Part timers: Good or Bad for business?

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

List of part timers (By order of beggining of part time run):
-The Rock (Feb. 14 2011)
-The Undertaker (Feb. 21 2011)
-Triple H (Feb. 21 2011)
-Chris Jericho (Jan. 2 2012)
-Brock Lesnar (April 2 2012)
-Rob Van Dam (July 14 2013)
-The New Age Outlaws (January 6 2014)
-Batista (January 20 2014)


There are two sides of this discussion.




On one hand, part timers are stealing the spotlight from the young talents.
WrestleMania, the biggest wrestling event of the year, where many stars became superstars and larger than life icons (such as Hulk Hogan, Shawn Michaels, "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, John Cena, Batista, CM Punk...) has become an event to showcase former stars like The Undertaker, The Rock, Triple H, Brock Lesnar...

The 3 biggest matches of WM29:
-Rock vs Cena II
-Taker vs Punk
-HHH vs Lesnar II


The 3 biggest matches of WM28:
-Rock vs Cena
-Taker vs HHH
-Punk vs Y2J


4 out of 6 of these superstars are part timers and the 2 full-time guys are wrestlers who are already established (John Cena and CM Punk).


CM Punk on part timers:

"If I didn't want to be there every week, I wouldn't be there every week. Miz will go out there and say 'it's great having these (part timers) back' because I honestly believe he thinks he has to say that … They don't work as hard, and they make just as much money. But it makes me work harder though – and god dammit that's gonna burn me out."



Dolph Ziggler on part timers:

"It really pisses me off. But, it also is good business. Every year a part timer comes back, but there's a reason that they're back. Whether it's the fans want to see them, if they're a draw, if they're a movie star, there's a reason that they're back. They're not back just to do it. There's business to be had. And it pisses me off and it motivates me a hundred percent. It makes me want to be that guy that they're begging to come back. I appreciate it, it's just good business. When people come to Wrestlemania to see the Rock and the Undertaker and they leave that Wrestlemania thinking, 'Wow, that Dolph Ziggler stole the show. I can't wait to tune in to ‘Raw' to see what he does next.' That's how I've lived my entire career."


Dolph Ziggler went from beating John Cena at the main event of TLC 2012 to losing in a mid-card tag match at WM29 because he got lost in the mix with all the part timers returning.


Two other talented individuals Cody Rhodes and Damien Sandow got their match at WM29 canceled at the last second because there wasn't enough time.








On another hand, part timers are definitely what's best for business.

After failing to reach over a million PPV buyrate for two consecutive WrestleManias (WM25 and WM26), The Rock came back for the next 3 WMs and all 3 of them got over a million PPV buyrates.

WM28 main evented by Rock vs Cena broke records for most PPV buyrates for any wrestling event in history. WM29 broke a few records as well.

The night before Rock returned in 2013 got a 2.4 rating then the night The Rock came back, RAW got a 3.1 rating.
The night before the 2013 Royal Rumble RAW got a 3.1 rating, the night after Rock won the title got a 3.8 rating.

2013 Royal Rumble headlined by The Rock vs CM Punk also had one of the biggest PPV buyrates in years.

The Rock was named Wrestling Observer Newsletter's biggest draw of 2011 and 2012.

He is by far the biggest draw in WWE today (when he's there) if not of all time.

Other than The Rock, Brock Lesnar who also was named Wrestling Observer Newsletter's biggest draw in 3 consecutive years: 2008, 2009 and 2010 and broke PPV buyrates record in UFC.

Brock Lesnar's first match with WWE in 8 years gained huge interest from fans and Extreme Rules 2012 did very good numbers.

There are part timers like The Rock and Brock Lesnar who are being brought back to bring in ratings and ppv buyrates just like they are part timers like Chris Jericho and Rob Van Dam who are there to put over young talents.


Chris Jericho put over a lot of talents in his last run such as Fandango, Dolph Ziggler, Ryback and even Curtis Axel.

