The thematic PPV are killing the annoucements and gimmick matches

[RD_21]

I hope this won't be seen as spam or stupid, it's more a comment and something that I have noticed and would be glad to share it with people and know how you feel about it.

Yesterday I was watching Raw and when Cole got to the computer and said at the PPV it will be "RANDY ORTON"..... "VS SHEAMUS"...................... "IN HELL IN A CELL!!!!!!!"

No? FOR REAL? Are you kidding me an hell in a cell match, wow an heel in a cell in the hell in a cell PPV for the most prestigious title I would have never guess it....

Not only is it killing the annoucement that they are still trying to make sound like big thing or surprise but it also kill the very gimmick match. Hell in a cell used to be something big that you would be "lucky" or "unlucky" to take part in with only a select number of people having been in one like Undertaker, Triple H, Shaw Michaels, Mick Foley and Jericho but now you have Sheamus and Orton in a HIAC match where you can't even bleed and do big spot.

The MITB match at Mania was big too and they put a PPV about it that lesser the importance of it.

Same goes for breaking point, a submission match between Angle and benoit or Angle and Jericho was something special but when you have a PPV based on those matches you get superstar who never did a submission move and aren't technical needing to win like that all of a sudden.

The only themed PPV I ever liked was when TNA started it with six side of steel in Lockdown but then WWE tried it and push it to the extreme. It's funny that the last PPV they did NOC (and I agree it's a theme one too to a certain extent) was the first PPV I considered buying in a long time with maybe Summerslam. But Hell in a Cell where I will see people fighting in a cage like they could be in a normal match.... no.

 

[D-Man]

This is part of the reason why gimmick PPV's have been viewed as a fail-concept by the IWC. It takes a lot of the "shock factor" out of what match type is going to be used at each PPV. In the past, when a HIAC match was announced, it used to send shockwaves through the audience and raise TONS of excitement. A perfect example of this was when Steve Austin announced the main event at Bad Blood 2003 between Kevin Nash and Triple H to be contested in the HIAC. (I wish I could find a video on it.)

There's too much foreshadowing these days in pro-wrestling. The WWE feels that the hype in naming the PPV after its main event gimmick benefits them more than a surprise announcement. To an extent, they're right. If an audience knows that a PPV will contain a HIAC or a TLC match prior to the beginning of ticket sales for the event it will probably sell more tickets. But we, as the audience, are left to suffer since the mystique is taken away from us.

 

[Huggie-Bones]

RD, I have to say I agree with you 100%.

It used to be very dramatic when specialty matches were announced, like back during the HHH/Mick Foley feud where Hunter came out like a true heel and talked about the '3 Stages of Hell' match. It made me want to buy less beer 3 weeks so I could afford to grab the PPV.
Now I just wait for highlight videos and published results because the hype isn't there. It's such a shame because the shock value was one of the biggest selling points in the past.
My 2 cents.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

To some degree, I understand and agree. However, let's be honest, the mystique of pro wrestling is something that's virtually gone the way of the dinosaurs thanks to the internet. For instance, I have little doubt that tons of people have already read the results for next week's taped episode of Raw. Why? Because they wanna know what's going on and either aren't able or aren't willing to wait next week to find out what happens. And then after the show airs next week, you'll see many comments posted by many of those same that read the spoilers about how the show simply didn't have the energy or interest as a live episode. The mystique in wrestling is all but gone, it's unfortunate, and the internet does have a lot to do with that. I wish that weren't the case, but it is, so I've generally had to accept it.

In general, there's no pleasing the IWC in particular. Too many simply want everything and anything and complain once they don't get it. When it comes to something like Hell in a Cell or TLC, the lack of mystique really doesn't bother me all that much because it's not like the WWE does those types of matches very often anyhow. Usually, there'd be one or two HIAC matches held in the WWE during the year anyhow, so putting them on a yearly ppv could equal increased ticket sales and ppv buys since the fans know what they're going to be getting in advance. It might not have the shock value but it probably ultimately means more money generated in the end. The ppv buys for both the HIAC and TLC ppvs were up from the buys the ppvs they replaced generated in 2008 and it was the same with the live attendance.

