If you were running WWE

[Psykohurricane55]

Here the scenario, You just became a billionnaire and Vince Mcmahon is looking to get rid of the WWE. You make him a offer and he accept it and you're now the new CEO of WWE. So now what do you do with the company.

Here what i would do.

1. i would look at the full roster to see who's do i need and who is just a waste of money at this point and i would do a major spring cleaning of the talent roster. Right now the talent roster on all 3 major brand are way to bloated and you can easily get rid of at less 1/3 of the talents off those rosters

2. i would look at the financial reports to see who in the company works and who doesn't, the more money you make for the company the more you're chance of getting a push.

3. i would go back to the way of booking that they use in the 80's where you had you're top feud, then you're title feud and whoever was on the card and wasn't part of any feud would be just a throwaway match. You don't need to have feud for everybody on the roster. it makes the main matches feel less important.

4. Bring back the time limits for the matches, i feel like since the time limit as been taken away, it took some of the intrigue out of the matches. I want the matches to feel like a reel athletic competition again and in real competition they have time limits.

5. Get rid of the Hollywood writers. The worst thing that Happened to WWE was when Russo convince Vince that he needed writers to make his show better. Ever since they been using Hollywood Writers and it hurt the product as a whole. I would go back to the way they use to be. Have a couple of agents on both rosters to go through the matches with the talent, Have a main booker for both show who oversee everything and on weekends all theses guys meet up with me and we go through the next week t.v.

6. I would do some minor change to NXT, especially in the way they train. First i would stop touring with the brand as it cost a lot of money and doesn't bring enough of it to make a profit. So instead of touring all around the world with the brand, i would have them just do small shows around orlando. I would make sure that they're a less one class were you learn how to improv during a promo. If you want talent to go out and cut a promo that'S personal to them then you need to stop teaching them how to remember lines and just have them go out and cut a personal promo. Practice make perfect. When they get call up, i would make sure to have vignette ready for them so that i could introduce them to the main roster audience. It's one thing to be over with the Smart crowd, it's another to be over with a WWE crowd.

7. The content of Raw and Smackdown. Raw as Three hours every monday night. So why now use the hold jobber matches to fill part of the show. i'm not saying having like a whole hour of thoses but maybe 4 or 5 jobber matches sprinkle in would certainly help the product. Same goes for Smackdown. Have 1 or 2 jobber matches every week to not overexpose everybody.
As for main event and 205 live. I would continue those program. Main event would have 4 matches instead of the 2 matches they have now. it would be 2 from raw and 2 from smackdown. As for 205 Live, the only thing i would change would be is placement in the lineup, instead of having it after smackdown i would tape it before smackdown and air it on tape delay like Impact use to do. That way you would get a better reaction from the crowd since they would have seen the big stars yet and the presentation would look better on the network.

8. This would be a harder change because of all the harm they did with the network with PPV but i would have the big four PPV taken off the network and put them back as PPV only broadcast. They would eventually go on the network maybe a month after they aired live but if you want to see them Live, you would have to pay to see them. As for the rest of the events, i would leave them streaming live on the network but i would cut the time back to 3 hour events so that they don'T make the big four look like just another events. As for the big four, they would have a run time of 4 hours to 4 and a half hour max and would be price at 50$ each except for mania which would be 70$ but would last 5 hour max.

Anyway, That's what i would do if i own WWE.

 

[Navi]

I won't go through your points one by one just make an overall assessment.

First of all I wouldn't get rid of 1/3 of the roster right away. Part of the problem with the WWE right now is that most of the roster isn't used at all in televised matches. We are stuck watching the same matches week in and week out, after a while they fall into the "oh no not these two again" category.

Some of these wrestlers can be used to make tag teams and bolster that division. Wrestlers like Sheamus have been wrestling injured for awhile now, it's time to start giving some of these workhorses a rest and give some of the others some TV time. Not only would it help overworked wrestlers, it would give us some fresh matches. I'm not saying that throw everyone into the title hunt, but give the title holders some fresh meat to feud with.

I also wouldn't be getting rid of wrestlers based on how much merchandise they sell. That would be completely unfair as some of them don't have much to buy in the first place. Every wrestler on the roster has fans and I'm sure that they would buy their merchandise if they could. I know I went looking for some at Survivor Series a couple of years ago to no avail.