While Rob Van Dam put over Alberto Del Rio in a world title feud.



Do you think part timers are good for business or bad for business?

 

[laodaron]

Batista is a full timer.

And part timers give the WWE the capital it needs to keep paying the full timers. One day, Cena and Orton will be the part timers. Then they will come back and help sell PPVs and memorabilia.

 

[Wald]

I know Brock only works a few PPVs a year but I honestly think of him as being more of an attraction wrestler than a part time guy, similar to how someone like Andre The Giant was used for a period.

As for the rest of them, it depends on who it is and how they're booked. Batista hasn't worked as well as it was probably hoped because of poor booking decisions and him not being in shape on his return. Fans aren't going to accept the guy beating Orton for the title.

Undertaker will be a vital part of Wrestlemania until the streak ends. The Rock had a good run with Cena and is such a huge star (top grossing actor in 2013 right?) that he is always good for business. The one downside of his return is my belief that he should have lost that initial match up with Cena at Wrestlemania 28. I genuinely think it damaged Cena to lose that one and stole what should have been his big Mania moment from him. But that's poor booking again.

RVD and Jericho are fine as midcard talents, but both should be warned that losing constantly does nothing for getting anyone ever in the end. The Outlaws shouldn't be holding those tag belts when the division is genuinely quite strong but they do get a great reaction so obviously have a place on the roster.

Now here's the rub. It's fine bringing back guys that the audience genuinely wants to see, but loading them all in to Wrestlemania season does a huge disservice to the full time talent and also prevents the company from building new stars. Part timers should come in at random parts of the year when told, not all try get on the Mania card. I'm mostly looking at guys like Jericho, Batista, the Outlaws and RVD here, as Undertaker and Rock can pretty much do as they please.

But casual fans are most likely to watch January through April, we all know that. If you either keep your current talent off the schedule, or have them lose to part timers coming back, in that period they will not be able to grow their reputations with casuals and so will not be able to draw them in at other stages of the year.

I'll offer up the Summerslam buyrate this year as proof. Here you had two proven draws in Brock and Cena going up against Punk and Bryan respectively, arguably the two biggest draws (outside of the Rock) vs the two most talented (with loyal, large fanbases of their own). But it drew poorly and I've seen people wondering why ever since. Some have said that it's proof that Punk & Bryan just aren't huge draws, good draws no doubt but not top of the card talent.

I would argue that that PPV drew as should have been expected, that they got a good chunk of the year round WWE viewers to buy into the PPV based on knowing the four characters involved and knowing what was at stake. Who they didn't draw in however was the casuals who leave the product in April and only watch if their buddies tell them there's something great happening between two guys they are interested in. What I think happened was they were told about the main events for Summerslam and thought back to what they know of Bryan & Punk from the Wrestlemania seasons just past. With Bryan they saw him get a cheap win at Royal Rumble 2012, lose to Sheamus in 19 seconds in a title match and then be a midcard talent the next year. With Punk they saw a midcard title match at Mania in 2012 (proof he isn't a top card talent I'd imagine), a loss to (part time) the Rock and a loss to (part time) the Undertaker in 2013, fighting losses yes but losses none the less.

Why would they buy into either man being a match for Brock Lesnar or John Cena? So far this year all they know is that Batista returned and won the Rumble pretty easily and the New Age Outlaws are the tag team champions in 2014. What does that say about the current crop of superstars? Would it encourage them to stick around after Mania season is over?

I don't think so to be honest, and that is the problem with loading Mania season with part timers

 

[Rocky84]

Definitely good. The majority of fans want to see them regardless of the crybaby marks who complain about them stealing the spot light and time from wrestlers who are there every night. The numbers prove it.

These guys paid their dues and did everything these young wrestlers are doing currently. People seem to forget that. They too had to deal with other part timers coming in here and there...especially when WWF took over WCW and brought in all their talent. It's part of the business, so these marks and wrestlers like Dolph and Punk (both who I like) need to cut the bs crybaby act and step up their game because if they were producing numbers like the part timers they wouldn't be negatively affected by their presence.

