How Wrestlemania and Raw Started Underlying Cycles In WWE's Product

[RIPbossman]

How WrestleMania and Raw Started Underlying Cycles In WWE's Product​

When wrestling fans discuss different title reigns, their lengths and numbers attributed to certain wrestlers, a question that arises is “Will Bruno Sammartino’s seven year WWWF Title reign ever be surpassed?” And almost always, the answer is no. They say today’s audience doesn’t have the patience for another seven year reign. And while that is true, most of the reason can be credited with how WWF altered their product, going back to 1985.

When WrestleMania was announced, the biggest wrestling extravaganza of all time, fans were lead to expect something big. And while the event arguably doesn’t stand the test of time, it delivered back then. It was a success, and while this was on closed circuit television, it started the successful concept for WWF called pay per views. Once Hulk Hogan, then reigning champion, beat Andre The Giant at WrestleMania 3, there was no possible challenger with more credibility. How do you sell WrestleMania 4? You vacate the title, and hold a night long tournament. The excitement of a new champion being crowned sells the show.

A cycle started where big storylines climaxed at WrestleMania, with significant parts happening at other pay per views. The Mega Powers exploded at Wrestlemania 5, and a big tag match involving Hogan, Beefcake, Savage and Zeus happened at Summer Slam. In what became an almost annual tradition, the WWF’s World Title changed hands at WrestleMania. Warrior beat Hogan, Hogan beat Slaughter, Yokozuna beat Bret Hart (and Hogan beat Yokozuna) etc. Fans expected something exciting and important in late March/early April. Title changes are naturally more exciting than titles being retained, which explains the aforementioned unofficial tradition.

WrestleMania, Monday Night Raw, and monthly pay per views started underlying cycles in the product.

As you all remember, before Monday Night Raw, all the WWE’s tv shows (Superstars, Challenge, Prime Time Wrestling, All American Wrestling) were based out of a studio with a host (Sean Mooney or Gene Okerlund) discussing various things. The live event report, ongoing feuds, upcoming pay per views, etc. Over the course of a show they brought us a few taped matches and some taped promos made by wrestlers in front of green screen backgrounds.

The overall purpose of these shows was not really to bring excitement, but really to draw out and develop storylines. (Saturday Night Main Event could be considered an exception, but this show was only on once a month, and after a while it was aired considerably less, so its overall contributions to the product lessened)

When Monday Night Raw started, the entire format of the WWF, and eventually the industry, was changed. The purpose of Raw was not to develop story lines over a long period of time, but rather to give the viewers excitement week in and week out. Raw was made the flagship show right from the beginning. Considering this and that most of the new footage for the WWF was coming from this show, it shaped the overall product of the WWF. The old style of developing storylines over a long period of time were now over. Raw was formatted to give shock value and be thrilling to the home viewer, and that is what WWF fans grew to want in a wrestling show.

It became rather difficult to promote these angles over a longer period of time considering that in order to deliver this “excitement” that the fans wanted, the wrestlers had to get in the ring and do their interviews and somehow make major developments in their feuds every single week. With so many “exciting” additional developments to these feuds, the storylines lacked their overall quality that they once had.

But that’s not necessarily a bad thing. During the Monday Night Wars is when I feel WWF programming really hit the mark with how Raw was structuring their shows. The structure was geared towards weekly excitement, not slow developments. A roaring boil, not a low simmer. In order to compete with Monday Nitro, WWF tried to give us something thrilling almost every segment. You could argue it came at the expense of well crafted narratives between good and evil, but it was made up for in the product becoming a non-stop rollercoaster ride.

When we watched Superstars or Prime Time Wrestling back in the day, we might see a sneak attack from one feuding wrestler to another, but more often than not, we got two separate interviews, each trashing the other. Overall, the product was more geared towards character development rather than plot advancements. Everything was more focused on wrestlers selling themselves rather than intricate plot twists.

The way most storylines work is that they make an emotional connection with the fan. The fans will then be connected with the wrestler through the many twists and turns that their character will take. This means they become exposed to that particular wrestler for a certain period of time over and over again. If the fans are going along with the wrestler through too many storylines , they become over exposed to the wrestler. This is when the wrestler starts to become stale and rather boring.

Now regarding monthly pay per views, they too made substantial alterations. There were four main ppv’s a year. This meant that there were usually only four main times when a feud could be culminated. Sometimes a rivalry would go on for two ppvs, which would span half a year. This means that during this time period, when we were emotionally connected with a top main event wrestler in some way, we saw them go through three-four emotional ups and downs, twists and turns in one year. There are only so many of these that a main event wrestler can go through before we begin to become tired of their character and feel that they start to become stale. But at the pace of the “Rockin Wrestling Era”, it was harder for a wrestler to grow stale due to the storylines being so few and far between.