Don't understand why you want time limits. A lot of real athletic competitions don't have time limits. Take the recent US Open. A tennis match can be over in less than an hour or go the distance, depends on how evenly matched the players are. Besides considering that wrestling is a scripted sport I think it would even make it more unbelievable. 30 minute ironman matches every once in a while is fine, but not every week.

And as to your last point about taking the big 4 off the network, I would leave them alone. What the WWE should do is stop giving away free subscriptions all the time. The big four should be use to sell the network and they aren't. Huge missed opportunity there.

 

[I_Like_All_Wrestling]

Man, I don't want to shoot down other people's opinions, but you've got it dead wrong.

1. Sure. You could probably clean up the roster a bit. That makes sense.

2. I don't think you can tie the merchandise to the person immediately. I don't think The Ringmaster or Rocky Maivia was moving too much merchandise. I think Enzo sold a lot. Would you cut Stone Cold and The Rock and keep Enzo? You make stars.

3. I have to disagree with your potin on feuds. Throwaway matches are garbage unless they are crazy crazy matches or some sort of spectacle. You probably could make it something like "we put the best against each other so every person is ready and willing to fight anyone" but stories are what make wrestling. Always has. Always will. Some people liked the Attitude Era and some didn't, but everyone who was on RAW was someone's favorite because of the story. This includes guys like Val Venis and Funaki.

4. I don't think anyone even comes close to a time-limit in today's matches so I don't think you need this. It only works if you outright state there is a limit and then you DON'T adhere to it.

5. You need writers. They make the stories better. You can probably do better than what you have now but if you just told someone like Billy Gunn to put a match together, I'm sure he could, but you'd lose interest after one match. The better you are at crafting a story, the better the product is. I don't think you can plug in a writer from let's say, Fresh Off The Boat and expect them to excel in WWE. You need to be a writer, but you need a different set of skills than a "Hollywood writer."

6. I don't know the financials behind NXT but they are building stars there. If it loses money, it can be recouped somewhere else. Every item in a business doesn't need to make money. Some products pay for the others. I also believe that they do have hours and hours of promo training. I think Kevin Owens spoke about it at length on Jericho's podcast.

7. I honestly do not see how adding 4-5 jobber matches to TV is going to help. The story ties in here again. Heather Slater was garbage. But now he's not. I'd MUCH rather watch "I got kids!" Heath Slater and local "Cowboy Duke Jones" in a squash match. More jobber matches won't help.

8. This is maybe the worst idea. WWE stock is at an all-time high due to their FOX deal and the Network. You whole draw of the Network is that Wrestlemania essentially pays for 7 months, so it's foolish NOT to sign up for the network. PPV is dead. It's a dead industry. It's a dead model. If you did this, WWE would lose incredible amounts of money.

For me, I would add more stories to the shows. I would make sure everyone has a story and a reason for being on the show. If they are guys with no personality but are great wrestlers, I'd make sure they are in a tournament or some sort of ranked story so you can match workers up that way.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Here the scenario, You just became a billionnaire and Vince Mcmahon is looking to get rid of the WWE. You make him a offer and he accept it and you're now the new CEO of WWE. So now what do you do with the company.

Here is what i would do.

1. i would look at the full roster to see who's do i need and who is just a waste of money at this point and i would do a major spring cleaning of the talent roster. Right now the talent roster on all 3 major brand are way to bloated and you can easily get rid of at less 1/3 of the talents off those rosters

Yeah, the roster is beyond bloated at this point. I simply don't see the value in shelling out money to wrestlers just for the primary purpose of preventing them from working elsewhere. For one thing, it doesn't really solve anything as there are going to be others to move up on the indie scene to reach that status. For instance, some thought that WWE signing AJ Styles, Gallows & Anderson & Shinsuke Nakamura was a major blow to New Japan but, frankly, New Japan has kept chuggin' along just fine without missing a beat. When it comes to overall talent, WWE probably has the best roster its ever had but there are only so many viable spots available, they only have 5 hours worth of TV each week and they have enough wrestlers for 2 promotions in addition to their own. Just because WWE has the money to employ this strategy doesn't mean it's a good one.