I started to lose interest after they botched the WWF-WCW merger and all the potential blockbuster angles. I stuck around barely when Flair came over and the NWO poison angle came about because it was good stuff. I left immediately after Mania 18...seeing Jericho main eventing against HHH made me pissed and like the name changed suggested I got the eff out(the icing on the cake was WWF turning to WWE)...sucks since I missed Goldberg and Steiner coming back. I followed it sparingly throughout the years but hardly any real time watching the programming.

8 years later I find out The Rock is back and beefing with Cena. I tuned in and haven't left since. I attended Mania 28 and the Raw after when Brock came back. Was great to have wrasslin back in my life and be able to see all the old school guys like HHH, Taker, Rock, Big Show, Kane, Jericho, Outlaws etc one last go around before they all hang it up. If it wasn't for the part timers, I and a few buddies of mine wouldn't have started watching again.

So all in all...it's definitely a good thing. That's just a fact.

 

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

Batista is a full timer.

And part timers give the WWE the capital it needs to keep paying the full timers. One day, Cena and Orton will be the part timers. Then they will come back and help sell PPVs and memorabilia.

Batista is a part timer.

He's not attending every house show.

Also, he's leaving somewhere after this summer or something like that, which makes him a part timer.

 

[laodaron]

You don't get to just make up terms. Batista is on a 2 year contract. He's going to hit most of the Raws and the PPVs. He's on a full time contract. They aren't bringing him back for a quick buyrate increase at Mania, he's back on the roster...full time.

 

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

You don't get to just make up terms. Batista is on a 2 year contract. He's going to hit most of the Raws and the PPVs. He's on a full time contract. They aren't bringing him back for a quick buyrate increase at Mania, he's back on the roster...full time.

He will have a full-time run this year just like Jericho and RVD did in 2013.

But he's still a part timer, he's going to leave this summer then come back again.

He's working more TV dates than guys like Taker,Rock,Brock but he's still a part timer.

I don't think he'll wrestle as much house shows and TV matches as the current roster.

 

[justinept]

8 years later I find out The Rock is back and beefing with Cena. I tuned in and haven't left since. I attended Mania 28 and the Raw after when Brock came back. Was great to have wrasslin back in my life and be able to see all the old school guys like HHH, Taker, Rock, Big Show, Kane, Jericho, Outlaws etc one last go around before they all hang it up. If it wasn't for the part timers, I and a few buddies of mine wouldn't have started watching again.

So all in all...it's definitely a good thing. That's just a fact.

So you and your buddies started watching again because Rock and Lesnar came back. Just out of curiosity, what keeps you around when they're not on Raw or at the pay-per views. What's the hook to keep you?

I won't deny that those guys are big draws, that they bring a lot of interest back to the product. The complaint from day one - and you can look at my threads from two years ago when the WWE first started welcoming back former talent on a part-time basis - is that the WWE needs to take advantage of the increased viewership. If the fans you lost between 2006-2010 (Raw ratings went from mid 4's to barely cracking 3 during this time), are coming back to see The Rock and Lesnar, then you need to have a plan in place to keep those people hooked once Rock and Lesnar take their extended vacations from the company.

That's why showcasing guys that actually garner a reaction like Bryan, Ziggler, Wyatt, The Shield - and up until last week, CM Punk - is necessary. Those are the guys that have a shot at keeping the fans interested enough to tune in when Rock and Lesnar are gone.

...instead, we just get more of Cena, Orton, Triple H and Batista. What's the problem with that, you ask? Well, those were the top-4 guys in the WWE from 2005-2010. Those four guys were the focal point of every Raw, every Smackdown, every pay-per view during an extended period of time when a large chunk of this returning audience initially stopped watching. If the WWE thinks this is the way to keep whatever audience has returned, then I have some bad news for them - the audience has already turned off the TV once when these four guys ran the shows. They'll do it again.

