3 reasons why WWE should end the brand split after WrestleMania 35, and 3 reasons they should not

SmackDown Live and Monday Night Raw are two separate entities at the moment, but should they remain that way?

Back in 2002, WWE was encountering a unique problem.

After years of the wrestling business being red hot due to the Monday Night War--which WWE won by purchasing their rival, WCW--the fan's interest seemed to be waning. Despite being the only major promotion in the USA, WWE had failed to keep many WCW fans on board when many of that promotion's major stars failed to show up in WWE.

Also, the mere fact that there was less competition led to WWE being complacent. In order to address these issues, WWE split itself into two separate brands, Smackdown and Raw.

The brand split existed for nine years, when it was dissolved in 2011. However, the brand split was re-visited in 2016, and the Universal and WWE Championships were created as each division's top belt.

Three years later, there have been rumblings that the WWE might be moving toward ending the brand split once again. Of course, there are always such rumblings, and they aren't to be taken as gospel.

But the speculation does raise an interesting question; Should the brand split be continued after WrestleMania 35's fallout and the pending debut of SmackDown live on Fox Network?

Here are three reasons why it should continue, and three why it should not.

WWE should keep the brand split #1: Fewer stars lost in the shuffle

Kevin Owens is a popular, talented wrestler who sometimes gets overlooked on WWE's massive roster. The brand split has given him more chances to shine

The WWE Roster is stacked from top to bottom with excellent wrestlers both just starting their careers and already established legends.

With names like Randy Orton, Rey Misterio, and Brock Lesnar all occupying spots on the roster, it can be difficult for other less tenured stars to make their mark.

The brand split has helped alleviate this situation somewhat, as it has allowed for more championships to be chased, and more space on the individual cards to allow wrestlers to perform. It has led to the elevation of stars like Ali and Kofi Kingston, who might not have otherwise gotten main event exposure.

Ending the brand split would create new headaches for WWE as they try to find a spot for everyone on one big roster, a daunting task indeed.

WWE should end the brand split #1: The different brands could confuse casual wrestling fans

WWE Fans at Raw

While WWE has legions of dedicated, hardcore fans who follow every move the company makes on both television and social media, the fact remains that a majority of their audience is considered to be made up of casual wrestling fans.

The casual wrestling fan doesn't go online to check Brock Lesnar's contract status, or to see who got chewed out backstage after their performance. They don't care about the non-kayfabe drama that plays out behind the scenes, and instead, only want to watch and enjoy the programs.

Many of the casual fans don't catch every single episode of SmackDown or Raw, and they can be confused as to why Daniel Bryan and Brock Lesnar aren't duking it out in the ring. Ending the brand split would make WWE more accessible to casual fans and to a new audience who is unfamiliar with their product.

WWE should end the brand split #2: The championships will have more meaning if they are recognized company-wide

The Universal and WWE Championships. Which has more prestige?

With the brand split, there are now two 'big belts' in the WWE promotion. There's the Universal Championship, the 'red' belt currently held by the Beast Incarnate Brock Lesnar. Then there's the WWE Championship, the 'eco-friendly' title held by Daniel Bryan.

So which title has more prestige? For a long time, the unspoken rule about WWE was that Raw is the 'main' brand, with the bigger stars, so by default, the Universal title should be more prestigious. However, the Universal Title has been held by part-time wrestlers almost exclusively for most of its existence, while the WWE Championship is defended a great deal more.

That's not the only title confusion, either. What about the mid card belts, the Intercontinental Championship and the United States Championship? Which of those is the more prestigious belt? And don't get us started on the Tag Team Titles!

For titles to mean something, they must be unique. Having two big belt champions, two mid-card champions, and two different tag team champions cheapen the titles overall, and ending the brand split would alleviate this problem.

WWE should not end the brand split #2: It allows for more variety in the product

Raw and Smackdown both have different overall styles and themes.

While Raw and SmackDown are both WWE shows and therefore have many concurrent themes, there are many ways in which they are different from each other.

In the early days, Raw was live and SmackDown was a taped show. This made SmackDown ideal for wrestlers like The Undertaker, who wanted to spend more time with his family.

Since the most recent brand split, SmackDown is also a live broadcast, but there are still differences in the product. Raw is the sensationalist program with big drama and massive over arcing plotlines. SmackDown is the program which focuses more on 'pure' wrestlers like AJ Styles and Daniel Bryan, and while there is drama it tends to be of a more personal level, like the intense feud between Styles and Samoa Joe.

If the brand split is ended, then the WWE will have to meld these different storytelling styles together, which will be difficult and leave some fans feeling alienated from the product.

WWE should end the brand split #3: Faux competition within the same company will never be as compelling as the Monday Night War

The Monday Night War lasted years and nearly led to the end of WWE, and did lead to the demise of WCW

The entire WWE Brand split is engineered to recapture the dynamic energy and interest that surrounded the much ballyhooed Monday Night War between WWE and WCW.

However, one of the main reasons the Monday Night War was so compelling is that it was a real 'war.' WCW and WWE were different companies whose goal was to put the other out of business or at least establish complete dominance in the ratings.

Because fans knew that there were real-world stakes in the rating war, they tended to be more emotionally involved in the product of both companies. This led to greater ratings and greater interest in the wrestling business overall, creating a boom period.

The current WWE brand split is artificial; both brands belong to WWE, who would never stand for either one looking weak or uninteresting. Therefore the brand split warfare feels forced and contrived, like the 'invasion' during the Survivor Series build up.

Ending the brand split will eliminate this problem and allow WWE to move forward.

WWE should not end the brand split #3: Even if it's artificial, competition is still good for business

Daniel Bryan's heel turn has made Smackdown Live more compelling.

While both SmackDown Live and Raw belong to the same parent company, they tend to have separate house shows and television broadcasts. This means that WWE can tell who is putting butts in seats and garnering the lion's share of the rating pie.

Wrestlers on Raw might be motivated to up their game and try a little harder if SmackDown gets higher ratings or critical praise, and the reverse could be true as well. In fact, many fans and critics believe SmackDown to be the more entertaining broadcast because the athletes know they are secretly considered the 'B' Show and try that much harder than their Raw counterparts.

If WWE ends their brand split--which is just starting to feel concrete and real to many fans--they are throwing away this benefit of internecine warfare.

There you have it; three reasons WWE should end their brand split after Wrestlemania 35, and three they should not end it at all. Do you like the brand split, or are you done with it? Please comment and let us know, and as always thanks for reading!