WWE PPV Lineup Discussion (Gimmicks, number of shows, etc KEEP IT ALL IN HERE!!!!)

[ProWrestlingFan]

WWE has several gimmick PPVs like Extreme Rules, Money in the Bank, Hell in a Cell, TLC, Elimination Chamber etc.


In my opinion WWE should replace Hell in a Cell PPV with either King of the Ring or Cyber Sunday. Hell in a Cell is the worst gimmick PPV besides Money in the Bank. All Hell in a Cell PPVs have sucked and it lessens the importance of Hell in a Cell and is very predictable. Money in the Bank should be either held at Wrestlemaia or Summerslam and there should be only 1 Money in the Bank Ladder Match.

Which gimmick PPV do you dislike the most and by which PPV would you replace it ?

(Either you can bring back a former PPV or create a new one).

 

[avriltt234]

I think Wwe need to change all of the Pay Per Views back to there old names because before they started with the themed Pay Per Views you would be surprised to see a special match at a Pay Per View like a Hell In a Cell Match at Summerslam or a Elimination Chamber Match at Survivor Series and the matches would be longer because they didn't have to rush because they had another one to get through later in the night

 

[tvcolosi]

I totally agree with HIAC. that match should be used 2 times a year at most... not 2-3 in the same night. I remember before that PPV every single HIAC match featured HHH or Taker(al snow vs big boss man in the "kennel from hell match" doesnt count.

Ill also throw TLC in the mix too. HIAC and TLC matches should be built up for months and feature wrestlers that would be best in that sort of match. Not just because you happen to be #1 contender in December and whatever month HIAC PPV is in.

 

[ccotreau1]

As much as I love Hell in the Cell matches, the HIAC ppv kinda ruined my love for the actual match because those in those HIAC matches at the PPV doesn't have the proper buildup as those not at that event. I would replace it with Cyber Sunday. I would also merge Money in the Bank PPV with the TLC PPV (I would do the Money in the Bank matches as the Ladder match in that PPV) and replace Money in the Bank's PPV with King of the Ring.

 

[Dagger Dias]

I would get rid of Extreme Rules. I hate that show.... It's never "Extreme" and hasn't been for a few years now. I get it that they need a Wrestlemania rematch show, they should end Extreme Rules and bring back Bragging Rights. The main event could be Last Man Standing matches or Iron Man matches. Then they could of course have the midcard champions face each other, and either the divas or tag team Champions defend their belts on the show as well. The Raw VS Smackdown elimination tag team match would need to return and they'd need to promote its importance, although instead of a useless trophy I'd have the surviving wrestler(s) earn a title shot.

This is much better than keeping Extreme Rules around. That show always ends up being among my least favorites each year and it rarely ever truly is "Extreme". I'd rather get rid of No Way Out from this year, but it's without a true gimmick and thus I cannot delete it in this thread, so Extreme Rules it is. Hell In a Cell has been mentioned, but it makes sense to keep it for now, it's a popular gimmick and WWE can get away with having a PPV event devoted to it for that reason. Heck, they could also move Money In the Bank up to April and bring back The Great American Bash to replace it in July. That'd be even better than bringing back Bragging Rights, both of which part of me wishes they had never ended.

 

[Cyclorama]

I agree with both HIAC and TLC.
It makes these matches less special, I miss the days when we'd get a HIAC match at survior series or a TLC match at Summerslam.
Personally, I would do away with both of them and then not have a HIAC or TLC match for 2 years, in an effort to try and restore some meaning to them
I think that with WWE's big social media drive, Cyber sunday would be a perfect fit for an October PPV and in December I'd bring back Armageddon

 

[RDizzle]

Hey guys. Long time reader, first time poster .. The first one that comes to mind is definitely Hell In A Cell.. It really doesn't do anything.. Hell in a cell was designed to finish the most personal of feuds and we never knew when it was coming.. Now, we have a set date every year where we know we're getting a couple of matches in the cell.. Ever since it got its own pay per view, the matches have been so watered down and the cell usually isn't neccessary.. This type of match should take place when it's really needed to settle something, for a rivalry such as Triple H and The Undertaker (one of my all time favorite matches) or something like Triple H and Batista.. Not just because, for example, somebody wins a beat the clock challenge in order to face the champ in the cell.. I also agree that Money In The Bank should take place at Wrestlemania or Summerslam, ONCE a year.