 

[Gibby]

Nice use of meaningless stats but I don't watch wrestling to see it grow as a company so I don't care what is 'best for business'. And to be honest, neither should you.

Generally-speaking I have never been a fan of guest performers. As hosts. As talent. A featured artists on records. In walk-on roles on TV shows. For some reason it irritates me. It takes me out of the world that has been built up around these apparently permanently-based characters. I also think I am less likely to longterm invest in this world if I get the sensation that, I don't know, Floyd Mayweather can come on and beat someone up or that some guy who thought wrestling was beneath him five years ago suddenly becomes a main-eventer again. It's probably a little unfair seeing as my favourite fed, New Japan, also uses guests and freelance workers to spice up events. The difference is, I suppose, is that the Gracies fought against older freelancers in the mid-card of New Japan's annual Dome show, whereas occasional guys are walking straight into the top card in WWE.

But yes. WWE choose part-timers or one-night hits because they offer easy media coverage, talking points and ratings boosts. And the wider audience generally has a weak memory so they don't recall that Michael Strahan did one of the lamest things ever, or that Undertaker hasn't wrestled at all in the last 10 months. So part-timers clearly offer something and they have since WM1 and Mr. T and Bruno Sammartino in his son's corner and all that.

 

[iammikerodriguez]

I think part-timers are great for business. The Undertaker is a once a year thing, but he's without a doubt, an enjoyable performer. I enjoyed The Rock's return, Jericho always has great part-time runs, Triple H has good matches and even Brock Lesnar has been somewhat interesting.

I think part-timers are great BUT only great when they're not taking up spots for the full time guys. I don't think part-timers should come back and get the title though AND I think they should put the new guys over. (The Rock was back part-time for 2 years before he won the title, so I guess that an exception, plus good for the storyline he was in, with Cena winning the Rumble, and putting Cena over at WM29).

Batista could have came back and faced ANYONE, from Brock (in an MMA Style match) or Sheamus or even Triple H and people would have been okay with it... But winning the Royal Rumble, Headlining WM30(The supposed biggest Wrestling PPV of all time!), and take the title from Orton?(I doubt he is going to put Orton over at WM30.), when indeed it should have been Daniel Bryan winning the Rumble, going to Wrestlemania and Main Event!

 

[thebowtiekiller]

They are obviously good for buisness at least in the short term the problem a lot of fans and wrestlers have is that they steal main events and all the attention from full time up and comers which is a fair point but a lot of the part timers listed spent years working their asses off trying to make a name for themselves aswell so i dont see why its a problem if they come back for a short run or match every now and again.wwe have seriously overestimated batistas popularity but its clear most of the part timers are still huge draws.particularly undertaker and the rock.undertakers one of the biggest legends in wrestling ever and the rock is pretty much the most all round entertaining guy to ever be in wwe.younger guys can get all irate about him stealing there spot when he shows up but the simple truth is people want to watch him more.

 

[tru_overdose]

Batista is a part timer.

He's not attending every house show.

Also, he's leaving somewhere after this summer or something like that, which makes him a part timer.

Neither is anyone who is not world champion.

Batista is a full timer.

 

[Ryan1025]

Batista isn't a part timer. He signed a two year deal. Yes, he's leaving for a bit to honor a prior commitment. It would have been highly unprofessional for him to cancel his non WWE stuff that was booked before he re signed.

I don't even know if I'd call Chris Jericho a part timer. Yes, he usually works about half a year, but doesn't he work most house shows when he's back? That's more seasonal employee or something.

Part timer, to me at least, mean they come back for PPV's and maybe a few RAWs.
Taker has definitely earned his one match a year and for it to be at WM.
One or two part timers, feuding with a full timer, can really help a PPV. A PPV just shouldn't be padded with mostly part timers.

 

[Rocky84]

So you and your buddies started watching again because Rock and Lesnar came back. Just out of curiosity, what keeps you around when they're not on Raw or at the pay-per views. What's the hook to keep you?

