Why Dual-branded PPVs are great news.

[AegonTargaryen]

It just occurred to me how SDL's Fastlane is really just a drab event that's just there because it's February/March and SDL needs one more STOP before the real deal, the real feuds happen at WM, especially AJ Styles vs Shinsuke Nakamura.

This got me thinking. Not much on the card seems spectacular, barring the fresh Orton vs Roode match, supposing Jinder isn't thrown in the mix. Shinsuke Nakamura is in all likelihood not even going to be there, or at best in a meaningless "gain momentum" match against Mojo Rawley.

Now, what if the dual-branded PPVs were already ON!?

Fastlane is instantly transformed into a must-see 4-match half of the Elimination Chamber(or call it what you will- personally I prefer No Way Out).

Corbin and Ziggler have already been thrown in the WWE title feud and thus we have an awkward "fatal five way".

Shinsuke is doing NOTHING. Randy Orton is rushed into the US title match/feud against Roode, which could've been saved for Wrestlemania.

What IF:-

Either AJ Styles defends against Ziggler, Sami Zayn, Kevin Owens, Shinsuke Nakamura, AND Randy Orton

while Bobby Roode defends the US title against Corbin, or Jinder, or BOTH in a triple threat,

OR AJ Styles defends against either Jinder or Corbin

and Ziggler, Zayn, KO, Nakamura, Orton, Roode, and either of Jinder/Corbin enter the chamber to determine the number one contender for the WWE title at Wrestlemania.

Add to this a women's match and a tag title match and we have a solid Elimination Chamber PPV, also including 4 of the best matches Raw has to offer, including the elimination chamber match.

[Also, IMO, women participating in HIACs and Elimination Chambers is a big JOKE, even at the expense of me being labelled an MCP, a misogynist or whatever. (Stephanie might put forth her political and personal agenda in the name of WOMEN's revolution all she wants, but women are and will always be secondary, just a small ASPECT or wrestling, just like the cruiserweights). In my defense, I'll say that putting the cruiserweights in an Elimination Chamber is a big JOKE too, and they're MEN. ]

So there's no question of there being more than TWO chamber matches.


Granted, this would make the show 4 solid hours long, with some solid wrestling, and 1 hour pre-show.

But would you rather not have ONE stop before wrestlemania whether you call it Fastlane, Elimination Chamber or whatever, than have two lacklustre shows which amount to a good 7-8 hours ?

Personally, I'd have preferred an Elimination Chamber match involving the accumulated talents of Sami Zayn, KO, Ziggler, Nakamura, Styles and Orton. It's like the Smackdown SIX consisting of SHOW-STEALERS AND WRESTLERS.

And even the Raw matchup seems to be intriguing AF with the inclusion of Reigns, Cena, Rollins, and Strowman.

This is so much better than the times when we had to endure the likes or R-truth and Santino Marella in the chamber.

Your thoughts?

 

[Psykohurricane55]

The problem with having Dual brand PPV, and i mention that on another thread, is that all the shows will look the same since and the same guys will get all the opportunities. Yes, some cards over the past 2 years have been lackluster at best, not really because of the card but because of the fact that they had no time to build proper feuds in between PPV.

Imagine, if they would have use the formula they used during the first brand split. Having 12 PPV a year, 4 dual brand, 4 for raw and 4 for smackdown or you could have done 6 dual brand ppv (Rumble, the February PPV, Mania, MITB, summerslam and survivor series) and 3 for raw and 3 for smackdown and you alternate between those which would give april, july and october for raw and may, september and december for smackdown, that way you get time to build feud for those single brand ppv while you still build up main event stories for the dual brand. So the undercard, still has something to look forward to three times a year and you don't get tired of seeing PPV card with the same guys all year long.

In the end, i always been in favor of seeing new faces on PPV, guys that normally would get a chance to be seen on PPV because all the upper mid card guys are taking all the spots on every PPV. So, i feel this will hurt WWE in the end because all the shows will look alike and some fans might just stop their subscriptions to the network and resign to the network during mania season.

 

[d_henderson1810]

The problem with having Dual brand PPV, and i mention that on another thread, is that all the shows will look the same since and the same guys will get all the opportunities. Yes, some cards over the past 2 years have been lackluster at best, not really because of the card but because of the fact that they had no time to build proper feuds in between PPV.

Imagine, if they would have use the formula they used during the first brand split. Having 12 PPV a year, 4 dual brand, 4 for raw and 4 for smackdown or you could have done 6 dual brand ppv (Rumble, the February PPV, Mania, MITB, summerslam and survivor series) and 3 for raw and 3 for smackdown and you alternate between those which would give april, july and october for raw and may, september and december for smackdown, that way you get time to build feud for those single brand ppv while you still build up main event stories for the dual brand. So the undercard, still has something to look forward to three times a year and you don't get tired of seeing PPV card with the same guys all year long.

In the end, i always been in favor of seeing new faces on PPV, guys that normally would get a chance to be seen on PPV because all the upper mid card guys are taking all the spots on every PPV. So, i feel this will hurt WWE in the end because all the shows will look alike and some fans might just stop their subscriptions to the network and resign to the network during mania season.

