There Are No More Pay-Per-View Grades

[Danmen001]

As we all know all the PPVs are tri-branded. Now I want to make this point because people seem to be saying that the PPVs still have an A or B grade. I still see people saying, "Why are they wasting this match on a B PPV?" I felt the need to put a stop to it, there are no more PPV grades since the Tri-Branded PPVs. With the exception of Wrestlemania and the Royal Rumble, everyone of the WWE PPVs is on the same level.

Now as I said above, people seem to be saying why waste this match on this PPV, but there is still nothing particularly special about a particularly PPV. So why would you wait until these so called better PPVs. If the PPV is so bad, maybe this great match will get it some buys.

The exceptions are Wrestlemania and the Royal Rumble. Wrestlemania because it's the biggest PPV of the year, no arguments and it sells out stadiums of 75 odd thousand people. The Royal Rumble in my opinion is excepted as well because of the 30 Man event.

So next time you feel the urge to say that one PPV is a better grade than another, stop and think. Please. I have heard it enough.

 

[a7xoff]

I'm not a big fan of the whole every PPV is tri brand idea. To me it really ruins a lot of things. One thing is storylines. Storylines have seemingly been realitivly short since the tri brand PPV's started. Back when Raw was the only show to do Backlash, By the time Judgment Day came around for Smackdown, the storylines Smackdown had going were generally coming to a close and the feud up to the PPV was really good. Now you have so many PPV's for all the shows that your getting 2 and even sometimes 3 matches on a PPV per feud. It's ridiculous. I agree that there is not more PPV grades since they are all bascially the same. Of course Wrestlemania and the Royal Rumble will always be special, but as far as Survivor Series and Summerslam... I view them just the same as Backlash and No Mercy now. They are all the same so if you want to give grades give the Rumble and Mania an A and the rest B...

 

[Garrett]

The A PPV's are the big ones, the ones that have more tradition and normally get a higher buyrate. So that would be Survivor Series, Royal Rumble, SummerSlam and of course WrestleMania or in TNA Lockdown, Slammiversary and Bound For Glory. I do think you should have some PPVs more important that others as it makes the matches on that show seem more important. The WrestleMania main event always seems like something special because of how the PPV is treated.

 

[justinsayne]

What on earth are you talking about, of course there are still A & B PPVs, as stated before WM, SummerSalm, Survivor Series, & the Rumble, these PPV are better than the others and deserve bigger matches that's what makes them special, Summer Slam is arguably the second biggest PPV of the year, hence the reason they call it ' the biggest blockparty of the Summer' basically the WM of summer, Survivor Series is known for the Elimination match gimmick that none of the other PPVs do, and the Rumble of course for the 30 man Royal Rumble match which starts of the road to WM, each of these PPVs off something more than the other PPVs we get, which are generally just your basic PPVs for the most part

 

[PDecicco]

I agree with no more A or B classifactions for PPVs, and I've felt this way for a while. I pay the same money on every PPV excpet for 'Mania which is more.

Now I don't mind paying for a PPV, even if it is pricey, but I feel every PPV should be treated as an equal if I'm paying the same amount for each one.

When WWE had the "In Your House" shows which were cheaper and not as long as a WM, Rubmle, SummerSlam,KOTR and Survivor Series we had "B" shows.

But when Vince decided each PPV was 3 hours and were annual events he eliminated any sort of classification, except in the event of Mania.

No Mercy, No Way Out, Unforgiven, Great American Bash, and countless others have been recognizable PPVs for years at this point, there's no reason they should be treated less than Survivor Series which rarely has its traditional SS match anyways.

 

[Haner388994]

I don't really care about the PPV grades. I do think that the four main PPV's of the year should be different and bigger than the others. These four should obviously be Survivor Series, Summerslam, Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania. All of these PPV's are the PPV's that people wait for all year. I guess you should keep grades for the big PPV's but, not as much for the smaller PPV's.

 

[Shocky]

Of course there are still A and B pay per views. If there wasn't a difference, then why is there such a noticeable difference with hype leading into the Big Four, the actual atmosphere of the arenas of the big 4 being more intense, and quite frankly, guys bringing their A games to the big 4 pay per views.

The other pay per views are just crap. There are only a very rare few that are actually worth watching where you don't know the outcomes of the matches before they are even announced. Survivor Series is probably the weakest of the big 4 pay per views, but still usually better then any of the other pay per views.

Storylines end and begin at Summerslam, Wrestlemania, and the Rumble. Big Storylines. Those pay per views are nearly impossible to accurately predict, because something big usually happens at all of them.

 

[Tim]

There are still A and B grades. If there weren't why would people say that some matches have a Wrestlemania feel to them when they are put on an Unforgiven card. The whole tri branded ppvs thing is a stupid idea. With single brand ppvs, most wrestlers were in a feud. Even if they were sometimes bad, at least there was variety. Now, it's more like "Oh, Edge vs Undertaker 436". If there were no ppv grades, then the creative team could have a much easier time as they could make any kind of match for any ppv, instead of leaving a high caliber match for Wrestlemania or Summerslam.