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

Yeh..I agree, I'm sure I have posted a reply to a thread like this one before..but I will say again..
For us the ICW we want surprises and well themed ppv's they take that away..as of today..we know we have to wait a whole year to see a hell in a cell match, 10 years ago, heck even 3 years ago, we didn't know when we were going to the see a cell match..and when they used to be announced, it was really shocking!! but now its like..well, its a ppv..same can be said for TLC match, we know will come at the end of the year!!

Just off-topic, I think Orton vs Sheamus in HiaC will not be much of a good match, I didn't like Orton/Cena last year and I think this won't be good! Orton has now been in a total of 2 Cell matches correct? Against Taker, he was okay, because well he faced Taker, then last year because he had already been in a cell match, he was kinda supposed to carry Cena in the match and it didn't come out as good! I didn't mind just seeing 1 cell match this year..being Taker/Kane!

 

[The Raven's Epitaph]

I'm so glad somebody else actually created this thread, just to save me the time of making it myself. After I watched the latest installment of Raw that showed the mention of the Hell in a Cell between Sheamus and Randy Orton, this thread just instantly came into my mind.

I completely agree with you. Themed PPV's with the exception of Money in the Bank IMO are ruining WWE. I used to love the feeling I got such as back in 2003 when the Summerslam Elimination Chamber was announced, I was so excited and I was marking out. Now, we just expect matches like this because there's a PPV named after it that features that match. It's a horror.

But the Hell in a Cell, God above.. everybody went nuts when this match was announced, even the superstars who were in it were scared shitless - but when it's announced on Raw, Sheamus and Randy Orton are...smiling? They should be shatting their pants right there, not stood there being happy about it.

 

[huegtoad]

i think one way to circumvent what the person who created this thread is talking about is hyping THIS PPV before NOC. Something like this. this is truncated for a quicker read by the way
Raw GM: Night of champions will feature a six pack challenge featuring (name your six people)
Now, while you are preparing for NOC, i want you all to keep this in the back of your mind. The winner of the six pack challenge will have their first title defense in October's pay per view, which i feel compelled to remind you, is titled, Hell in a Cell, so i am sure you can all guess what that means.
Good luck!!!
I don't know after reading that, it sounded like a better idea before i wrote it but something to that extent, so the announcers could say as orton was celebrating,"Orton wins the title, who is he going to have to face inside the hell in the cell? find out tomorrow on raw see you then!!!" or something like that. You take the suprise away but you add SUSPENSE because what you are saying is that the champion has no rest for the wary. I also believe that ok, with TV, it makes SENSE in this corporate world to be PG. If you keep your sponsors happy, you keep your network happy and then when your contract is up you don't have to go hunting for a new network, it makes perfect sense. But the PPV's? They have a good relationship with the PPV providers and i don't believe there is anything stated that all PPV's have to be PG. I think elimination chamber, HITC and extreme rules can be converted to PG13 to allow blood, and i don't think any sponsors or networks or anyone else would bat an eye. You have to make the structures and the rules of the match a threat, it's what makes the gimmick work!!!

 

[TGS]

I agree.

it does kill the importance of whatever gimmick match they're doing. It used to be Vince would use Hell in a Cell to put an end to a heated rivalry or something along those lines to kind of fruther an angle.(HBK v UT, with Kane appearing).

Fans used to be excited to hear there was going to be a HiC or a Ladder Match or a TLC match coming up. Now just check out WWEs PPVs for the year and you can pretty much predict whats going to happen.

You could even tell last night when they did announce the HiC between Orton & Sheamus and how underwhelmed the audience.

get rid of the themed PPVs.

 

[VinnieSunshine]

Yesterday I was watching Raw and when Cole got to the computer and said at the PPV it will be "RANDY ORTON"..... "VS SHEAMUS"...................... "IN HELL IN A CELL!!!!!!!"