Take a look at Hulk Hogan in 1987 (some of this was mentioned in the beginning paragraphs) Hulk Hogan focused on facing Andre The Giant at WrestleMania 3, then defeated his team at Survivor Series that year (there was no Summer Slam yet). He developed an alliance with Randy Savage, and Andre with Ted Dibiase. Hogan wrestled Andre to a double disqualification at WM 4, and teamed with Savage to defeat “The Mega Bucks” at the first Summer Slam. Then once friction started between them, the Mega Powers “exploded” at WrestleMania 5. A three year span, the Hulkster really went through two major programs: against Andre (with Dibiase eventually added in) and aligning with and going against Macho Man. That really wasn’t that much compared to today.

In the mid nineties, the ppv’s increased to twelve a year, meaning that a main event wrestler would now be going through more feuds a year. This meant that the shelf life of a wrestler became shorter, in that the time would come sooner that they would become stale and the fans would grow tired of them.

Look at John Cena in 2005. He started off focusing on winning the Royal Rumble, and came up short. He then won a tournament to challenge JBL at WrestleMania 21 for the WWE Title, and won both the tournament and the belt. Throughout the rest of 2005 on pay per view he wrestled JBL (rematch), Chris Jericho twice, Christian, Kurt Angle multiple times, Shawn Michaels, and had a Raw storyline with Eric Bischoff. While Cena continued to be a good draw through the next ten years, many fans grew tired of Cena, and within a few years considered him stale. (Reading through posts in the IWC, no longer the minority voice it once was, can show this to you.) In 2008 he was pushed to the backburner, losing in feuds to Triple H, JBL and Batista.

In Sammartino’s time, there were no pay per views. Fans didn't need thrilling plot developments on a consistent basis. They didn’t have these expectations. He and Bob Backlund being champion for years was reasonable then. Backlund’s character didn’t need to go through emotional, exciting incidents every week. There were no pay per view cycles, thus it took longer for fans to grow impatient with wrestling characters.

John Cena has been the face of WWE since 2005. But he hasn’t always been champion, and he hasn’t always had the most spotlight. Similarly, when once the ppv cycle started, Hogan took a year off from being champion, and for a while Ultimate Warrior was arguably getting more spotlight. This isn't Sammartino's era, the brightest stars will burn out if you're not careful.


The concept of WrestleMania, starting in 1985, has shaped the WWE product as we know it today. It was gradual, but it has started underlying cycles within the WWE product. It eventually lead to twelve pay per views a year, and once Raw started, the entire product moved at a much faster pace. WWF/E may have started sacrificing some quality storylines, but in my opinion, WWE Raw can be an incredible roller coaster ride (like during the Monday Night War). It has also lead to wrestlers becoming stale much faster than in Bruno’s era, but you could say that would have happened anyway, with people today having such short attention spans. Regardless, WrestleMania and Raw have changed the landscape of World Wrestling Entertainment.

 

[peter_midnight]

How WrestleMania and Raw Started Underlying Cycles In WWE's Product​

When wrestling fans discuss different title reigns, their lengths and numbers attributed to certain wrestlers, a question that arises is “Will Bruno Sammartino’s seven year WWWF Title reign ever be surpassed?” And almost always, the answer is no. They say today’s audience doesn’t have the patience for another seven year reign. And while that is true, most of the reason can be credited with how WWF altered their product, going back to 1985.

When WrestleMania was announced, the biggest wrestling extravaganza of all time, fans were lead to expect something big. And while the event arguably doesn’t stand the test of time, it delivered back then. It was a success, and while this was on closed circuit television, it started the successful concept for WWF called pay per views. Once Hulk Hogan, then reigning champion, beat Andre The Giant at WrestleMania 3, there was no possible challenger with more credibility. How do you sell WrestleMania 4? You vacate the title, and hold a night long tournament. The excitement of a new champion being crowned sells the show.

A cycle started where big storylines climaxed at WrestleMania, with significant parts happening at other pay per views. The Mega Powers exploded at Wrestlemania 5, and a big tag match involving Hogan, Beefcake, Savage and Zeus happened at Summer Slam. In what became an almost annual tradition, the WWF’s World Title changed hands at WrestleMania. Warrior beat Hogan, Hogan beat Slaughter, Yokozuna beat Bret Hart (and Hogan beat Yokozuna) etc. Fans expected something exciting and important in late March/early April. Title changes are naturally more exciting than titles being retained, which explains the aforementioned unofficial tradition.

WrestleMania, Monday Night Raw, and monthly pay per views started underlying cycles in the product.

As you all remember, before Monday Night Raw, all the WWE’s tv shows (Superstars, Challenge, Prime Time Wrestling, All American Wrestling) were based out of a studio with a host (Sean Mooney or Gene Okerlund) discussing various things. The live event report, ongoing feuds, upcoming pay per views, etc. Over the course of a show they brought us a few taped matches and some taped promos made by wrestlers in front of green screen backgrounds.