2. i would look at the financial reports to see who in the company works and who doesn't, the more money you make for the company the more you're chance of getting a push.

That's sensible to some degree. I mean, the goal is supposed to be about making money but I also think it's equally important to actually pay attention to the fans. I'm not saying that you can personally cater to the tastes of all the fans all the time, because nobody can. However, this is a very big area where WWE could and should take a lesson from NXT because NXT pays attention to crowd interest, who they're getting behind, who they're not, who they respond to, who they're invested in. In some situations, Vince McMahon is way too concerned in having WWE have a very, very specific image, an image that he feels any real promotion should have, and that sometimes comes at the expense of the product, the roster and even the fans sometimes. Along with financial numbers from merchandise, ticket sales for house shows, ppvs and all that, factored in with who the crowd is interested in, info on quarterly TV ratings can help decide who gets pushed because it's a good means of measuring interest in a wrestler based on what their segment/match drew during that time period. WWE can make a shit ton of money AND pay more attention to the wants of the fans because, frankly, WWE is in a position where whatever changes they decide to make can affect the entire industry as a whole; no matter what some trolls might say or dirt sheet writers might think, WWE is synonymous with professional wrestling in the minds of most people you ask.

3. i would go back to the way of booking that they use in the 80's where you had you're top feud, then you're title feud and whoever was on the card and wasn't part of any feud would be just a throwaway match. You don't need to have feud for everybody on the roster. it makes the main matches feel less important.

I don't think packing a card with throwaway matches is going to do much, at least not with American fans. This is something that can work in some Japanese promotions; for instance, many of New Japan's cards are packed with various throwaway tag team, six man tag team, eight man tag team and even ten man tag team matches that serve a few purposes. For one thing, it can be used as a means of having a lot of the top stars on a card so they can be seen by the fans but in matches that generally don't matter. It can also be a means of helping save on the wear and tear the business can bring about as some of these guys, depending on the format of the match, may only see a few minutes of ring time. A good example is tomorrow's "Destruction" show in Hiroshima that features an entire card made up of tag team, six man tag team or eight man tag team matches along with one throwaway singles match and really only one match on the card that means anything: Kenny Omega vs. Tomohiro Ishii for the IWGP Heavyweight Championship. There are some existing feuds that are going on between some of the participants in some of these tag matches but they're mostly filler. For some internet fans, that'll be just fine as they'll suck New Japan's balls no matter what right now, but they'd blast WWE for putting together a card in which nothing feels like it matters except for one or two matches and it won't click with more casual fans because they, just as internet fans, have gotten pretty spoiled over the years. If a program doesn't matter and they're made to feel that way, they'll sit on their hands the entire time unless the card is packed full of throwaway matches in which the wrestlers just go out there and damn near kill each other with insane, over the top spots and sheer physicality that'll quickly lead to mounting injuries when you factor all that in with their touring schedule. Once that happened, you'd have critics coming out the yin-yang ready to rake WWE over the coals and if someone wound up hurt badly enough, it just looks bad for the company.

4. Bring back the time limits for the matches, i feel like since the time limit as been taken away, it took some of the intrigue out of the matches. I want the matches to feel like a reel athletic competition again and in real competition they have time limits.

Time limits are a non-issue for nearly everybody. The only times in which time limits matter or have any sort of relevance are in ironman matches or in other matches in which you know that there's a strong possibility that the time limit itself will be ignored. Using New Japan for another example, Okada and Omega had a bout back in June that was specifically announced to have a 60 minute time limit and you knew immediately that the only reason that this bout was announced with a time limit was so that they'd go over it as a means of making the match seem all the more epic. We see that happen with ironman matches much of the time and all it does is reinforce the notion industry wide that time limits are a thing of the past.

5. Get rid of the Hollywood writers. The worst thing that Happened to WWE was when Russo convince Vince that he needed writers to make his show better. Ever since they been using Hollywood Writers and it hurt the product as a whole. I would go back to the way they use to be. Have a couple of agents on both rosters to go through the matches with the talent, Have a main booker for both show who oversee everything and on weekends all theses guys meet up with me and we go through the next week t.v.

