Will There Ever Be An Addition To The "Big Four" PPV's?

[Paralyzer Z]

No I do not mean another addition to the general WWE PPV calender but an adaption of a current WWE PPV to become a major event in the company.

The Big 4 as we know consist of Wrestlemania, Summerslam, Survivor Series, and Royal Rumble. These 4 were the original WWE major WWE events and every new event since has been considered inferior to the big 4 (not quality wise but importance wise). The only one that has broken through the glass ceiling of relevance it The King of the Ring which is no longer broadcast as a PPV but rather as an annual tournament. WWE fans alike as well as the company itself hype these 4 as the biggest events of the year, with WM being the climax. Besides being the original 4, the 4 seems to usually have more effort put into them and it usually results in a more qualitative show than any of the other PPVs in the duration of the year.

The question is will one of the current PPVs not considered as important as these four ever join their ranks? I say yes, and it will be Money in Bank! Sure it is a gimmick PPV but so is Survivor Series and the Royal Rumble. The only 2 editions of the PPV have been of extreme quality, with 2010 being a great PPV, and 2011 containing the first 5 star WWE match since 1997, as well as other fantastic matches. In simpler words Money in the bank has the best track record of any Non- big 4 PPV of the year. The EC PPV comes in second but the 2010 edition was not THAT great in my opinion. With the important atmosphere in this past year's MITB PPV, it really did feel like it was one of the big 4 and had a much more important status than others such as Over the Limit, or Night of Champions. That however is just my opinion, now it is your turn.

Will there ever be a big "#5 event" to join the other 4? If so which one would it be? Why?

 

[Why Always Me]

No - the only other big PPV was King Of The Ring which alas is no more. All other PPV's have names changed every few years, but the Rumble, Mania, SSlam and S Series have history and tradition.

 

[mral82]

If there was a chance it would've been King Of The Ring back in the day but not now. As I see it other than The Royal Rumble, WrestleMania, SummerSlam and Survivor Series "The Corre 4" the others are glorified In Your Houses w/ the Tag line names like Elimination Chamber, Money In The Bank, TLC, Hell In A Cell, Night Of Champions and ETC.

 

[Aquaman6686]

I considered Night of Champions a Big PPV, until they ruined it in 2010 by having a non-title match on the card, now Night of Champions means nothing.

 

[I_Like_All_Wrestling]

Are any of them really a big deal anymore? I suppose you could argue Survivor Series this year because of The Rock and the fact that they were trying to attract corporate partners. But really, is any PPV different than any other. Even Wrestlemania is exactly the same now, just in a bigger venue. You could argue Royal Rumble because it's unique. I enjoy the Rumble myself, but outside of the main match...same matches as the week before and after.

We have a match on RAW, then see the same longer match on a PPV, then see it again the next night on the next RAW...then we repeat it the next month. When that becomes a little stale, we just take two matches and make them tag together. The reason that the Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam, and Survivor Series were a big dea (and King of the Ring when it debuted) was because they were exclusive PPVs. When they added more PPVs, they used them all to continue stories and build towards the big PPV. No longer. Now it's just a repeat and I think the "big" events other than Wrestlemania are more in the minds of older fans.

Unless they take away PPVs, reserve titles shots for specific events, or save one offs, like The Rock wrestling, no, I don't really think there's any way to make one a big deal (annually).