I won't deny that those guys are big draws, that they bring a lot of interest back to the product. The complaint from day one - and you can look at my threads from two years ago when the WWE first started welcoming back former talent on a part-time basis - is that the WWE needs to take advantage of the increased viewership. If the fans you lost between 2006-2010 (Raw ratings went from mid 4's to barely cracking 3 during this time), are coming back to see The Rock and Lesnar, then you need to have a plan in place to keep those people hooked once Rock and Lesnar take their extended vacations from the company.

That's why showcasing guys that actually garner a reaction like Bryan, Ziggler, Wyatt, The Shield - and up until last week, CM Punk - is necessary. Those are the guys that have a shot at keeping the fans interested enough to tune in when Rock and Lesnar are gone.

...instead, we just get more of Cena, Orton, Triple H and Batista. What's the problem with that, you ask? Well, those were the top-4 guys in the WWE from 2005-2010. Those four guys were the focal point of every Raw, every Smackdown, every pay-per view during an extended period of time when a large chunk of this returning audience initially stopped watching. If the WWE thinks this is the way to keep whatever audience has returned, then I have some bad news for them - the audience has already turned off the TV once when these four guys ran the shows. They'll do it again.

Well, when I tuned back in when I found out The Rock was back, I also saw the new Tough Enough with Austin, and saw that HHH and Taker were still here in a big way not to mention having a match at Mania. That was enough to keep me invested.

With those guys being involved it got me to watch every week to see what the product was like overall, and I started to actually like a few of the new guys like Del Rio and Ziggler. Hell, even Miz was pretty entertaining in his fued with Cena leading up to Mania. I wasn't big on Punk at that time with his Nexus angle against Orton. Kinda corny.

Rock returned in February, and Mania was a month or so later. The Raw after is when he challenged Cena in Miami (I live in South FL) so that got me and my buddies pumped and kept us around the whole year. Plus, like I mentioned the talent was decent.

After a while the talent started to get better ..like Cm Punk and his rise after the pipe bomb speech, and even Nash returning. Plus Jericho coming back for a fued with Punk. Johnny Ace was entertaining too...dude was hilarious. It's also cool seeing another old school dude in Mark Henry get a big push.

So they definitely did their part to fill in the rest around the return of a lot of big name guys. I know I'm forgetting some other good talent I grew to like along the way but they definitely keep improving and have a good system where they bring back big named part timers so that fans who don't watch anymore come back and it gives the younger newer guys exposure.

That quote from Dolph in the OP kinda touches on that. We tune in for the big names and find ourselves saying "hey that new dude is good, I wanna see more of him".

I think what they've done is perfect and need to keep at it because fans from the old school like to see their guys back, as well as seeing the newer guys come up. I think it's a nice balance, but it's up to creative to make sure we don't have problems like we did this year with Bryan and Punk being left out. That's not a smart move. If they mixed it up the right way, there's plenty of room for everybody to have their time to shine...except the lower tier guys unfortunately but I don't pay to see them so I couldn't care less.

Hope that helps to answer your question bro...a little long lol but I tried to explain as much as I could haha.

 

[Ubermensch]

The Rock has been so huge since branching out into film that he will always be a draw.

What I disdain the most about Wrestlemania and the WWE throughout the years, is the constant nostalgia they want you to feel.

While we all know, their product is not as good as it used to be. When you constantly bring up and involve older wrestlers you're just admitting this true.

I appreciate Hogan. He built wrestling, but he hurt it in many ways. His time has gone and passed. It's unethical for them involve him in their greatest ppv when it knocks other deserving wrestlers out of their chance to shine. That is why I cringe when I hear talks about him every wrestle mania.

Same with Sting and Hogan, this was a dream match for everyone...15 years ago. They are both old, this is not entertaining.

What if Edge and Christian, Hardyz, and Dudleyz TLC match had been replaced by Ricky Steamboat and Bob Backlund?