 

[Heel Ziggler]

Get out Extreme Rules, Bring back Bragging Rights. Have the normal WM rematches, a couple of new feuds, and have main events in gimmick matches, like last man standing and steel cage.

 

[frogsplash31]

I would bring back War Games for sure, it could easily replace Hell in the Cell or Extreme Rules. I always liked normal pay per views that could have one gimmick match to end a fued, not a whole card of them.

 

[HBKistheHOF]

That's funny, You put down all the PPV's I enjoy. And out of all of those MitB I think deserves a PPV the least, and no one even voted for that!

I actually like a PPV dedicated to HiaC, Elimination Chamber, TLC, etc. Instead of never knowing if or when they would do that kind of match that year. I just think the names are stupid. Why couldn't "creative" figure out better names than just the match types themselves?!?!


BY FAR, Night of Champions is the biggest waste of a gimmick PPV. EVERY title should be on the line at EVERY PPV! Complete Waste!

Also I don't mind 12 PPV's a year but 9 would probably be better. Do the Big 4, plus the 5 stipulation PPV's you mentioned, with new names, and I think that would make the PPV's a little better all around.

or if they keep 12, replace a NWO or OVL with Bragging Rights. By far the best name & concept for a "new" gimmick PPV.

 

[King of the Words]

MOD NOTE:
There have been a lot of threads lately about the number of PPV events there should be and what gimmicks they should have. Please keep all of those topics in this thread. Duplicate topics will be warned/infracted and merged/deleted.

I would get rid of Hell in a Cell out of the themed PPV's. Like everyone is saying, this PPV has taken the greatness out of the HIAC match. I can see having it once a year at Mania or Summer Slam, maybe even Extreme rules, instead of a Steel cage match.

I actually think the Elimination Chamber is enough for the cage type matches. Since that match has come around I don't think the HIAC is really needed unless it is for the Undertaker or Triple H. to fight in like last Mania.

I would replace the HIAC PPV with the King of the Ring PPV for sure. This is one ppv that is missed by many WWE fans. I think bringing it back would be a great idea. I know they have MITB, but that should be for one briefcase for one year. The King of the Ring should get to be King for an entire year and earn the right to face the WWE or WHC at a ppv.

This is the way I would list the ppv's for MITB ppv and KOTR ppv to work properly.

#1. Royal Rumble in January. Have the winner to face either the WHC or the WWEC at Mania.

#2. Elimination Chamber in February. Have 2 chamber matches. One for a title and the other for the 2nd #1 contender for Mania.

#3. March would not have a ppv. Give more time to build up Mania feuds.

#4. Wrestlemania in early April. Best card of matches of the year. ( Possible HIAC match.)

#5. Backlash/Extreme Rulz in late April to settle Mania feuds.

#6. Cyber Sunday in May to get the fans involved in the entire card.

#7. Night of Champions, in June, with every title on the line.

#8. King of the Ring, in July, winner gets to face the WWE or WHC at Summer Slam.

#9. Summer Slam, in August. 2nd biggest ppv of the year. Maybe in a warm outdoors arena like the Rose Bowl. ( Possible HIAC match.)

#10. WWE Scramble PPV in September. Have 2 Five man Scramble matches for WWE and WHC titles.

11. T.L.C. MITB ppv in October. One Match containing 8 to 10 WWE superstars from Raw and SD to compete in a MITB match for the Briefcase under TLC rulz. The Briefcase is good for one whole year.

12. Survivor Series in November. WWE and WHC defended along with 2 traditional Survivor series elimination matches.

13. Holiday Havoc ppv in December. A holiday themed ppv in which wwe fans are treated to seeing faces vs. faces, heels vs. heels, WWE and WHC are defended, one in a cage match and one in a battle royal, plus a costume contest with the divas. As it is the season of giving, this ppv would be free, as a gift from WWE to all its loyal fans.

So, thats 12 ppvs in one calander year, which covers all match types and gives creedance to the MITB ppv and the KOTR ppv.

 

[kingofkings01013]

PPV should go back to having just titles like Judgment Day, GAB, and Backlash. Including the gimmick match name in the PPV is just dumb. It take the suspense out of what is going happen what could they do next. We can pretty much guess that it will be Cena vs. Show in a Hell in the Cell match at Hell in Cell (example).