 

[King of the Words]

Well, every year since they started, I have looked forward to the MITB ppv. and the Elimination chamber ppv. As much as Survivor Series and Summer Slam. Wrestlemania and the Royal rumble are in a league of their own.(IMO.) I personally would like to see WWE drop to 6 or 8 ppv's a year. My 6 would be Royal Rumble in January, Wrestlemania in March, King of the Ring in June, Summer Slam in late August, MITB ppv in early October, and The Survivor series in late November. The Elimination chamber matches could be put into the Survivor series with some 5 on 5 traditional S.S. matches. TLC matches could be combined with MITB ppv if done right. Any event could have an extreme rules match which would take care of that ppv idea. I think they should make Summer Slam even a bigger deal. Make it like the Wreslemania of the Summer with matches you would only see at Wrestlemania. This could lessen the greatness of Wrestlemania, so it would have to be done very carefully. Wrestlemania still needs something on the card that you will not see anywhere else, all year long. Being in a big stadium is a help, plus a giant match as the main event every year that appeals to all ages. Like different generations colliding with Cena and Rock. I think this would be a good way of booking the WWE ppv year, and would be worth trying. It would give more time between ppv's to build feuds properly and makes the fans more interested in the product. I think that less could really be more in the long run.

 

[HBsam31]

I don't think that there ever will be.. King of the ring came close, but for what ever reason it fizzled out and was completely disgarded until it was brought back as a tv tournament. As fat as mitb goes it was my favorite ppv of this year, but if it was not in chicago I do not believe it would have had that big ppv feel to it. The matches were awesome, but it was the crowd that made that ppv.

 

[TM Punk]

No I do not mean another addition to the general WWE PPV calender but an adaption of a current WWE PPV to become a major event in the company.

The Big 4 as we know consist of Wrestlemania, Summerslam, Survivor Series, and Royal Rumble. These 4 were the original WWE major WWE events and every new event since has been considered inferior to the big 4 (not quality wise but importance wise). The only one that has broken through the glass ceiling of relevance it The King of the Ring which is no longer broadcast as a PPV but rather as an annual tournament. WWE fans alike as well as the company itself hype these 4 as the biggest events of the year, with WM being the climax. Besides being the original 4, the 4 seems to usually have more effort put into them and it usually results in a more qualitative show than any of the other PPVs in the duration of the year.

The question is will one of the current PPVs not considered as important as these four ever join their ranks? I say yes, and it will be Money in Bank! Sure it is a gimmick PPV but so is Survivor Series and the Royal Rumble. The only 2 editions of the PPV have been of extreme quality, with 2010 being a great PPV, and 2011 containing the first 5 star WWE match since 1997, as well as other fantastic matches. In simpler words Money in the bank has the best track record of any Non- big 4 PPV of the year. The EC PPV comes in second but the 2010 edition was not THAT great in my opinion. With the important atmosphere in this past year's MITB PPV, it really did feel like it was one of the big 4 and had a much more important status than others such as Over the Limit, or Night of Champions. That however is just my opinion, now it is your turn.

Will there ever be a big "#5 event" to join the other 4? If so which one would it be? Why?

First of all shawn michaels vs undertaker from wreslemania 25, and shawn michaels vs john cena from raw in 2006. There's two 5 star matches.

Anywho, I would love to see less ppvs and I would love it if king of the ring made its way back to being a ppv. When that was a ppv there was not a big 4 there was a big 5. I say this because in its prime it was the rumble, mania ss, kotr, and survivor series. All other ppvs were in your house. So, call me old school, but I think that the only one that could come close is KOTR. But I heard somewhere that vince doesn't like tournaments. Go figure, he hates something we all love.

 

[willross]

I think WWE should do Royal RUmble, ELimination CHamber, Wrestlemania, Money in the Bank, Night of Champions, and Survivor Series should be the "major PPV's" featuring RAW and SD guys while the remaining months should have Brand Exclusive PPV's....best way to showcase as many people as possible and get fresh matches, give guys a chance to show what they got.

Never agreed with them making every PPV featuring both brands, took away from the special feeling the big time PPV's gave.

 

[Voice of Reason]

If it were up to me, the only Pay Per Views that I would keep would be Wrestlemania, Royal Rumble, Survivor Series, Summerslam, MITB, and Elimination Chamber. I would get rid of literally all the others. While I enjoy a good Hell in a Cell match, they're not unique enough to warrant their own Pay Per View. And I have never liked Night of Champions. Oh boy! A Pay Per View where all of the titles are defended! BIG DEAL!! It's a Pay Per View. The titles are supposed to be on the line.