The overall purpose of these shows was not really to bring excitement, but really to draw out and develop storylines. (Saturday Night Main Event could be considered an exception, but this show was only on once a month, and after a while it was aired considerably less, so its overall contributions to the product lessened)

When Monday Night Raw started, the entire format of the WWF, and eventually the industry, was changed. The purpose of Raw was not to develop story lines over a long period of time, but rather to give the viewers excitement week in and week out. Raw was made the flagship show right from the beginning. Considering this and that most of the new footage for the WWF was coming from this show, it shaped the overall product of the WWF. The old style of developing storylines over a long period of time were now over. Raw was formatted to give shock value and be thrilling to the home viewer, and that is what WWF fans grew to want in a wrestling show.

It became rather difficult to promote these angles over a longer period of time considering that in order to deliver this “excitement” that the fans wanted, the wrestlers had to get in the ring and do their interviews and somehow make major developments in their feuds every single week. With so many “exciting” additional developments to these feuds, the storylines lacked their overall quality that they once had.

But that’s not necessarily a bad thing. During the Monday Night Wars is when I feel WWF programming really hit the mark with how Raw was structuring their shows. The structure was geared towards weekly excitement, not slow developments. A roaring boil, not a low simmer. In order to compete with Monday Nitro, WWF tried to give us something thrilling almost every segment. You could argue it came at the expense of well crafted narratives between good and evil, but it was made up for in the product becoming a non-stop rollercoaster ride.

When we watched Superstars or Prime Time Wrestling back in the day, we might see a sneak attack from one feuding wrestler to another, but more often than not, we got two separate interviews, each trashing the other. Overall, the product was more geared towards character development rather than plot advancements. Everything was more focused on wrestlers selling themselves rather than intricate plot twists.

The way most storylines work is that they make an emotional connection with the fan. The fans will then be connected with the wrestler through the many twists and turns that their character will take. This means they become exposed to that particular wrestler for a certain period of time over and over again. If the fans are going along with the wrestler through too many storylines , they become over exposed to the wrestler. This is when the wrestler starts to become stale and rather boring.

Now regarding monthly pay per views, they too made substantial alterations. There were four main ppv’s a year. This meant that there were usually only four main times when a feud could be culminated. Sometimes a rivalry would go on for two ppvs, which would span half a year. This means that during this time period, when we were emotionally connected with a top main event wrestler in some way, we saw them go through three-four emotional ups and downs, twists and turns in one year. There are only so many of these that a main event wrestler can go through before we begin to become tired of their character and feel that they start to become stale. But at the pace of the “Rockin Wrestling Era”, it was harder for a wrestler to grow stale due to the storylines being so few and far between.

Take a look at Hulk Hogan in 1987 (some of this was mentioned in the beginning paragraphs) Hulk Hogan focused on facing Andre The Giant at WrestleMania 3, then defeated his team at Survivor Series that year (there was no Summer Slam yet). He developed an alliance with Randy Savage, and Andre with Ted Dibiase. Hogan wrestled Andre to a double disqualification at WM 4, and teamed with Savage to defeat “The Mega Bucks” at the first Summer Slam. Then once friction started between them, the Mega Powers “exploded” at WrestleMania 5. A three year span, the Hulkster really went through two major programs: against Andre (with Dibiase eventually added in) and aligning with and going against Macho Man. That really wasn’t that much compared to today.

In the mid nineties, the ppv’s increased to twelve a year, meaning that a main event wrestler would now be going through more feuds a year. This meant that the shelf life of a wrestler became shorter, in that the time would come sooner that they would become stale and the fans would grow tired of them.

Look at John Cena in 2005. He started off focusing on winning the Royal Rumble, and came up short. He then won a tournament to challenge JBL at WrestleMania 21 for the WWE Title, and won both the tournament and the belt. Throughout the rest of 2005 on pay per view he wrestled JBL (rematch), Chris Jericho twice, Christian, Kurt Angle multiple times, Shawn Michaels, and had a Raw storyline with Eric Bischoff. While Cena continued to be a good draw through the next ten years, many fans grew tired of Cena, and within a few years considered him stale. (Reading through posts in the IWC, no longer the minority voice it once was, can show this to you.) In 2008 he was pushed to the backburner, losing in feuds to Triple H, JBL and Batista.

In Sammartino’s time, there were no pay per views. Fans didn't need thrilling plot developments on a consistent basis. They didn’t have these expectations. He and Bob Backlund being champion for years was reasonable then. Backlund’s character didn’t need to go through emotional, exciting incidents every week. There were no pay per view cycles, thus it took longer for fans to grow impatient with wrestling characters.

