5 reasons why SmackDown going to 3 hours would be a bad idea

With WWE allegedly close to agreeing a $1 billion deal that would see SmackDown move to Fox on a Friday night, there have been rumors circulating that the show could run for 3 hours, just as Raw does on Monday nights.

Sportskeeda is the one-stop destination for latest WWE rumors and wrestling news.

Proponents of SmackDown going to 3 hours will no doubt point towards the increase in revenue from the TV deal and therefore the increase in money WWE will have to spend on talents wages, especially as their roster increases with superstars from NXT making the crossover.

But SmackDown as WWE's number 2 show will face problems if it is to extend by an extra hour. Many detractors point towards there being too much wrestling already on TV. With Raw, SmackDown, NXT and 205 live, there is already over 7 hours of wrestling each week, and when there is a pay-per-view, it brings this number up to over 10 hours.

The first temptation for any wrestling fan is to celebrate more wrestling on TV, but does more wrestling on TV really improve the product? Or does it have a detrimental effect? Does it help the talent? Or is it a hindrance?

Here are 5 reasons why SmackDown going to 3 hours would be a bad idea.

---

#1 Audiences have a short attention span

It has become harder to retain the attention of fans

Modern TV tends to cater to audiences with short attention spans. This should be no different for WWE, who like to think of themselves as being in the entertainment business.

One of the problems with moving to 3 hours from 2, is that it is a long time to be watching anything entertainment related. Most films are not even 3 hours long. To keep the audience attention for the entire 3 hours, in between adverts as well as trying to fill the show with good segments and wrestling, is very difficult.

Add the 3 hours SmackDown could possibly move to, to Raw's 3 hours, then you have 6 hours a week for WWE's main two shows. Ardent wrestling fans will no doubt keep up with this schedule, but the company could lose a lot of its fans purely for the length of each show.

Although Raw is currently 3 hours long, it has long been established as the WWE's number 1 show. SmackDown, however, is not and it could suffer because of this, especially if it is to air on a Friday night, as has been rumored.

#2 NXT proves that less is more

Less TV time hasn't hurt NXT

The first temptation is to think that more TV time can improve the quality of the product, as superstars will have more chances to show what they are capable of. But NXT programming shows that this is not necessarily true.

NXT's weekly show only runs for an hour, and on top of their Takeover shows, their airtime does not come close to WWE's main shows. Yet NXT's product is compelling for its in-ring action, as well as the stories they are able to tell, there is no need for them to extend their weekly running times in order to improve their shows.

Overexposure is a detriment for creating stars and adding an extra hour will make this worse for SmackDown. NXT has benefited from a shorter show with fewer matches, but crucially these become more meaningful because they are so scarce.

Having a longer show means more meaningless matches which will dilute the overall product. More promos and filler matches are more likely to damage a stars progression.

#3 Not enough depth on the roster

SmackDown has some top stars but lacks depth

SmackDown has some top talent on its roster, especially after the superstar shake-up in April. With the likes of AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, Shinsuke Nakamura, Daniel Bryan, Randy Orton, Charlotte Flair, and Asuka on their brand, SmackDown has the potential to be the best wrestling show on TV.

However outside of the top tier of talent just mentioned, SmackDown lacks the depth to justify going to 3 hours. There would have been a good argument for going to 3 hours if there was no brand split and Superstars could move freely between both brands. But shorter rosters mean that it is more likely shows will be filled with matches the audience has already seen and therefore dilutes the product.

As is the case with Brock Lesnar, the fact that he rarely appears gives his matches a more meaningful feel. With 3 hours to kill every week on SmackDown, it is less likely that we get that meaningful big match feel on WWE's events or at WrestleMania due to Superstars facing each other more regularly in order to fill time on each show.

#4 Raw has suffered from going 3 hours

Many people have called for Raw to get back to 2 hours

Many would argue that despite being WWE's number 1 show, Monday Night Raw has suffered as a result of moving from 2 hours to 3 in 2012. Even as a Monday night show, Raw has become diluted by excessive commercials, promos, interviews and pointless matches to fill the 3 hour time slot.

One of the main reasons that Raw is 3 hours and has been that way for the past 6 years is the increase in revenue it receives from the USA Network. Although this is clearly an incentive for WWE in terms of having more income to pay an ever-expanding talent roster, they must consider the bigger picture of developing talent. Streamlining the roster and cutting the amount of TV programming each week, can avoid overexposing talent and therefore develop talent more effectively.

Raw going to 3 hours has not increased the opportunities for younger talent and it wouldn't for SmackDown. Having a bloated talent roster, with not a great deal of depth, weakens the product overall, not only from overexposure but also a lack of focus on individual talents.

SmackDown could be affected even more negatively then Raw because it is not WWE's number 1 show and if it is moved to Friday then its viewership could decrease. Particularly after the brand split, moving to an extra hour show would be to SmackDowns detriment in terms of stretching its talent roster and diluting the entertainment value with endless commercials and filler promos.

#5 The show is too formulaic

SmackDown moving to 3 hours would exacerbate already existing issues

In its current format, turning SmackDown into a 3 hour show would not be a good idea. For quite some time now, the show has been too formulaic and script driven. Generally, this has made the show predictable and generic. Having 3 hours of this would not be particularly conducive to great television.

There could be a good argument for SmackDown going to an extra hour if the show was more chaotic and unpredictable. If it were less script-driven and more spontaneous, with stories told throughout the night, rather than constantly building to the next pay-per-view, then the shows would be much more worthy of the 3 hour time slot.

If WWE can hook the audience for a full show, then 3 hours is not too long. But all too often the shows are more driven towards building for the next pay-per-view, instead of trying to make each show memorable.

Even 2 hours can seem too much when shows use the same tried and tested formula, and so a move to 3 hours may be particularly challenging for spectators to sit through. If SmackDown were to become less structured and have a bit more continuity throughout the show, then there could be a good argument put forward for moving to 3 hours. But under the current formula, SmackDown could suffer from the increase in TV time and lose viewers.