MITB definitely deserves a Pay Per View because the matches are some of my favorites to watch and their outcomes have huge, far-reaching ramifications. And while I will admit that the Elimination Chamber doesn't have a big impact on anything besides titles, I think that the matches themselves are unique enough to warrant a Pay Per View. I still watch some of the old Chamber matches on YouTube. They're fantastic.

As for King of the Ring, I really hate to say this but unless they make being King of the Ring a bigger deal somehow, it doesn't deserve a Pay Per View. I definitely think that the tournament should stick around because it's a great way to give a promising young talent a very big push. However, for it to get a Pay Per View, they need to give the King of the Ring some sort of reward besides the title of King. This is just a suggestion, but I think it would be cool if the King was made the temporary general manager of one of the shows. Now that would warrant a Pay Per View.

 

[GameOver]

I considered Night of Champions a Big PPV, until they ruined it in 2010 by having a non-title match on the card, now Night of Champions means nothing.

Night of Champions was never a big PPV, titles should be defended on every PPV the idea of one night a year when all are defended is ******ed they still only have the main titles anyway

back to the OP, actually there already was 5

WrestleMania started 1985
as did King Of The Ring (though it wasn't a televised PPV til 1993, and the first official title shot at SummerSlam stipulation wasn't until 2002 which is also the year it ended til revised in 2006 and then every 2 yrs there after)
Survivor Series started in 87
followed by Royal Rumble and SummerSlam in 1988

so there ya go, this whole time the Big 4 was really 4 and a non televised PPV.

KOTR was a great idea, i don't see why they can't fit it in and get rid of one of the other ******ed themed ones, it gives midcard/upper midcarders a shot at spotlight and boosts the vibe going into SummerSlam, then they just need something to fill the void between SummerSlam and Survivor Series.

 

[Dagger Dias]

I considered Night of Champions a Big PPV, until they ruined it in 2010 by having a non-title match on the card, now Night of Champions means nothing.

Wow, really? I didn't agree with having CM Punk face Big Show at Night of Champions either but that hardly ruined the event. They have less titles now so they have no choice but to put on some non-title matches unless they decided to put the MITB briefcases on the line. It's not that big of a deal. Night of Champions is still one of the most consistently great shows of the year. I look forward to it every single time it's upcoming.

As for my choices.... I can think of a handful that could someday join the big 4. Night of Champions has always been the #5 show to me because the fact that EVERY title is up for grabs in the same night just screams of prestige. Elimination Chamber is another one. As part of the road to Wrestlemania it will only continue to grow in importance due to how it sets up world title feuds for the biggest show of the year. Then there's Money In the Bank. Both of the shows that PPV brand has put on have been solid and the MITB concept has been a huge success ever since Edge won the first one in 2005. It has successfully replaced King of the Ring as the main path for someone to break into the main event for the first time and that show will continue to grow in importance much like Elimination Chamber.

 

[Ellye]

Among the new PPVs, Money in the Bank is the one that can become huge.

In fact, is one of the very few PPVs that I really, really look forward to (the other ones are Royal Rumble and, to a lesser degree, Wrestlemania).

 

[The Brain]

It will be very difficult to view any other ppv on the same level as the current big four. The reason is longevity and tradition. I'm willing to bet that the big four ppvs we have today date back to before 90% of the posters here were wrestling fans. They have been apart of our lives for nearly our entire lives. What's the next one on the seniority ladder? Extreme Rules? I think that dates back to 2007. Also the other ppvs often get switched around either in name or date. The big four have their spots cemented and we know we can count on them every year.

 

[rge2010]

To the OP...Kurt Angle vs Brock Lesnar at WM19, Kurt Angle vs Chris Benoit at RR03 or Kurt Angle vs Shawn Michaels at WM21 not a 5 star match? Or how about HBK's matches with Taker at WM25 and WM26? Loads of 5 star matches since 1997.

