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I would much rather read that than my own.

    ReplyDelete
  12. they def should make the first hour a pre show than at 9 the action begins to give USA their 3 hours they desire.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Completely pointless show, and they would probably save a shitload of money."
    Except for the money they would lose on NBC decreasing their rights fees. So yeah, other than that it'd be a windfall.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I wouldn't mind if they do 3 hour Raws like 1-2 times a month. Do a 3 hour Raw the day after a PPV and the occasional special show (Old School Raw, King Of The Ring, etc.)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Maybe they should continue to do what they did this week, with
    the show fizzling out like an old SNME. People are tuning out in the 3rd
    hour anyway, why not put all the important stuff and the main event on at the
    start?

    ReplyDelete
  16. it could work, but Raw still sucked and the first 2 hours besides Cena was boring.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The thing is, if there wasn't a change a few months ago when WWE's TV contract was renewed, there's just not gonna be a change. That was their one opportunity to put everything on the table including the length of the shows. They could have insisted on moving back to a 2-hour Raw as part of the deal, and maybe they tried to but then NBC offered them less money and so WWE blinked. Who knows.

    But at this point nothing's gonna change and we're stuck with the 3-hour Raw. Which sucks.

    MAYBE, as others have suggested, they could get away with Hour 1 being some sort of pre-game show. Doubtful, as ratings would slide and then USA would throw a shitfit, but some sort of alternate programming in the first hour is the best we could hope for.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Even the matches are too long. It’s not like they’re
    cluttering the show up with too many skits, it’s more who wants to sit through
    15 minute Sheamus matches? Why is Seth taking 15 minutes to pin anybody? Crash
    TV is for the birds, but I’m starting to miss the days when TV matches were 3
    minutes long.

    ReplyDelete
  19. as you saw with tna it took 2 weeks to get their audience back and they switched nights. people will eventually realize that the show really starts at 9 and 8 is just a run down with ric flair and booker t jibber jawing.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Oh totally, I doubt the pre-game thing would fly in the end. I just don't really see what they can do now that their TV negotiations have passed. That was their chance to blow up the ship and start fresh, and they didn't do it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. nice article, the pic you used actually made me long for even what the ywere giving us 2 years ago. team hell no, cm punk w heyman etc.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment