A Mix Of The Past and the Present

[Little Jerry Lawler]

The consensus is that the WWE has too many PPV's as evidenced by Hell in a Cell coming Suinday just two weeks after Night of Champions. Back in the day, Raw and Smackdown had their own PPV's which were on average mediocre for the most part because there weren't just enough good people on the roster to fill out a 3-hour event. I have two parts to my solution to try to make everyone happy.

Part 1
Eliminate most of the gimmick PPV's such as Fatal Four Way and Hell in a Cell because HIAC isn't what it used to be and should only be used in certain circumstances. For example, HHH vs. Orton in 2009 would have been perfect for the Cell but people weren't getting tired of that feud. Here would be my lineup:

January: Royal Rumble
February: Elimination Chamber
April: Wrestlemania
May: Extreme Rules
June: The Great American Bash
July: Money In The Bank
August: Summerslam
September: Night of Champions
October: Vengeance or Unforgiven
November: Survivor Series
December: TLC

You would get ample time to build storylines and eliminate the rushed feeling some storylines receive because of the short amount of time.

Part 2
When the brand split started, both titles were defended on every PPV for the first half of 2003 and I believe stopped at Vengeance if I'm not mistaken. Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam, Night of Champions, and Survivor Series can have both world titles defended. What I thought about doing is that for the other PPV's, alternate between world titles. For instance, the main event of Extreme Rules would be for the WWE title and the main event of The Bash would be for the WHC title.

You can have the midcard titles and the tag team titles defended at each PPV. I don't know if the fans or you for that matter would be a proponent of one world title being defended but for most cases, you can have two months to build up a feud for a title.

So do you like my plan and if not, what can be changed or is the current PPV schedule just the way it has to be?

 

[Mustang Sally]

I like your plan, especially the idea of giving storylines more time to develop.

The notion of not having PPVs at all in some months appeals to me, too. For instance, you have nothing in March and I think that's good. I might suggest eliminating MITB (the concept is growing old, especially since the winner winds up taking the title every time) and keeping July open too. Also, they might consider getting rid of Vengeance in October, keeping that month free. The idea is to keep the breaks seasonal; that way, they've got a free month in Winter, one in Summer and one in the Fall.

That means only 9 PPVs in a year? So much the better!

I'm remembering back to the days of "In Your House" PPVs (which cost $9.95!) and realizing that the monthly shows are too frequent, thereby making them less exciting and forcing some storylines to rush too much.

 

[xavyer]

I think they should go back to the original 4 pay per views,royal rumble,wrestlemania,summerslam and survivor series,make those 4 hour pay per views,for two reasons,first,that gives them more than enough time to build some feuds or storylines the right way,and second,more superstars could participate in those pay per views,and something else,in stead of people getting tired of so many pay per views,they will be looking forward for them,at least that's my opinion.........

 

[S.J. Maximus]

Take out Elimination Chamber, and TLC. There should beno ppvs that are named after matches besides the prestigious Royal Rumble and the popular Money in the Bank matches. That being said, there should be one ladder match at the Money in the Bank ladder match with 4 people from Raw and 4 people from SD just like how the RR is 15 from Raw and 15 from SD. Just imagine how much less the RR would mean if there was another one later in the night, how much less epic would it be for the winner of the first one? Trust me on that. Feb should be No Way Out and Dec should be Armageddon. Other than that I completely agree with the rest of part 1 and all of part 2. It would be refreshing and it would make everything seem that much more special. Elimination Chamber matches and TLC matches would be a special treat instead of a forced occurence

 

[Dagger Dias]

Some good ideas here, LJL. I think that switching up which world title is defended at the less important shows is a good idea. It gives time for angles to develop. They already switch out which midcard titles are defended, so why not do it for world titles too? The divas and tag team titles could be switched around as well.

I do agree with eliminating Hell In a Cell. It's always bottom tier and having two weeks to build an entire PPV is insane. That match type should be one that is used for intense feuds, not on a PPV that screams lazy booking. I'd delete Extreme Rules too due to it usually being bad as well, it has not been "extreme" in years. My lineup would look something like this:



January - Royal Rumble
Neither brand's world titles defended. This one's about the Rumble!

February - Elimination Chamber
Both brand's world titles defended.

April - Wrestlemania
Both brands world titles defended.

May - Over the Limit
Raw's world title defended.

June - Money In the Bank
Smackdown's world title defended.

July - King of the Ring (This NEEDS to come back.)
Neither world title defended.

August - Summerslam
Both brand's world titles defended.

September - Night of Champions
ALL titles defended.

October - TLC
Raw's world title defended.

November - Survivor Series
Smackdown's world title defended.