As for your question, I dont see anything breaking into the big 3. There is no big 4 anymore IMO because Survivor Series isnt unique in anyway. Bragging Rights was virtually the same, they dropped that and Survivor Series stayed the same with 1 fucking 5 on 5 match. Yes, a big deal this year because 25 years, MSG and The Rock but its lost its way in recent years.

KOTR should be brought back. WWE could really push this as a major tournament. You dont even need to have the Titles on the card. Have the very best of the best and make it a 'Wrestling World Cup'. It can be an accolade that is held for 12 months.

Another way of making PPV's is making them more important. Cut it down to 6 a year PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!! Less is more!!!

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

To the OP...Kurt Angle vs Brock Lesnar at WM19, Kurt Angle vs Chris Benoit at RR03 or Kurt Angle vs Shawn Michaels at WM21 not a 5 star match? Or how about HBK's matches with Taker at WM25 and WM26? Loads of 5 star matches since 1997.

As for your question, I dont see anything breaking into the big 3. There is no big 4 anymore IMO because Survivor Series isnt unique in anyway. Bragging Rights was virtually the same, they dropped that and Survivor Series stayed the same with 1 fucking 5 on 5 match. Yes, a big deal this year because 25 years, MSG and The Rock but its lost its way in recent years.

KOTR should be brought back. WWE could really push this as a major tournament. You dont even need to have the Titles on the card. Have the very best of the best and make it a 'Wrestling World Cup'. It can be an accolade that is held for 12 months.

Another way of making PPV's is making them more important. Cut it down to 6 a year PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!! Less is more!!!

He was referring to Dave "let's count how many moves happen and base it off that" Meltzer's 5 star matches. Meltzer is a massive puro mark and doesn't understand that pro wrestling is a business.

Survivor Series is still one of the big 4. Summerslam and Mania are essentially the same and the only thing that makes RR different is one match. They're all still promoted as a big deal.

As for the topic, no. You can't just magically have prestige. It takes years. Times change and these other PPVs aren't really brands like the others. If you say any one of the big four, most people in the general public know you're talking about wrestling.

Wrestling World Cup is a bad idea. If I wanted it to be sports-driven and not story-driven....I'd watch sports.

Cutting down the number of PPVs don't make them more important and neither does adding shit to them. Matches and stories make PPVs important. Most of them are. I've looked foreward to pretty much every ppv this year. WWE has been smart and used match types as an advertisement for the PPV so people channel flipping see it and immediately know at least part of what to expect "hell in a cell" "money in the bank" etc.

WWE has done a good job at mixing story with business to create a pretty successful format. You guys who say "back in the day there were only a handful of PPVs" yea....and have you ever gone back and watched the regular weekly shows from then? Unless you want Raw to be Dolph Ziggler vs local jobber number 2, Zack Ryder vs Local jobber number 35, Cena promo, Punk promo, main event with Del Rio vs Santino, that's a bad idea. You can't have the current fast-paced weekly format and NOT have at least 1 PPV a month.

 

[martymcfly]

Honestly, I think the WWE would be better served making summer slam and survivor series prestigious again before going for a 5th. Obviously this is my personal opinion, but there has not been a summerslam card that didn't sound terrible in quite some time. Hate to say it, but same for survivor series.

Historically, the WWE has had it's Big 4, and the other monthly filler PPVs, but I feel like in the last few years especially, that there has not really been anything in summerslam or survivor series to really make it stand out from any of the other pay per views as far as interest, built up storylines, or caring too much one way or the other about the victors. Sure, each pay per view has its unique gimmick matches, but that's not enough for me to order one. If I didn't know any better, I would not have guessed that any recent summerslam or survivor series was supposed to be any bigger or better or more entertaining than any other PPV.