John Cena has been the face of WWE since 2005. But he hasn’t always been champion, and he hasn’t always had the most spotlight. Similarly, when once the ppv cycle started, Hogan took a year off from being champion, and for a while Ultimate Warrior was arguably getting more spotlight. This isn't Sammartino's era, the brightest stars will burn out if you're not careful.


The concept of WrestleMania, starting in 1985, has shaped the WWE product as we know it today. It was gradual, but it has started underlying cycles within the WWE product. It eventually lead to twelve pay per views a year, and once Raw started, the entire product moved at a much faster pace. WWF/E may have started sacrificing some quality storylines, but in my opinion, WWE Raw can be an incredible roller coaster ride (like during the Monday Night War). It has also lead to wrestlers becoming stale much faster than in Bruno’s era, but you could say that would have happened anyway, with people today having such short attention spans. Regardless, WrestleMania and Raw have changed the landscape of World Wrestling Entertainment.

I'm wondering how much of this you actually witnessed or have researched because you couldn't be more wrong on so many counts. I don't even have enough time in the day to go through this line-by-line, but let's get the obvious out of the way.

WM 4 was supposed to end w/Ted Dibiase winning the belt, but that got squashed when HTM refused to put Savage over at Saturday Night's Main Event. Savage winning against Dibiase was an audible that led to the Mega Powers angle, but you act as if they planned it that way from the start. As a matter of fact, given that HTM had the belt longer, this set up HTM putting the Warrior over for the belt. If Savage wins the IC belt, which was the original plan, how does Warrior get the IC title? Does he beat a babyface Savage? Also, how does Dibiase lose the belt?

Next: Superstars was not shot at a studio (I know much of the voiceovers were), but actually was shot to look "live" with occasional breaks to Sean Mooney at the studio/event center.

Your premise for the purpose was wrong too. Back then TV drove house show business. The purpose of developing a feud on TV was so you would pay to see the house show. Back then, the only way you saw two non-job guys wrestle was to go to the non-televised match at the arena when they came to town. That's why they ended up doing the same match at every house because the show was supposed to be the same payoff to what was shot on TV. That's before PPV of course.

What about Raw in the beginning says it was supposed to be "shocking" as you say? They still did long term planning back then. Pretty much every top guy from the previous eras has said that Vince used to plan things out a year in advance. TBH, the stuff you mention didn't really start to happen until Russo took over as the first ever head writer(because everyone else was a booker until that point). Even then, it was fairly obvious that they were grooming Austin to win the title early on. That's what the babyface turn said to me anyway. I felt like Austin-Bret 2 was the next logical step until Shawn Michaels, politics, and Montreal got in the way.

Nitro on the other hand was made for shock value, right from the beginning. Raw on the other hand had no shock to it other than not-so-scantily-clad ring girls, lol.

Prime Time wrestling was not geared toward "character" development. Go back and look at the tour schedules, these shows were to drive HOUSE SHOW business, nothing else.

The truth is that guys weren't on tv every week and that's why people get stale faster these days. Back on Superstars, you rarely saw the same guy come out every week. I think Bret Hart became one of the most frequent guys to come out, but they were selling him as a fighting champion so it made sense. Even then, in the late 90s, nobody got tired of wrestlers like the Radicals (WCW, in WWF, they got tired quick), Booker T, or some of the WWF guys. I felt like the WWF was stale, but I know I'm of a minority opinion on that one. WCW always had good action, which kept things fresh. What got old in both camps were 10 plus minute promos, backstage skits, and the same guys getting over with bullshit finishes every week.

I'd say the biggest offenders were WCW finding a reason to always have a heel champion. I remember DDP won the belt as a babyface and literally just trashed the fans the next night on Nitro for no reason. If you wanted to be WCW world champion, you had better be a heel seemed to be the formula they worked with. It was pretty good, but babyfaces actually have to be on top for more than 1 night.

In WWF for me the biggest issues were the 20 minute promos with matches that were laced with ridiculous stipulations that made me wonder what the hell I was watching, which made me go back to Nitro where evil always wins. lol

 

[Really?]

The Savage being Plan B and Dibiase scheduled to win is a bit of an urban legend. It was in the January or February WWF Magazine, which would have been written earlier than that, where the WWF telegraphed the tournament and referred to Savage as the WWF Champion. Now if the SNME that you are talking about happened before that, then you're still stretching. For it to be an audible, even back in that day where angles were booked well in advance, would not be accurate. The booking of the tournament was such that Savage was the only consideration: he was booked to work the most matches, against "insurmountable odds", with Dibiase looking to have an advantage. I have no doubt that Dibiase was considered at one point, but the switch to Savage would have been more of a calculated decision than an audible.