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

Not answering the poll because for all those choices, none of them really reflect my thoughts.

In general though, I don't mind part timers on an occasional basis but they should not be the main event of WrestleMania nor should they ever win the World Title.

Aside from that, I don't mind seeing any of these guys. I'm glad that Lesnar came back, I'm glad that Rock had his match with Cena, and I'm cool with Undertaker's nearly once a year schedule. But the World Title and the top spot at WrestleMania should be for the guys who do the work year round. I think it's healthier for morale and healthier for the business overall.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

First you have to be clear what you mean by part timer and I'll explain why... with all the research you did (DIAGRAMS...YES!) you didn't explain what you mean by a part timer... is it someone who wrestles half the year? someone who is under short term contracts? or someone who is only used in selected matches to maximuse their value or "bang for the buck?"

It's important because on the WWF roster, what you would class as "full timers" or not on your options... are very often part timers too... for the last 5 years 3 guys get regularly rotated out for months at a time... Kane, Big Show, Mark Henry... it's often phrased as an injury but other times they just "go on break" for 4 months. WWE do this because they are maximising their career potential to them, due to their size they have attendant risks and the rest means they can still be valuable to WWE over a longer period... they disappear for months, and then come back, often in the title picture with a big push... So are these not "part timers?"

Take the biggest name of them all... the man who is under contract 365 days a year but wrestles once or maybe twice a year... UNDERTAKER! He is a guy taking a full time deal for one match, that they never seemingly know if he is going to do until the January or so of the year... now he might not be on the same money as he once was, but his retainer is pretty hefty... now if it were me paying that I'd want Mark Callaway to be training the whole year within reason, never out of shape.. because I might need him... last 2 Manias he has not been in "good shape" at all and I almost worry what shape he will show up in this year... Sure he is old, there is value in the character, streak etc... but he is the ULTIMATE part timer... he shows up for one match a year at Mania and worse has never put anyone over at that event... in recent years he has stuck to a select few opponents 3 in 5 years to be exact... when younger guys could benefit even from losing to him... just getting that rub.

Look at a guy like Christian, who is just not used a lot... if he's only onscreen for 7 of 12 is he a part timer too?

So is a Chris Jericho, who comes in for 6-7 months of the year (the same schedule as Kane and the like), puts people over for 90% of that time actually worse? or even a bad thing for business? Of course not...

Is RVD bad? Someone who has had a bad experience with the company, who has made a deal where he and the WWE can "try it, see if we like working with each other" and if so, he will be around for more periods but with suitable breaks in between? No that's common sense - his run was as much a try out for WWE on him as him trying them out...

Does a Miz class as a part timer?, cos he spent 2 months filming a movie for WWE? Technically he's under contract but not available as a performer...indeed any WWE guy who makes a movie for them or outside is also a "part timer".


Are the Outlaws bad? guys who are on the payroll 365 doing other roles for WWE, given an in ring run? or might it be that a lot of young talent who Gunn has worked on training in NXT are coming up in the next few months so it'll be useful to have he and Dogg around for them as a "friendly face" and to help them learn "on the job" while getting a nice nostalgia wave with the fans?
There are some part-timers who are bad... Brock is a prime example, he leveraged a huge deal based on the number of appearances, immediately forcing WWE to ration them... more recently he has had to "loosen that" or he would have been dropped as the return didn't justify the expenditure... he clearly still wants to do UFC, basically he wants 2 massive deals from 2 separate companies that would ultimately have to compete for his services on a timeshare basis... that's greedy, that's wrong.

Warrior and Hogan will be bad, they have a short term boost effect for one show, but the deals they will want for a couple of months work, relative to their ability in the ring would fund the salary for a year of 2-3 NXT talents or a lower midcarder when the reality is there is no actual benefit to a younger talent of either man being there. Warrior wrestles, he isn't losing, Hogan isn't allowed to, so neither can really "put anyone over" only damage them.

