In the pandemic era of wrestling, the episodic format on both WWE RAW and SmackDown has considerably changed to ensure that the interest towards the overall product remains the same without a live audience.
WWE fans can't help but compare the two shows in terms of quality. Here, we will be looking at why the Blue brand might be better in several aspects when compared to Monday Night RAW.
Of course, some people may prefer the Red brand over SmackDown, and they are always welcome to comment on their opinions below. With that in mind, here are five things WWE SmackDown does better than RAW.
#5: WWE SmackDown has fewer filler segments than RAW
WWE fans have always said that watching a SmackDown episode feels less of a chore than tuning in for three hours of Monday Night RAW.
Like any other long-running show, WWE SmackDown has been through many ups and downs. But in recent times, it feels like SmackDown's creative team has been using the two-hour runtime to their favor every week.
The Blue brand has achieved this by showcasing main storylines which are then addressed on a frequent basis throughout a single episode. RAW has done the same in recent memory too. However, SmackDown is a two-hour show, so there is little to no room for filler content as a result of this booking technique.
Some of the least important aspects of SmackDown, like King Corbin's ransom, affect the creative direction of other stars on the same brand.
Otis' current arc on SmackDown is an entertaining part of the show on a smaller scale. Mr Money in the Bank has been featured in several multi-man tag team matches. Simultaneously, there is a mini-storyline where The Miz and John Morrison attempt to steal his MITB contract every week. Even though all of this sounds a bit silly, it comes across as more entertaining than WWE's traditional way of putting filler matches together.
Whereas on RAW, writers tend to book multi-man matches together in the most standard and uninteresting ways possible.