 

[FlairFan2003]

OK,

First, WCW was the one who expanded the PPV calendar ....not WWE. Remember, WCW got free production courtesy of Turner Broadcasting, that is also why they were the first ones to go live every week. Vince McMahon had to pay for the production costs because he wasn't owned by a media conglomerate that had deals with MLB & the NBA and owned multiple TV Networks.

Sammartino, Backlund, and other champions (Harley Race) had long, uninterrupted reigns not because fans didn't expect major events, it's because storylines advanced slower without the need for monthly blow off bouts to sell PPVs. This way the entire house show circuit could see the top feud play out, sometimes twice, which would take several months to do. This was still the basic premise throughout the 1980s.

WrestleMania wasn't even the first annual SuperCard. The whole creation of W-Mania and the booking idea of building the biggest feuds to culminate in blow off matches at the Super Show was a WCW concept (NWA actually) created by Dusty Rhodes and was hugely successful, it was called Starrcade. Essentially Starrcade's success meant a subtle change in booking philosophy where the biggest feuds would build for months and end at the show. W-Mania copied that concept.

As for S-Slam 88.....WWE was desperate to add another major card as an annual event, the success of The Great American Bash meant the audience could sustain and support another "playoff caliber" mega card and it wouldn't detract from the importance of the "big" show. Also, WWE didn't want to just hand over the summer months to the NWA and let them have the spotlight after the post WrestleMania honeymoon died at the end of the spring. There were stories the original main event was to be Savage defending the belt against Flair in what would have been his WWE in ring debut since Vince was recruiting him hard in 1988 with the uncertainty surrounding the transition from Jim Crockett Jr to Ted Turner. Flair never jumped though so the whole point is moot.

Vince McMahon favored a fan favorite champion as his standard bearer. It wasn't until Yokozuna in the mid 90s that he made a long commitment to a full fledged heel champion. St Slaughter had a cursory reign basically just to re introduce Hulk Hogan back into WWE storylines (and set him up to regain the title). The Undertaker had an almost non existent reign just to surprise fans and add interest into Ric Flair's title pursuit. Flair had two reigns, one cut short by injury, but in neither case was he expected to be the flag bearer long term, there were brief considerations letting him retain the title at Mania 8 after his scheduled match with Hogan was changed but that was quickly changed. It appeared Flair was given the title back just to put over Ultimate Warrior, but Warrior injuring Flair and getting fired changed those plans but even then WWE wasn't sold Warrior - they did give Brett Hart some high profile title shots in main events against Flair on their European Tour to test crowd reactions. Although Hart claims he never had an inkling he was next in line to be champ until literally a few hours before the show where he won Flair has stated in the past there were rumors WWE was considering him, even as he & Warrior were headlining all over the US and seemingly building to S-Series. Bob Backlund's final reign was just a "shock the fans" moment meant to advance the sibling rivalry angle between Brett & Own Hart while also giving a huge push to Kevin Nash.

Simply put, Vince liked fan faves as champs with strong heels chasing them, creating the heroic triumph when the fave wins against the odds, pleasing the younger, pre teen audience they catered to. DiBiase may have been considered for the title win at Mania IV but Vince in those days was predisposed to the string fan fave champ....Hogan-Savage-Warrior-Hart, a pattern that mostly lasted until The Attitude Era was well under way (even both HBK & Kevin Nash were booked as solid faces when they got their chances to be long term champions).

RAW hasn't changed much of anything. RAW was simply the name change from PrimeTime Wrestling, which was established as WWE's main TV show back in the 80s. As far as booking more main event caliber matches on RAW, that was in response to the sagging ratings they were suffering against WCW Nitro which had not trouble booking, Hogan, Flair, Savage, Sting, Luger, Arn Anderson, in main event caliber matches with each other, often with surprising results (Savage winning the WCW Title on free TV, Flair pinning Hogan for the 1st time, etc). RAW simply started booking better matches because Nitro already was, and was winning the audience fight.

Realistically, every change you mention was simply created in response to the success their main competitor was having at their expense, none of them were original ideas, and the change in the business model mostly has been brought about by their competitors post national expansion, at least until the creation of the WWE Network (a major programming change they instituted on their own).

 

[peter_midnight]

The Savage being Plan B and Dibiase scheduled to win is a bit of an urban legend. It was in the January or February WWF Magazine, which would have been written earlier than that, where the WWF telegraphed the tournament and referred to Savage as the WWF Champion. Now if the SNME that you are talking about happened before that, then you're still stretching. For it to be an audible, even back in that day where angles were booked well in advance, would not be accurate. The booking of the tournament was such that Savage was the only consideration: he was booked to work the most matches, against "insurmountable odds", with Dibiase looking to have an advantage. I have no doubt that Dibiase was considered at one point, but the switch to Savage would have been more of a calculated decision than an audible.