Here's the thing about the main roster writers, and I've said this a lot, in that they have one of the toughest jobs in all of wrestling because their primary job is to please Vince McMahon. They get a ton of criticism from fans but nothing makes it to TV without Vince approving it. I'm going to be speculating a little bit here, but I think it's some safe speculation. If you're someone who's written for WWE for a while, there's going to come a time in which you get a handle on just what sort of feud, program, segment, angle, storyline or whatever that is going to appeal to Vince; that is, of course, on top of being told by others who've been there before you if you're able to speak with or writers who're currently there and have been there longer than you. As a result of knowing Vince's likes and dislikes, your job is to weave something together that's ultimately going to please him and make him happy. As a writer, that's your job when you get right down to it. That's not to say that the fans are irrelevant, of course, but...c'mon, every time Vince or Stephanie says that WWE's success is all because they listen to their audience, it makes me want to head to WWE headquarters in Stamford with a AR-15 and as many clips I can carry because it's just not true and we all know it. I know they don't completely ignore fans but they do a good deal of the time, otherwise Finn Balor wouldn't be floating around in one meaningless mid-card program after another, Jinder Mahal would have never been WWE Champion, let alone held the title for 6 months, the roles of Charlotte Flair and Becky Lynch would be reversed, Drew McIntyre wouldn't be Dolph Ziggler's big buddy, Raw wouldn't be 3 hours long and these are numerous others that we complain about on a daily basis. WWE and everything about it, first and foremost, is about Vince's vision for what he wants people to see his company as and that means that any creative team you put together on the main roster, whether it's "Hollywood writers" or a room made up of wily wrestling veterans is going to be creatively hamstrung to variable degrees. It's not the writers who have the wrestlers say virtually every word that's written for them, it's not the writers who've painted Roman Reigns as this fairly one dimensional alpha male who, more often than not, is like watching paint dry when talking on the mic, that's the vision Vince has for Reigns, which means that's what the writers and Reigns himself have to give us.

6. I would do some minor change to NXT, especially in the way they train. First i would stop touring with the brand as it cost a lot of money and doesn't bring enough of it to make a profit. So instead of touring all around the world with the brand, i would have them just do small shows around orlando. I would make sure that they're a less one class were you learn how to improv during a promo. If you want talent to go out and cut a promo that'S personal to them then you need to stop teaching them how to remember lines and just have them go out and cut a personal promo. Practice make perfect. When they get call up, i would make sure to have vignette ready for them so that i could introduce them to the main roster audience. It's one thing to be over with the Smart crowd, it's another to be over with a WWE crowd.

For me, one of the changes I'd make to NXT would be to, possibly temporarily, expand the show to 2 hours as it would answer the questions as to whether or not NXT can maintain the same level of quality with more time. If so, then we'd have a much clearer picture of possible changes that could be made to the main roster if/when Triple H takes the throne after Vince steps down. NXT, when you get right down to it, is more of a third touring brand than the "developmental brand" of WWE because the actual developmental brand for WWE is the Performance Center. That's where the wrestlers are trained, where they're put through the paces, work on potential weaknesses, go to promo classes, etc.. I'd also consider expanding NXT into bigger venues as far a ticket sales go but NXT was never really meant to bring in a profit due in large part to not having a TV deal but, again, that's part of the design of NXT in the first place. As far as "small shows" go, how much smaller can it get than Full Sail? There are only about 400 or so fans there during the TV tapings and playing to venues as small or smaller around Orlando isn't going to bring in any money but, at any rate, if NXT was any sort of drain on WWE's bottom line, changes would be made I'm sure.

7. The content of Raw and Smackdown. Raw as Three hours every monday night. So why now use the hold jobber matches to fill part of the show. i'm not saying having like a whole hour of thoses but maybe 4 or 5 jobber matches sprinkle in would certainly help the product. Same goes for Smackdown. Have 1 or 2 jobber matches every week to not overexpose everybody.
As for main event and 205 live. I would continue those program. Main event would have 4 matches instead of the 2 matches they have now. it would be 2 from raw and 2 from smackdown. As for 205 Live, the only thing i would change would be is placement in the lineup, instead of having it after smackdown i would tape it before smackdown and air it on tape delay like Impact use to do. That way you would get a better reaction from the crowd since they would have seen the big stars yet and the presentation would look better on the network.

