There've been a lot of great stables in wrasslin history, and there've even been some good ones in recent memory--myself I really liked the Jersey Triad (Bigelow, Kanyon, Page)-- and I'm usually quite happy when a new one appears. The operative word in that sentence, though, is "new". As Deion stated about repackaged stables in his thread-opening post, WWE never does another company's stables right. Dammit, they don't even redo their own groups right. For this reason I don't want to see a new Flock, Brood, Horsemen, DX, nWo, Freebirds etc.
On the other hand, while the gimmick isn't completely new, I'm quite happy to see the Anti-Americans, as long as they aren't pushed as the Hart Foundation 2002. Let the group stand or fall on its own merits and the quality of the members. I really do think, though, that Storm et al could use another high profile member (Jericho??), so long as Lance and Christian aren't reduced to the status of being merely warm bodies to fill up the numbers in the group. Test has never done it for me (sorry, BrewGuy)
I also think that AWArulz makes an extremely important point when he states that heel stables cannot job: they must dominate to garner, and keep, their heat. If they regularly lose, especially to one man, then they die on the vine
"Emotional feedback on timeless wavelengths, bearing a gift beyond price- almost free" -- Rush
I believe more people get Smackdown then RAW. I believe RAW has more "superstars" then Smackdown to begin with anyway. RAW also has the women's division for those that like to, quoting Rassmussen, "toast their loads".