That's what irks guys like Ziggler and Punk, guys who come in with that mentality, "get in, make a bundle, bury someone else and get out".

By all accounts "Dave" has signed a long term, full time deal... but with time built in for him to fulfil contractual obligations to Marvel. So yes he's a part timer, but no worse than Big Show, Kane or Henry who will all still get their time off each year. With him there is the upside that right around Summerslam he will be in a #1 movie... kind of a good thing to have for Summerslam and is bringing more to the table than Warrior or Hogan is and arguably even Sting. Only wrestling fans will care about Sting to WWE... but WWE seems intent on pissing off all the wrestling fans right now... so who knows.

I'm not able to select any of your options, cos at the end of the day the right option is. Each talent on their own merits.

 

[L@RISANO]

I have said before, that WWE has to phase out the need for so many part-timers to in order to sell a PPV card.
Having 1/2 per year at WM time, is ok, as long as there are guys primed to take over and become the next big superstars of the company. Have 1/2 special Part-Timers for WM, and any others can be used during the year to drum up interest.
The Roster right now, if full of talent that needs pushes in programmes that can help them to the top and into the main stream. Part-Timers would be perfect in such programmes,lMO.

At the end of the day, the part-timers have their roles and can be a big boost if used correctly.

For e.g. a hypothetical situation:
Daniel Bryan has been chasing the gold for quite a while, what if he were to win it at EC, and then Brock Lesnar is placed as his opponent in addition to Batista. Having Daniel Bryan beat those two monsters somehow would do wonders for his career.

That being said; it is not just as simple as part-timers coming to put over guys(Remember Fandango vs Y2J??). If they return to put over someone, it should be someone needing that final push towards superstardom, not some new guy that just debuted or some glorified mid-carder,lMO.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I think it generally depends on the part timers and what your definition is of good business. Ideally, good business would mean someone that's not only a huge draw, but is also someone who can frequently deliver in an entertaining way. However, most part timers are going to be stronger in one area than the other.

For instance, RVD & Chris Jericho are two guys that can be a lotta fun inside the ring. We also know that Chris Jericho is great at promos, but neither guy is a particularly big draw. They make money for the company, of course, but they're not huge draws. Batista, thus far, doesn't strike me as being either a particularly big draw or all that entertaining. I'm sure he'll get some credit for the big numbers Raw has drawn as of late but, frankly, Raw always draws particularly well during WrestleMania season.

 

[Mustang Sally]

That "part-timers" exist at all in WWE represents a major adjustment in Vince McMahon's thinking; his way of changing his ways to suit the needs of the times. It used to be if you wanted to work for WWE, you had to submit to the full-time schedule McMahon demanded and there was no room for negotiation.

Now, largely with the trail-breaking ways of Chris Jericho, there are ways for guys to break in, more on their schedule than Vince McMahons'. Tougher economic times have allowed them to tell Vince "If you want me at all, you're going to have to bend."

If what we've read is true, this drives people like CM Punk insane; he seems to hate the idea of guys coming in for limited engagements and dictating more of the stipulations than "regular" employees get to do......not that any of this stopped Punk from negotiating a few conditions of his own during the opportune times he encountered during the Summer of Punk.

In essence, I can understand why he doesn't want people like The Rock and Brock Lesnar coming in and taking over main event matches. Still, it's a reality of business that fans love seeing people come in occasionally and injecting a burst of excitement to the proceedings.....guys we wouldn't get to see at all if not for these special provisions.

Does having the New Age Outlaws come in for a limited engagement increase the number of PPV buys at an event? I rather doubt it, but it's still great to see guys from the past in the ring again, especially since they're still able to perform.

We can kick this aspect of business around from here 'til doomsday, but the thought that stays with me is that having the Rock fight John Cena two years in a row at the biggest PPV of the year surely increased the number of buys......and I wonder if Punk minded getting a larger WM payoff generated partly because of these "part-timers."