I'm not sure how having 4 or 5 jobber matches helps anything at all. There are times in which WWE can get fans to be invested in marquee matches featuring top stars, so pacing a show with 2 minute squash matches isn't really going to do much that I can see. If you want to cut down on overexposure, I'd consider the alternative of trying to pack the shows with too many different things going on at once and reduce Raw back to 2 hours. Don't feature the same wrestlers next week as was on the show this week, mix it up, give different feuds some screen time each week and for feuds that aren't being featured on TV during this week, use vignettes and a couple of brief backstage interviews along with the commentators reminding fans of said feud. If Reigns and Strowman are on TV one week, don't feature them the next week but keep them in people's minds by having the commentators mention them at various points through the show. I'd also use TV to devote to some matches and feuds that shouldn't wind up on ppvs just for the sake of being there.

As for 205 Live, yeah, I'd tape it before SmackDown each week, or Raw each week for that matter, and show it on a different night via the WWE Network. Either that, or I'd just flat out make the Cruiserweight Division part of NXT and use 205 Live as, essentially, a second NXT show.

8. This would be a harder change because of all the harm they did with the network with PPV but i would have the big four PPV taken off the network and put them back as PPV only broadcast. They would eventually go on the network maybe a month after they aired live but if you want to see them Live, you would have to pay to see them. As for the rest of the events, i would leave them streaming live on the network but i would cut the time back to 3 hour events so that they don'T make the big four look like just another events. As for the big four, they would have a run time of 4 hours to 4 and a half hour max and would be price at 50$ each except for mania which would be 70$ but would last 5 hour max.

A big reason WWE created the network itself was so they wouldn't have to give some of the money they make from ppv events to cable and satellite companies for carrying the show. The WWE Network cuts out the middle man and it's a strategy that's ultimately working for WWE. WWE generally has around 2 million paying subscribers so that comes out to roughly $20 million per month, the subscription is a little higher in some countries but $20 million is still a good, estimate number. PPV numbers were also already falling big time due in part because the prices were so high. A ppv that wasn't one of the Big Four would run someone $35 to $45 on top of a monthly cable or satellite bill that in and of itself, in many cases, was already close to or in excess of $100 a month and before WWE went to the network, I remember hearing that WrestleMania XXX would be $65. Airing the Royal Rumble, WrestleMania, SummerSlam and Survivor Series on ppv then adding them to the network a month later makes no real sense because why would fans want to pay $65 dollars to watch a show on ppv when they can wait a month and see the show on a different platform for $10? You'd have some hardcore fans that'd order the ppv, but not all that many and what's the point of watching one of those shows a month later when you're already going to be able to find out what happens by just reading the dirt sheets the same night the show is on, or the next day or by watching WWE programming?

I'd also cut the ppvs back down to 3 hours and leave the Big Four at about 4 hours. Also, as I alluded to earlier, I'd use the ppvs to sell and highlight most of the biggest feuds currently going on as there's no need to just put half the damn roster on the ppvs just for the sake of having them on. For instance, there may be some months where mid-card or tag title feuds could be settled during Raw or SmackDown, thereby giving some bigger matches to TV or feuds that just aren't all that interesting, i.e. Balor vs. Corbin, on TV and not taking time off ppvs for feuds that are simply worth more money.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

If I became a majority stock holder of WWE the first thing I would do is shit my pants when the stock drops 80% upon the announcement that some middle aged married father of two with no history of owning a business was now in charge of a billion dollar entertainment company.

Then I would make an announcement that I am just waiting for Vince to come back and buy back the company for more than I sold it just like Donald Trump did to him years ago. Then people would tell me that was just a storyline and I would have to throw away another pair of pants.

So now I'm stuck with a company bleeding assets which leads to bleeding talent. I would at this point look to sell anything and everything I can to pay my legal fees for all of the lawsuits brought against me from stockholders whether fair or not.

In about six to eight months I would finally be forced to hire Vince Russo as the only person with any wrestling business experience left willing to work for me.

Meanwhile, even though I was smart and forced Vince McMahon to sign a five year non-compete, I never got the same non-compete from HHH who has a new wrestling company with the backing of Disney who is further putting me out of business before the end of the year. I'm left selling trademarks and a tape library for almost enough to pay my debts.

