5 reasons why WWE SmackDown is now better than RAW

#1 SmackDown's two hours are better than RAW's three hours

You just heard the music on #Smackdown, now hear it whenever you want to acknowledge YOUR #TribalChief… @WWEMusic https://t.co/9boh5s5uY4 pic.twitter.com/aRql5IGTZ8

— Roman Reigns (@WWERomanReigns) May 8, 2021

SmackDown's two-hour events have always been better than RAW's since the Red brand's show became three hours long. The length of WWE's RAW shows have long been a reason for some of the WWE Universe's complaints.

WWE made the change several years ago and, since then, RAW has suffered the consequences. Three hours every week is a lot of programming to fill. While the Red brand has a huge roster, WWE's creative team is not known for its consistency.

Even if one week they manage to book an amazing show, the next week, they fall apart. The feuds and matches become repetitive, with a lot more filler segments than the show requires. Instead of giving the focus to stars who might otherwise not feature, WWE books the same big stars week in and week out.

SmackDown's two-hour events, next to these, have shown exactly why smaller shows might be the answer to WWE's problems. Tightly booked, each SmackDown event shows exactly what's necessary, and yet they also manage to make the best use of their roster.