No? FOR REAL? Are you kidding me an hell in a cell match, wow an heel in a cell in the hell in a cell PPV for the most prestigious title I would have never guess it....

Not only is it killing the annoucement that they are still trying to make sound like big thing or surprise but it also kill the very gimmick match. Hell in a cell used to be something big that you would be "lucky" or "unlucky" to take part in with only a select number of people having been in one like Undertaker, Triple H, Shaw Michaels, Mick Foley and Jericho but now you have Sheamus and Orton in a HIAC match where you can't even bleed and do big spot.

C'mon dude, like you couldn't see Sheamus get a rematch at the next PPV, which just so happens to be HIAC. I think it would've been better to place Orton in the ME in the cell against someone else and do a multiple HIAC match with Sheamus and do a triple threat or four-way. Sheamus being in that match, he is lucky. He is now among the ranks of those men you listed. Not EVERYONE on the roster can be in those matches. I love watching all these type matches, yeah some of them are not believable with no blood, but I dont need to see the violence anymore. The times are changing.

I agree that the gimmick PPVs have devalued the structures such as HIAC and MITB, but Im loving these concepts. But not each match on the cards are using these matches. Lets face it, the days of old and being somewhat surprised are gone.

 

[CanadianCrippler12]

These "Themed PPVS without a shadow of a doubt have to go. As soon as I saw Cole go to the podium and he mentioned the HIAC PPV it was pretty obvious that he was going to say "Sheamus vs Randy Orton in a Hell in a Cell Match! There is a time and a place for themed PPVS though for example Bragging Rights where it should be all RAW vs SmackDown! natches to determine who the better brand is but as far as having the Main Event match in the PPV title name, that's gotta go a.s.a.p.

I can remember as a kid practically begging my dad to order Backlash 2001 to see Kurt Angle vs Chris Benoit in a 30 minute ultimate submission match or Bad Blood 2004 with HBK vs Triple H in a Hell in a Cell match because those types of matches were only used maybe once a year. Now by having names like Elomination Chamber, Hell in a Cell and TLC that takes away the mystique and the thrill of wanting to watch those matches because back then they were classic matches like Cactus Jack vs Triple H or TLC II, now it's just thrown in their just for the sake of it.

 

[excel_excel]

gotta agree with you all. Its devaluing the gimmick matches and in particular HIAC which was once built up as a 'career ending or shortening' match but now feels just...normal. there is no tension or anything for Orton and Sheamus stepping into the cell, it feels like any regular match, and that's just wrong.

Elimination chamber as being a once a year PPV is fine but Money in the bank should be booked the same way, don't have it at as a PPV and 'Mania as well. Man WWE are relying too much on gimmick PPV's and there buyrates this year reflect the waning interest in them by the public

 

[Dzone]

Stupid WWE and wanting to make more sales... lol.

Anyways yeh it is devaluing gimmick matches which I personally do not like... Maybe they should bring back some matches like "audience brings weapons" =] *wont work in PG era but meh*

Also I wanna see the "inferno match" it simply is a good way to put someone "for a break" or pretend to get injured... defo wont work in PG era but hey lol.

 

[DeathClutch]

Fans are spoiled for choice nowadays, I'm sick of HHH/Cena or Cena/Orton having some kind of meaning ie WrestleMania quality main event feel, no it's a standard RAW main event and it's boring, gimmick matches are being over used and have no meaning of excitement, like Orton/Sheamus HELL IN A CELL.. SERIOUSLY? what happened in their feud that turned it into a hell in a cell match is needed? nothing. Same goes for these gimmick PPV's now and again their fun, like 2-3 a year but everything PPV?
WWE needs to use the gimmick PPV's they have/had (Royal Rumble, King of the Ring & Survivor Series) and use the concept and then ADD a gimmick PPV or two through out the year but only the main event like HBK/Taker II (Badd Blood 1997) not have 2-3 of the same match on the same card.

WWE is in a transitional period they're testing waters and trying to see what works and what doesn't but IMO WWE should go back a little old school style with booking.