This "giving everyone a chance on PPVs" has never sat well with me. I feel it is like what schools do now with giving every child a "participation" award so that no-one feels that they missed out.

I think PPV spots need to be "earned" a bit. This goes back to another thread I wrote where I said that the death of kayfabe now means that we all know that wrestling results are predetermined, so fans don't act like the guys on top have "earnt" their spot.

Besides, if you think everyone should be given a go, then why not include NXT matches in that mix.

In fact, I wouldn't mind seeing the regular PPV structure being set out like this:-

-Two RAW matches
-Two SD Live matches
-Two NXT matches
-One "205 Live" match
-An extra match, which would be where RAW, SD and NXT getting a "third" match, one brand every match on a rotation basis getting a "third" match.

Also, if you did this, then the people on PPV would be decided. Have them all be title matches, such as :-

-RAW would have a Universal Title match, and either a Women's Title, IC Title or Tag Title Match
-SD Live would have a WWE Title Match, and either a Women's Title, Tag-Title or U.S. Title match.
-NXT could have an NXT World Title match, and either a Women's or Tag Match.
-205 Match would be for the Cruiserweight Title.

So, each PPV would be a title holder and their challenger at the time. That way, everyone has "earned" a shot. Also, those who don't get on PPV regularly might pop up in a Tag Match for example e.g. Cesaro might have never got a Universal or WWE Title match, but now being Tag Champs with Sheamus, he would be PPVs whenever the Bar are either champions, or challenging.

This would make PPVs like they used to be, where every title was on the line every month (no more of this Universal Title not being defended some months BS). Also, everyone would have "earned" their spot story wise, as they are either a champion or a challenger. It would be like "Night Of Champions" every month, but given long enough, most of the roster get a title shot somewhere along the line. It don't want an unannounced R-Truth versus Mojo Rawley match, for example, with no build, just to give two guys on the roster "their moment".

 

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

We had our own thread for this but here comes another one, when that opinion could have been posted there.

Ok. The only reason they are doing dual branded PPVs is because they will turn SD into the B show and move everyone to RAW. They will have Nak as WWE champion but they dont really have faith in him to hold the brand on his own. Hence they throw the rosters back together for their PPVs. Ticket sales were also down and let's be honest. SD ppvs werent really anything special this year. Of course all of that could change if they had stars of equal star power on each brand. But they'll keep the big boys on RAW.

That's fine. Lets look at the positive side of things. At least each PPV will feel special.

But the downsides far outweight the upsides. First of all, they have nine championships. Say goodbye to most pf them being on PPVs.

Secondly, say goodbye to women's feuds that dont include a championship.

Thirdly, say goodbye to undercard talent.

Fourth, prepare for 4 hour shows every month. Thats insane.

Fifth, say goodbye to midcard matches being given time to shine. Like New Day vs Usos.

The only upside as I said is that every PPV will look special and the TV shows will most likely increase in match quality. Hopefully.

 

[King Patrick Star]

I prefer having one dual branded pay per view each month, but keep the brands and rosters separate. If I go a step further, I’d like to see every pay per view using the Night Of Champions format. Each pay per view should have 9 Championship Title matches. This will drive ticket sales up, for the simple fact that every time you go to a pay per view, you know you’re going to see 9 Championship Title matches. So if you’re a Champion or a challenger, then you’re on the Sunday show. If not, then you’re not. They can solve personal feuds on Mondays and Tuesdays.

 

[Spencesc11]

No reason to carry any 205 Live or NXT matches on the PPV's they have their own shows. Start Preshow at 7pm
Run PPV from 7:30pm to 11:00pm

Raw - 4 matches (3 men's, 1 women's)
Smackdown - 4 matches (3 men's, 1 women's)

8 matches total with 210 minutes gives you a solid 20 minutes/match plus 50 minutes of promos and stuff. This would work fine and it eliminates garbage filler matches that the brand only PPV's have that aren't even good enough to main event Raw or Smackdown.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

I liked separate brand PPVs and too many PPVs. I could pick and choose what I wanted to watch live or after if others gave it enough praise. I'm afraid with less PPV content and opportunity we are being cheated out of some terrific matches. At least the fourth hour gives some opportunity that wasn't there a couple of years ago but I struggle to think why I would want to go to a four hour event or sit through a four hour event every month. Then again, that is not really fair since I wasn't going to three hour events and wasn't watching the three hour events live anyway.

But I guess what is really annoying me in the back of my mind is how Raw still has three hours to fill, SD has two, and I'm not sure they have enough to fill that time when so much isn't building to a PPV. Maybe we will get more payoff and story for the lower and mid card on the broadcast shows. That would be nice. Then every monthly PPV can be Roman focused. <<sarcastic yeah!>>

I'll live with it but I'm pessimistic.

 

[Ceen]

They are good? Rlly? They make both World titles look like they are not as THE TOP Title in WWE.
Just give us one of each, as before the Brand Split. But just keep divisions on each show