r.prince18
Dark Match Jobber
between royal rumble and wrestlemania? Do you think they should just bulid up the mania match in between those months and maybe move the EC ppv to another month?
Do you think WWE should stop doing ppv
- Thread starter r.prince18
- Start date
Unsold Bacon
Shucky Ducky Quack Quack
No.
HBKperfect23
Championship Contender
royal rumble, wrestlemania,summerslam,survivor series: thats it. Maybe an SNME or Clash a few times a year. PPV between Rumble and WM is a waste
r.prince18
Dark Match Jobber
I'm not saying cel iti'm saying move it to another month.
PlayTheGame
The Cerebral Assassin
no, why exactly do you think a ppv at that point in time is a waste?
Blue Chipper
Shapeshifting Humanoid
No.
xoxo French Kiss xoxo
Pourquoi?
I think one a month is good..... but if they had to cut back I think one every other month would be good.
Six a year would put them in a better place than none.
Royal Rumble in January
EC in March
WM in May
Summer Slam in July
Extreme Rules in September
Survivor Series in November
Cut out the BS, build better and more meaningful feuds and take the time to really develop and push talent.
Six a year would put them in a better place than none.
Royal Rumble in January
EC in March
WM in May
Summer Slam in July
Extreme Rules in September
Survivor Series in November
Cut out the BS, build better and more meaningful feuds and take the time to really develop and push talent.
Pay Per Ghost
What they f*ck happened in the thread section here
Stop doing. No.
But if they would skip a PPV before SummerSlam it would be ok.
I don't know what the fallout PPV's like Backlash and whatever-comes-after-SummerSlam bring in.
But here I can ask a question.
If we didn't have a PPV in February, would that make you watch Raw & SD more? As in you expect some shock or title change to come at EC like HBK superkicking Taker, Taker losing title, or Batista beating Cena for the title.
If we are left devoid of a shock result or setup PPV for Mania, would that make Raws and SDs more enjoyable and the booked surprises would then happen on TV?
But if they would skip a PPV before SummerSlam it would be ok.
I don't know what the fallout PPV's like Backlash and whatever-comes-after-SummerSlam bring in.
But here I can ask a question.
If we didn't have a PPV in February, would that make you watch Raw & SD more? As in you expect some shock or title change to come at EC like HBK superkicking Taker, Taker losing title, or Batista beating Cena for the title.
If we are left devoid of a shock result or setup PPV for Mania, would that make Raws and SDs more enjoyable and the booked surprises would then happen on TV?
Nice idea except the dates are wrong. Mania is always March / April. Why would that change? It would be easier to move EC.
Though the six PPVs will never happen.
Mr. Artistic guy
Better Off This Way
EC was my favourite WWE PPV last year. No from me.
King Patrick Star
K. O. T. R. 2007 - Team Undisputed
I like this plan. A few changes, if I don’t mind…
January – Royal Rumble
March – WrestleMania
May – King Of The Ring
July – SummerSlam
September – Night Of Champions
November – Survivor Series
With this format, the WWE can have Elimination Chambers, Extreme Rules, TLCs, Hell In a Cells, and any other match type at any of these 6 PPVs, without making a regulated schedule out of them. We can have feuds end in a Cell outside of October, or vacated Titles can be filled in an Elimination Chamber match before the Royal Rumble or after WrestleMania…or at WrestleMania. We can have TLC matches whenever, and not just around Christmas time. I’m not even going to get into Money In The Bank, you already know. Point is, stipulation should be just that, stipulations, and leave the themes to the traditions.
The problem with this is the WWE would lose out on half their PPV income…like I give a $#!+!!
Dr. Mantis Toboggan, M.D.
Dog The Bounty Hunter
no
xoxo French Kiss xoxo
Pourquoi?
I don't think they would actually lose out on half the PPV income.
They would have more time to build up to PPV, which would make for better feuds, better matches, and more meaning going into those matches at the PPV's. If the quality of PPV was better more people would watch, and they would make more money.
I know plenty of people who've had buyers remorse after watching a WWE PPV. (Survivor Series 2011) I also don't know anyone that buys every monthly WWE PPV. Cutting back on the amount of PPV's per year could actually increase viewers and buy rates because the quality of programming would be higher.
Yeah I don't know anybody who buys them every month either. When I was a kid (and kids are WWE's primary audience these days) if I would have asked my parents to spend over 40 bucks a month on wrestling they would have told me to go pound salt. Especially when there's already 4 shows of it a week between RAW, Smackdown, TNA, and ROH.
This Is My Name Thank You
Is a horrible poster.
no.
HBKperfect23
Championship Contender
Cena/Punk MITB was the best match of the year...at least that I saw. But this proves my point even more. I didnt order the ppv because it was a one match card. Only match I could name on the card. What if they spent the time and built every feud and had this at summerslam? Instead they hotshot the angle by rushing Punk back and having the rematch at summerslam. Now we have seen Punk/Cena at least 3x.