 

[Tougie]

Always hated the PPV name changes, and the fact they have the "new" ppv's as gimmick pv's make it worse. It always got me amped up when a HITC was announced, like Brock-Taker, couldnt wait for it. So Sheamus and Orton, HITC and the HITC PPV...SHOCKING!!!!!

Just sucks all the way around. Takes away from the suspense, no one cares about an all HITC, Elimination Chamber, TLC PPV to begin with. These werent PPV concepts for a reason. Because whenever they were announced it got fans amped up. The only true thing you knew was that the Rumble was gonna happen and MITB was going to happen every year at Mania (Since 2006 once they did it for the second time it was obvious they were sticking with the concept). But yeah, gimmick ppv's are just another way WWE is dumbing it down, taking away from the product, and laughing at IWC members like me who come online and talk about it.

 

[ccotreau1]

I would agree with you about some of these themed PPV's are overkill...but sometimes the theme itself needs to go away, for example HIAC. Not to say I don't love a good HIAC match, but it is hard to top the one between Undertaker and Mankind from King of the Ring 1998, so I honestly think they should have retired it then, or at least if they continue to use it, make it the last match of a feud. TLC is another one I am not crazy about personally, because TLC was special when you had both Hardy's, Edge/Christian, and the Dudley Boyz in it, and they did to that match what Undertaker/Mankind did to HIAC. It should have been left alone. The Elimination Chamber one doesn't bother me so much where it is still on 1 PPV a year. Nor do the other themed PPVs bother me.

 

[Montague]

I was excited when certain gimmicked ppv's were made(NoC,ER)but thats because several different types of matches can be made, for ER it could be anywhere from a steel cage, to a hardcore, to a ladder, to a tables match.
for other ppv's (HiaC, TLC, EC, F4W) its so predictible what stipulation the match is going to involve and alot of times who will be in said match
its not HiaC with out Taker, Kane, HHH, HBK, or Foley
its not TLC with out Edge or a Hardy
the same 4 main eventers all year round will be in the main events for F4W
MitB was surprisingly good i think if they got rid of it at Mania then it can stay but the other 4, they have got to go

 

[CJ The Pirate]

The only 'good' reason I can see for the PPV's being Themed is so it's easier for Parents to see what their kids are watching. They can quickly search Hell In A Cell or TLC and decide whether or not they think that's suitable or not.

'Good' reason

 

[Y2JChrisJericho]

These "Themed PPVS without a shadow of a doubt have to go. As soon as I saw Cole go to the podium and he mentioned the HIAC PPV it was pretty obvious that he was going to say "Sheamus vs Randy Orton in a Hell in a Cell Match! There is a time and a place for themed PPVS though for example Bragging Rights where it should be all RAW vs SmackDown! natches to determine who the better brand is but as far as having the Main Event match in the PPV title name, that's gotta go a.s.a.p.

I can remember as a kid practically begging my dad to order Backlash 2001 to see Kurt Angle vs Chris Benoit in a 30 minute ultimate submission match or Bad Blood 2004 with HBK vs Triple H in a Hell in a Cell match because those types of matches were only used maybe once a year. Now by having names like Elomination Chamber, Hell in a Cell and TLC that takes away the mystique and the thrill of wanting to watch those matches because back then they were classic matches like Cactus Jack vs Triple H or TLC II, now it's just thrown in their just for the sake of it.

Wouldn't you want to buy the PPV than if you enjoyed watching these type of matches? It makes sense. Instead of asking to order a ppv for one match, you can order a ppv for a ppv.

I don't know, personally I like the themed ppv's, I don't mind them at all. I guess nothing really shocks me anymore in the WWE, and the internet is apart of that but people blame the internet for a lot of things, yet it's all apart of a new generation and era, and in fact the internet has built interest for me. I don't read spoilers or anything like that, it isn't that hard to not click on the link...yet people complain.

The themed PPV's are good in my opinion but for now...in a couple years it will be really repetitive and than I'll agree for some change, but nothing has been that bad, PPV buys aren't having a major decline or anything either.