So you're saying that Ted Dibiase and HTM were spreading urban legends? They both said in their respective shoots that this is what happened. So did Jimmy Hart. WTF constitutes an urban legend? Put it this way. Randy Savage feuds w/HTM for a year, never gets the decisive win, then suddenly is winning the world title? It doesn't make any sense. As a matter of fact, to show that this was a last second decision all one needs to do is look at the booking of HTM. HTM should've legitimately had a complaint about Savage being world champion despite never being able to beat him, but they just tossed that aside and never got mentioned. That's something that you hope fans don't catch on to because back then Vince or Pat didn't let details like that slide. Stuff like that slides when you want people to forget about it.

It wasn't an audible in the sense that it was at the last minute, but it was obviously changed in the plans. The booking of the whole thing makes this obvious.

 

[peter_midnight]

OK,

First, WCW was the one who expanded the PPV calendar ....not WWE. Remember, WCW got free production courtesy of Turner Broadcasting, that is also why they were the first ones to go live every week. Vince McMahon had to pay for the production costs because he wasn't owned by a media conglomerate that had deals with MLB & the NBA and owned multiple TV Networks.

Sammartino, Backlund, and other champions (Harley Race) had long, uninterrupted reigns not because fans didn't expect major events, it's because storylines advanced slower without the need for monthly blow off bouts to sell PPVs. This way the entire house show circuit could see the top feud play out, sometimes twice, which would take several months to do. This was still the basic premise throughout the 1980s.

WrestleMania wasn't even the first annual SuperCard. The whole creation of W-Mania and the booking idea of building the biggest feuds to culminate in blow off matches at the Super Show was a WCW concept (NWA actually) created by Dusty Rhodes and was hugely successful, it was called Starrcade. Essentially Starrcade's success meant a subtle change in booking philosophy where the biggest feuds would build for months and end at the show. W-Mania copied that concept.

As for S-Slam 88.....WWE was desperate to add another major card as an annual event, the success of The Great American Bash meant the audience could sustain and support another "playoff caliber" mega card and it wouldn't detract from the importance of the "big" show. Also, WWE didn't want to just hand over the summer months to the NWA and let them have the spotlight after the post WrestleMania honeymoon died at the end of the spring. There were stories the original main event was to be Savage defending the belt against Flair in what would have been his WWE in ring debut since Vince was recruiting him hard in 1988 with the uncertainty surrounding the transition from Jim Crockett Jr to Ted Turner. Flair never jumped though so the whole point is moot.

Vince McMahon favored a fan favorite champion as his standard bearer. It wasn't until Yokozuna in the mid 90s that he made a long commitment to a full fledged heel champion. St Slaughter had a cursory reign basically just to re introduce Hulk Hogan back into WWE storylines (and set him up to regain the title). The Undertaker had an almost non existent reign just to surprise fans and add interest into Ric Flair's title pursuit. Flair had two reigns, one cut short by injury, but in neither case was he expected to be the flag bearer long term, there were brief considerations letting him retain the title at Mania 8 after his scheduled match with Hogan was changed but that was quickly changed. It appeared Flair was given the title back just to put over Ultimate Warrior, but Warrior injuring Flair and getting fired changed those plans but even then WWE wasn't sold Warrior - they did give Brett Hart some high profile title shots in main events against Flair on their European Tour to test crowd reactions. Although Hart claims he never had an inkling he was next in line to be champ until literally a few hours before the show where he won Flair has stated in the past there were rumors WWE was considering him, even as he & Warrior were headlining all over the US and seemingly building to S-Series. Bob Backlund's final reign was just a "shock the fans" moment meant to advance the sibling rivalry angle between Brett & Own Hart while also giving a huge push to Kevin Nash.

Simply put, Vince liked fan faves as champs with strong heels chasing them, creating the heroic triumph when the fave wins against the odds, pleasing the younger, pre teen audience they catered to. DiBiase may have been considered for the title win at Mania IV but Vince in those days was predisposed to the string fan fave champ....Hogan-Savage-Warrior-Hart, a pattern that mostly lasted until The Attitude Era was well under way (even both HBK & Kevin Nash were booked as solid faces when they got their chances to be long term champions).

RAW hasn't changed much of anything. RAW was simply the name change from PrimeTime Wrestling, which was established as WWE's main TV show back in the 80s. As far as booking more main event caliber matches on RAW, that was in response to the sagging ratings they were suffering against WCW Nitro which had not trouble booking, Hogan, Flair, Savage, Sting, Luger, Arn Anderson, in main event caliber matches with each other, often with surprising results (Savage winning the WCW Title on free TV, Flair pinning Hogan for the 1st time, etc). RAW simply started booking better matches because Nitro already was, and was winning the audience fight.