It would all be worth though if within that year if I can somehow convince my wife and Mandy to have a threesome. #metoo

 

[Dagger Dias]

Michael Cole and Roman Reigns would both be gone immediately. As in during my first meeting as a WWE owner they both get fired right on the spot. "Thank you so much for the opportunity to run this company, I'm excited to move the federation forward. By the way, Michael Cole and Roman Reigns, you're both fired. Get out!". Graves becomes the main announcer as he is already on both shows anyway. Seth Rollins gets Roman Reigns' push.

Beyond that, the next thing I would do is I would get rid of 205 Live. The Cruiserweight title and division can be used for the third hour of Raw. This makes things less repetitive on the red brand and more guys would get some time onscreen there. Having the cruiserweights stuck on their own show makes them look inferior and I would put a stop to that.

The PPV's would return to the branded format. Half are either Raw branded or Smackdown branded while the other half are a dual-branded Big 6. The original Big 4 plus Money In The Bank, and Night Of Champions which would come back in its original format as the only show where every title gets defended. No matches on that card would be allowed to be non-title. Each of the Big 6 get an NXT Takeover event that weekend as well. This allows more exposure on major events for guys who might otherwise not get that shot. It's more fun to not see the same group of guys on PPV each month anyhow.

There's probably more I could do but those would be the more immediate things I would address. Other than that I like a lot of what the WWE is doing.

 

[Spidey Revivey]

I'd do everything in my power to keep it as is. I have financial obligations.

If I ran WWE, I'd be more worried about keeping the sponsors happy than I would some 20-somethings who can't come to grips with a product that no longer caters to them. In a perfect world I'd listen to writers and their ideas, put it to practice, and see how burly men with a narrative are indeed better than burly men who are going to fight because everyone else is doing something. But this is a pipe dream, and reality tells this arachnid he needs to get his shit together and not lose money. Therefore, I'd keep pushing Roman who is obviously my biggest asset when it comes to merchandise sales who isn't a part-timer, and you would get exactly what you're getting now, but instead of an old man who doesn't get kids these days there will be a young man who doesn't get kids these days.

That said, I would do something more with Bray Wyatt because I can't help myself.

 

[Tsunaru]

Time limits are a non-issue for nearly everybody. The only times in which time limits matter or have any sort of relevance are in ironman matches or in other matches in which you know that there's a strong possibility that the time limit itself will be ignored. Using New Japan for another example, Okada and Omega had a bout back in June that was specifically announced to have a 60 minute time limit and you knew immediately that the only reason that this bout was announced with a time limit was so that they'd go over it as a means of making the match seem all the more epic. We see that happen with ironman matches much of the time and all it does is reinforce the notion industry wide that time limits are a thing of the past.

If you mean the match at Dominion this year, it was actually specifically announced as NO Time Limit, because the last time they faced off for the title it went to a time limit draw. All NJPW matches have explicit time limits to them, 10 minutes for a Young Lion singles match (which frequently go to time limit draws), 20 minutes for undercard, 30 minute for special matches (tournament, special single matches, etc.), and 60 minutes for title matches and occasional big special main events (Golden Lovers vs Young Bucks at SSE comes to mind as a recent example).

If we use this as an example, the 1 over 60 indicates its a one fall match, with a 60 minute time limit.

Versus the Okada/Omega match at Dominion this year, which says best of 3 falls with no time limit.

Meanwhile, the 30 minute time limit played a huge story in the Omega/Okada match at the G1 Climax last year, as no one thought that Omega, who was unable to beat Okada in 60 minutes just two months earlier, would be able to do it in less than 30 minutes in the tournament, making it a big moment when he got the win (not to mention the fact that the time limit has played a role in the G1 for the last three years in a row when Okada ended up getting a time limit draw against Tanahashi twice (2016, 2018) and Suzuki last year)


The only reason I would agree that time limits aren't necessary with WWE matches is because you NEVER see anything go longer than 22 or 23 minutes unless it's a gauntlet match. The whole purpose of a time limit is to create tension as you get near it, which is something that wouldn't occur in the current WWE.