 

[Honkey_Kong]

I don't think thematic PPVs are necessarily the problem. I for one look forward for the Rumble. And I loved war games and Survivor Series.

But I think the violent gimmick matches should be saved for special matches that are built up by the booking. I mean, when I think of Hell in The Cell, I think of Mankind/Taker and the violent feud they had that led to it. Having a whole night of hell in the cells doesn't really work the gimmick in to the story.

It makes it as crappy of an idea as Lockdown.

 

[MizfitPeep]

I agree with some of the posters here. Like the Honkey_Kong, I enjoy the Royal Rumble & Survivor Series(when they actually do SS matches). But it's the ppv's like Hell in a Cell, Fatal 4 Way, & TLC that I'm not really ok with. Having those types of matches on a specific ppv doesn't make it as exciting as if they had them randomly throughout the year. I want to be surprised about what type of match I'm going to see on a ppv. Michael Cole dramatically reading the GM's email on Monday was silly, because we all knew what the next ppv's theme was. WWE should just get rid of the HIAC ppv since it's just a thrown in extra, anyway.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

The whole point of a Hell In A Cell match was to end the feud...it was the "it all comes down to this...one man will survive" idea, a perfect example of this was the Cactus Jack v Triple H title match in Foleys "retirement" match back in 2000 i think it was. The horror on Triple H's face when Cactus announces its a HIAC match reinforced how dangerous this match was, and the crowd went mad.

Now, everyone knows there will be HIAC matches at the HIAC ppv, their is no suspence as to what type of match the title match will be, as the title of the ppv gives this away. The Hell In A Cell used to be a very rare match, there wasnt even one every year, and this PPV has ruined it.

Same with the Submission matches at Breaking Point, the Elimination Chamber at No Way Out (the idea of this was that the chamber was the only way to solve an issue between 6 men), and the MITB ppv. The multi-man ladder match at wrestlemania was a great once-a-year match, and now there is a whole ppv dedicated to it? Talk about gimmick overload.

Overall, themed PPVs is a terrible idea IMO, it lessens the effect on a special match and doesnt really add anything. You could have a HIAC match a couple of times a year, but knowing when it is going to happen months in advance can be damaging to storylines and takes away the excitment of the announcement

 

[LongLiveTheStreak]

For us, the Internet Wrestling Community, themed PPVs are killing the suspense of a HIAC, fatal 4-way, TLC.

But for WWE's target audience, little kids, the suspense and shock value of these matches is alive and well.

WWE may be very predictable to us at times, but it's not so predictable to Vince's young target audience.

I'm not saying I like it by any means. I miss the old days when a HIAC announcement was shocking and suspenseful. The last time I remember "marking out" at the announcement of a Hell in a Cell was Vickie Guerrero telling Edge he would be locked in there with the Taker.

 

[Trill Co$by]

Well when you're living in a time where the IWC doesn't stop trying to get inside scoop, then you've gotta find a way to grab interest before the IWC turns it away.

WWE announcing it early is a way for them to gain interest. Sure the announcement has no suspense, but the anticipation of seeing the two (or more) lock horns in the cell is what matters.

But anyway, if you want your shock value back then stop going to IWC sites and just watch it. Otherwise stfu and deal with it.

 

[RD_21]

It's not just about shock value. I am reading news and sometime spoilers and was still shocked by the nexus.

But like many users said when you had an hell in a cell before it was because the feud was becoming so intense that they needed the only thing that could contain their hatred. Now I know it's going to be an hell in a cell and for feud that don't even deserve one just because the PPV name call for it.

Sheamus no matter how much you like it and think he is a ME isn't yet, he is an upper mid carder to lower main eventer he doesn't have the prestige yet to be in a hell in a cell match and there's no way that his feud with Randy needed a cell.

Kane vs Taker maybe, but not Sheamus vs Orton. Gimmick match are feud ender or to make a feud pick up, now it's just thrown for the sake of it.