Realistically, every change you mention was simply created in response to the success their main competitor was having at their expense, none of them were original ideas, and the change in the business model mostly has been brought about by their competitors post national expansion, at least until the creation of the WWE Network (a major programming change they instituted on their own).

Although we seem to be disagreeing on Ted Dibiase, pretty much this ^^^, lol. Vince was never original, but he sure did do top the other guys at their own game. IYH was a direct response to the monthly PPVs that Bischoff started doing in the 90s.

As for Summerslam being a ripoff of the Great American Bash. I wonder if George Scott didn't suggest this as he was booking at the time, right? Or did he already leave the WWF?

Most people seem to forget that George Scott booked the 1980s WWF that everyone enjoyed, which funny enough had a NWA feel to it and featured a lot of North Carolina guys (Greg Valentine, Roddy Piper, etc) with babyfaces chasing heels. HTM vs Savage was probably the best example of NWA style booking. I don't ever recall Vince booking like that prior to George Scott showing up, but I could be wrong.

 

[Jonyboyuk2]

Wrestlemania certainly changed how Wrestling was viewed and how it was sold to the mainstream consumer. WWE - at the time - was very much a regional based New York organisation. It soon had gone national. And then after WM4 - it had gone pretty global by that point.

The originator of this post is correct to say that WrestleMania; spawned the big 4 PPV model (cycle) in WWF. And whilst people are quick to point out WCW had more PPV's per year before WWE (WWF) did; WWF had a fantastic business model. It was not on mainstream TV as much as it is today by any stretch of the imagination. This kept production costs down. Furthermore, it meant WWF could go do the house show market with two different rosters essentially operation in different areas of the USA and Canada. The success of this model was unparralled.

However, in 1991/1992 following the negative publicity the WWF got, and the impact of that that dragged on to Spring 1994 - it lead to a downturn in business. This meant some big superstars were suspended or walked away to avoid the bad publicity. The PR nightmare, the big firms cancelling sponsorship deals with WWF, meant that a new cycle had to be introduced. Putting the emphasis on WWF Monday Night Raw began this cycle in early 1993, and then WWF added a 5th PPV - KOTR 1993. At the time- a lot of WWF activity was based in the UK and thre rest of Europe. The way WCW reacted to that - which it did with buying all the old WWF stars and creating Nitro - meant WWF had more TV time to generate interest in monthly PPV's - which is eventually what happened with the IYH's series which morphed to independent branded PPVs - such as backlash, unforvigven, insurection etc. This is a number of reasons for the different cycles WWF/WWE went through.

I also want to add that way before ECW existed ; WWF had their own violent angles. I will just demonstrate a few - Roddy Piper smashing a coconut over Jimmy Snuka's head, Outlaw Ron Bass ripped Brutas Beefcakes forehead open with a metal Spur, Shawn Michaels through Jannetty through a plate glass window, and Jake the snakes pet cobra bit Macho Man. They were pretty hardcore angles.

I think what changed the tactic in 1998, was the WWF had grown stale and the kids who grew up watching the hero Hulk Hogan had taken an interest in WCW because hogan had gone bad. This was WWF/WWE's way of winning the audience back - and it worked exceptionally well.

 

[justinept]

So you're saying that Ted Dibiase and HTM were spreading urban legends? They both said in their respective shoots that this is what happened. So did Jimmy Hart. WTF constitutes an urban legend? Put it this way. Randy Savage feuds w/HTM for a year, never gets the decisive win, then suddenly is winning the world title? It doesn't make any sense. As a matter of fact, to show that this was a last second decision all one needs to do is look at the booking of HTM. HTM should've legitimately had a complaint about Savage being world champion despite never being able to beat him, but they just tossed that aside and never got mentioned. That's something that you hope fans don't catch on to because back then Vince or Pat didn't let details like that slide. Stuff like that slides when you want people to forget about it.

It wasn't an audible in the sense that it was at the last minute, but it was obviously changed in the plans. The booking of the whole thing makes this obvious.

Who cares what the plan was? The OP is discussing what actually happened. His entire premise is that Raw and monthly PPVs have a negative effect on the product because they over saturate the number of stories that are told each year. In making his point, the OP is looking back on things that actually happened prior to the creation of this model. He's not wrong to say that Hogan went two years working programs against just two wrestlers - Andre and Savage - because that's what happened!

Whether or not the original plan called for DiBiase to win the belt at WrestleMania IV is completely irrelevant to the actual issue being presented by the OP because DiBiase's winning wouldn't have changed anything about this argument! If DiBiase had won the belt, Hogan and Savage still would've taken on DiBiase and Andre at SummerSlam 1988. Hogan then would've moved on to a feud with DiBiase that would've culminated in Hogan winning back the belt at WrestleMania V. So instead of spending two years working two programs against Andre and Savage, Hogan would've spent two years working two programs against Andre and DiBiase.