December - Bragging Rights (brought back)
Champion VS Champion match concept eliminates world and midcard title defences.


This way the world titles are not always defended at the same show other than the Big 4 and Night of Champions, with some shows not having any world title matches at all. It also provides opportunities for the midcard titles to be defended when that brand's respective world title is being defended. The tag and divas belts are dual branded, so they could randomly switch which one gets onto the show. I think this would allow angles to develop in longer timeframes and it would force WWE into putting more time into Smackdown's world title during the month that Raw does not get a world title defence, and vice versa. This then leads to better matches and more fans buying the shows. Everyone wins.

 

[Robbo89]

I like the idea of eliminating a few ppv's and like a poster before said, have a few months PPV free (i.e the month before the big ones, WM, Summer Slam and Survivor series) these 3 PPV's need more than 3 weeks build to their matches and will create more buy rates because people dont want to pay the prices that we have to pay every month (twice a month in some cases) to watch the same storyline matches with no real development.

Take this month for example, we had NOC, then 2 weeks later its HIAC and the 3 weeks after (23rd October) its Vengence! 3 PPV’s in 5 weeks is ridiculous!

This would be a perfect calender year for WWE

January: Royal Rumble
February: New PPV
March: NOTHING
April: Wrestlemania
May: Backlash
June: Fatal 4 Way
July: NOTHING
August: Summerslam
September: Night Of Champions
October: NOTHING
November: Survivor Series
December: New PPV

This way, the big PPV's get time to build up the storylines, The Royal Rumble mainly focuses around the Rumble Match itself, you could even have an elimination match between 8 people at the December PPV to decide the 30th Rumble entrant.

The Hell In a Cell, Elimination Chamber, Money in the bank and TLC PPV's need to go! Fatal 4 way was a good concept because its the 4 top names from each brand fighting out for the title. The 3 named matches should be left for certain times! (i.e one money in the bank match at Wrestlemania, or one HIAC match every 18 months, one Chamber match every 2 years and one TLC a year) not 2 or 3 of each a year! and whats the deal with the TLC PPV? There is one TLC match, A Table match, a ladder match and a chair match! What is the point of a chairs match? you dont win by using the chair!
The table match and ladder match used to be great matches too in their own right not just thrown into a PPV because of its name! Why would John Cena vs Wade Barrett be any different in a No DQ match instead of a "Chairs match"

Hell in a cell used to be the end of a fued, not the beginning or middle of one! it used to be terrifying to whoever stepped into it, not just be a bit of decoration around the ring while the wrestlers carry on as if its not there!

 

[jaceynightheat]

I think they should go back to having 4 PPVs a year. Mania, Summer Slam, Royal Rumble & Survivor Series.

Have specials on NBC or other big networks sporadically through out the year. Saturday Night Main Event. Have Night of Champions be a special tv show or bring back the NWA/WCW name Clash of The Champions.

PPVs outside of Wrestlemania's Undertaker match & select others don't feel special anymore.

The Main Event of WM use to be something really big. Now it's pretty much the same match we see all year long. I also think no triple threats or fatal fourways, just one-on-one build ups.

 

[TheSammichEater]

I agree with the fact that there are too many PPVs, but I disagree to skip months. Sure it gives time for storylines to develop and give wrestlers breaks, but it takes MONEY from Vince. Vince is all about the money because business is about the money and the WWE is a business. I think going back to the Raw PPVs and SD PPVs would be the best bet and look similar to this:

January: Royal Rumble - Both brands and major titles defended before the Rumble. Losers enter the Rumble
February: NEW PPV - SD only
March: No Way Out - Raw Only
April: Wrestlemania - Both brands
May: NEW PPV - SD only
June: Money in the Bank - Both brands, both titles, one ladder match
July: The Great American Bash - Fits with 4th of July and should be Raw only
August: Summerslam - Both Brands, both titles
September: Night of Champions - Both brands and all titles
October: Vengeance - SD only
November: Survivor Series - Both brands and no title defenses. Go back to all Survivor Series matches
December: Armageddon - Raw only

Both shows will get equal amount of PPVs and extra time to build storylines

 

[therockiswwf]

I think going back to the Raw PPVs and SD PPVs would be the best

Oh good lord no. There are a few things wrong with this:
1. Lack of star power
2. Lack of matches that deserve to be on a PPV
3. They suck

I think the WWE would be fine if they did one ppv per month. I would move the Elimination Chamber up by one or two weeks to give Mania time for more build. I think that gimmick PPVs are fine, except for HIAC. I think that both World titles should be defended at every PPV, they are the most important titles and if they were defended less than other titles, it would make them look less special.