Sometimes, I don’t think WWE is stupid. I think they’re justly badly informed.
Every aspiring .net wrestling columnist has attempted to make the same point in the last month: the RAW/SmackDown! feud doesn’t work, because it’s unbelievable the wrestlers would have such strong feelings about their brand, with many of them having been on the other show in the recent past. I’m not arguing their wrong, although I think it’s worthwhile to take it case by case for a moment
Should they have a strong affinity for their current show?
SmackDown!
JBL: his career peak has come on SmackDown, so Yes.
Mysterio: never a part of RAW. Yes.
Lashley: never a part of RAW. Yes.
Batista: his ascension happened on RAW, and he’s really been The Man on SmackDown. He really shouldn’t have a strong preference either way, but I think since he’s the top guy on SmackDown, he’s got take it upon himself to be the leader. Yes.
Orton: Big career wins happened on RAW, Undertaker notwithstanding. No.
(Eddie would’ve been an easy Yes. Christian would’ve been a No. Matt would be a Yes.)
RAW
HBK: never been a part of SD!. Yes.
Chris Masters: never been a part of SD!. Yes.
Kane: never been a part of SD! (I think). Yes.
Carlito: Carlito’s been on both shows, been on the same position on both shows, hasn’t particularly cared. No.
Big Show: Too recent of a jump. No.
7-3. Not bad. Should be better.
Anyway, my point isn’t that the angle makes sense – let’s go with the concept that brands mean nothing more to wrestler than what days they work, what day they’re on TV, and what color shirt they wear to meetings, and work from there.
Any hack writer can cite this and say “this premise doesn’t work at all! I can’t believe they’re doing this.” See, I just did. It doesn