Other than the names being changed, the situation is exactly the same!

 

[peter_midnight]

Who cares what the plan was? The OP is discussing what actually happened. His entire premise is that Raw and monthly PPVs have a negative effect on the product because they over saturate the number of stories that are told each year. In making his point, the OP is looking back on things that actually happened prior to the creation of this model. He's not wrong to say that Hogan went two years working programs against just two wrestlers - Andre and Savage - because that's what happened!

Whether or not the original plan called for DiBiase to win the belt at WrestleMania IV is completely irrelevant to the actual issue being presented by the OP because DiBiase's winning wouldn't have changed anything about this argument! If DiBiase had won the belt, Hogan and Savage still would've taken on DiBiase and Andre at SummerSlam 1988. Hogan then would've moved on to a feud with DiBiase that would've culminated in Hogan winning back the belt at WrestleMania V. So instead of spending two years working two programs against Andre and Savage, Hogan would've spent two years working two programs against Andre and DiBiase.

Other than the names being changed, the situation is exactly the same!

Strong reading comprehension.

My point is that the OP makes it sound like all of this was smooth and calculated. He clearly doesn't know that some of this stuff just happened because of politics, circumstance, and the fact that Vince had someone that booked southern style wrestling angles(George Scott). You can't have a sound argument if you don't have sound facts, and he doesn't have them. OP claims WM was a PPV. No it wasn't, it was on closed circuit TV, and like another poster said the NWA had already been using closed circuit TV and the big blowoff shows well before Vince did. Again, that's why George Scott's involvement is important because being a southern booker, he knew how to book heels strong and get heat out of chasing babyfaces, something that the McMahons rarely if ever did prior to the 80s (maybe with Buddy Rogers, but I don't know the angles from back then).

Also, how do you know that Savage would've been the guy to take on Andre and Dibiase w/Hogan at Summerslam? Savage would've likely been doing IC belt stuff, which would have freed up another babyface. If you give Dibiase the belt and Savage the IC belt, why would Savage be feuding w/Dibiase? Savage wasn't even booked into the tournament until the audible was called, because it would have made 0 sense. There are way too many variables to just say that things would've played out the same just with championship holders switched. C'mon, lol.

OP also claims that shows were for "character development" before Raw debuted. This is not true. Shows were for house show business. You never got money matches for free, you always had to go to the house shows or PPVs if you wanted to see big time matches. That is the major difference between today and before. Now everything is on TV, so you have to get guys over on TV because you need to draw interest in ratings. There's no reason for me as a fan to go to house shows because I can get anything I want for free or for $9.99 a month.

 

[RIPbossman]

Strong reading comprehension.

My point is that the OP makes it sound like all of this was smooth and calculated. He clearly doesn't know that some of this stuff just happened because of politics, circumstance, and the fact that Vince had someone that booked southern style wrestling angles(George Scott). You can't have a sound argument if you don't have sound facts, and he doesn't have them. OP claims WM was a PPV. No it wasn't, it was on closed circuit TV, and like another poster said the NWA had already been using closed circuit TV and the big blowoff shows well before Vince did. Again, that's why George Scott's involvement is important because being a southern booker, he knew how to book heels strong and get heat out of chasing babyfaces, something that the McMahons rarely if ever did prior to the 80s (maybe with Buddy Rogers, but I don't know the angles from back then).

Also, how do you know that Savage would've been the guy to take on Andre and Dibiase w/Hogan at Summerslam? Savage would've likely been doing IC belt stuff, which would have freed up another babyface. If you give Dibiase the belt and Savage the IC belt, why would Savage be feuding w/Dibiase? Savage wasn't even booked into the tournament until the audible was called, because it would have made 0 sense. There are way too many variables to just say that things would've played out the same just with championship holders switched. C'mon, lol.

OP also claims that shows were for "character development" before Raw debuted. This is not true. Shows were for house show business. You never got money matches for free, you always had to go to the house shows or PPVs if you wanted to see big time matches. That is the major difference between today and before. Now everything is on TV, so you have to get guys over on TV because you need to draw interest in ratings. There's no reason for me as a fan to go to house shows because I can get anything I want for free or for $9.99 a month.

I never said Savage was the original plan for WrestleMania 4. I said the crowning of a new champion was something special to look forward to, since Hulk had no challengers more credible than Andre. I explained that, relative to today, Hulk went through few programs in a long period of time. Dibiase winning the belt isn't going to change much in that regard.

I stated WrestleMania 1 was on closed circuit television, and lead to the pay per view model being successful within WWE.

When I say business back then was focused on character development, I mean there was much less focus than today on intricate plot twists. Wrestlers themselves sold tickets more than the plots did, imo.