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

I can definitely see why WWE keep resorting to part-timers. They are the wrestlers that people want to see. Stars the calibre of The Rock, Brock Lesnar, The Undertaker, Chris Jericho are stars of the past, and seeing their name on the PPV poster encourages casual fans to purchase a PPV when otherwise they may have not bothered. They have the name value that pretty much no star today has (other than John Cena).

However, the part-timers returning for a run takes away a spot on the card from a full-time performer who otherwise would have been in that spot, which is detrimental to the company's future. It just shows how poorly WWE have done in replacing these guys, because as soon as they show an interest in returning they are booked in the highest profile matches. Maybe its because they are better than the wrestlers on the roster today, or maybe its because WWE has focused so much time and energy on these old-timers, and given them the most focus in storylines than the younger guys who work hard all year haven't had the opportunity to shine and become mega stars.

I like seeing the stars I grew up with, especially Triple H and Undertaker. But once they retire permanently then who will WWE turn to? They need to ensure there is a new generation of main eventers coming through, and the part-timers need to put over new talent, as Jericho always does. For example, a win over The Rock on PPV would do wonders for an up-and-coming talent, but it's unlikely we will ever see it. I hope Batista does the job for someone on his comeback tour.

 

[mcfly2012]

You know what people? It was genius when WWE made the network when they did. They know that in a couple Wrestlemania's time or even three these 'part timers' that are saving the day now wont be around. Gone for good, as in retired. Who will they replace them with? There is no one in roster right now who can make step to mega stardum. Not when you got Cena in our face all the time, and to be honest rightly so, he brings in the major dollars. SoI reckon the 'million plus ppv buyrates ' will be well and truly over when you can fork out the network for cheap. So WWE wins in that respect.

 

[ASKane]

Part Timers
Good for Business
Bad for the Product

I will expand a little. WWE only allows guys to be part timers if they can draw and someone like The Rock can double PPV buys with just an appearance and in that sense it is financially good which is good for business. However generally the product is weakened when the WWE gives big matches to part timers as they will have the match a disappear for about half a year (eg Lesnar at Summerslam). I don't like part timers as I don't care about the financial success I just care about the quality of the product but unfortunately WWE would rather have a terrible product that makes money rather than a great one that struggles financially. I just hope WWE puts faith in younger guys and gives them a chance to try to draw over multiple PPV's but WWE only gives guys 1 ppv to test if they can draw but if they don't they are back in the midcard

 

[laodaron]

The thing is that without the part-timers coming around to bankroll the WWE, does a guy like say, Dolph Ziggler get to stay on contract? Do we keep all three members of the Shield, or does Ambrose lose his contract due to being the least talented of the stable, and the WWE not having near the capital that Part-Timer season brings upon us?

 

[jacdnwarrior]

That really depends on the part timer and how well the storyline is done to incorporate that performer. The truth is the problem is that the WWE has had a hard time developing true stars big enough or great enough to make calling in or signing the part timers unnecessary.

The Rock was needed. The wrestling industry needed him to return. The WWE needed him. Performers in the back can kiss the Rock's ass if they didn't like him returning. That includes Punk, Orton and any one else who didn't like his return. He brought in the money the entire roster couldn't before his return. 3 WMs with big buyrates, one where he hosted, 2 where he wrestled (the matches were hardly great, but still), he headlines other ppvs that also had high buyrates, RR and Elimination Chamber. The company was greatly helped by his return.

The next big deal will be Sting, if he happens to join the WWE on a part time basis that wouldn't help the WWE ? If the WWE brought back people that had no ability to perform or play their part, I might be agree with the complaints. The people who came back were some of the best performers the WWE have ever seen in the business. RVD, Jericho, Batista, The Rock give the company performers who know how to play their role. Batista main eventing WM may be a flop or he could save the event, time will tell. Jericho was in my opinion the most helpful part timer they had, solid matches, put over Fandango, Punk and played his role without any ego.

I understand the complaints of the back, but don't care enough about their dissatisfaction when the company is better off for having the part timers there than not.