 

[The_Midnight_Show]

Obviously WWE sees marketability and effectiveness by having each PPV represented by a certain gimmick, however I enjoy PPVs more when they are without specific gimmicks (Royal Rumble and Survivor Series excluded). I personally liked it better when WWE would use their generic names like Backlash, GAB, Unforgiven, No Mercy, Armageddon, etc. During these PPVs or even on the big 4 you throw in a Hell In A Cell match or a TLC match or even Elimination Chamber. This way you can use your gimmick matches when it is effective to do so; not because the PPV title all but says you have to. If WWE has a good feud in February and sees a TLC match as the most effective way of ending it, why prevent yourself from having a TLC match?! Because the gimmick of the month is an elimination chamber? Because you have to wait another 10 months until TLC is the gimmick of the month? It seems rather ridiculous to restrict yourself like this. If the PPV is named "Unforgiven," you can have any match. One year TLC, the next Last Man Standing, and so on.

Anyway to more directly answer the OP's question, if I had to remove just one PPV, I would say HiaC and replace it with King of the Ring. Winner can become the No 1. contender for Survivor Series. Many have said replace HiaC with Cyber Sunday but I feel like every Raw is becoming "Cyber Monday" (which is fine) so there is no point in making a PPV gimmick out of it.

 

[Unknown]

Get rid of all of them... Y ???? because i liked when they would anounce the Hell in a Cell match or Elimination chamber match as a suprise at PPV a Like Summer Slam or Survivior Series. Plus the matches arent really that cool to watch because Theres NO blood or HOLY SHIT moments anymore.. not to mention that they put the WORST people in the Elimination Chamber Match. Like Santino Marella or Drew Mcintire.. like seriouslly.. back when the match was made, they put the 6 best people on the roster in the match.. and that made it less Predictible.. but now you can pretty much predict that SUPER CENA is going to win the Raw match... and The queer Viper, Randy ortan OR Sheamus is going to win the smackdown match. I just hope this year, that Brock Lesnar or The Rock is in the Elimination Chamber Match.... Hopefully Lesnar..

 

[Wolf Pac]

I'd get rid of Extreme Rules. No "extreme" matches are booked on the PPV and when there are, it's usually generic matches like No DQ, Falls Count Anywhere & No Holds Barred which are all basically the same thing and they feature at least one match that is already a PPV, which goes against the point of that match having it's own PPV. Example being last year, Del Rio & Christian competed in a Ladder match but that's supposed to happen at TLC & MiTB only.

I'd also get rid of Over The Limit. I'm not sure if that PPV has it's own gimmick but if it does, nobody has a clue what the hell it is.

And I agree with Dagger Dias about No Way Out. It was horrible this year and the plan was for that PPV to hold "no way out" type matches such as Cage matches, Handcuff matches, Strap matches etc. which didn't happen but they all sound awful anyway, so either way, gimmick or not, they should still get rid of No Way Out or a better solution would be rename Elimination Chamber back to No Way Out.

 

[Arcade]

Damn so much Extreme Rules hate. Extreme Rules is one of the best PPV's right now.

I would rid Hell in a Cell for the reasons that everyone has listed. I would also change the name of Elimination Chamber back to No Way Out, since No Way Out used to feature chamber matches.

 

[Marv95]

How about all of them? Gimmick ppvs aren't needed. They've done nothing to really jack up buyrates and the only decent one out of the bunch is Extreme Rules. Go back to the standard format before 2009 except replace the Feb ppv with a SNME instead. Save HIACs for special occasions and have 1 EC match at a PPV.

January: Rumble
February: SNME(NBC or USA, no PPV)
March: Mania
April: Backlash
May: ONS: Extreme Rules(or no PPV)
June: KOTR
July: GAB
August: Summerslam
September: Unforgiven
October: No Mercy
November: Survivor Series
December: Armageddon(or New Year's Revolution)

 

[HBsam31]

I voted for Extreme Rules just because it got so far away from what it was created to be. This year's ppv was pretty good actually, but it doesn't need to be under the logo of Extreme Rules. I also dislike HIAC because that match was supposed to be a special once or twice a year type match. I am not saying we are over saturated with HIAC matches, but the PG era has caused them to be toned down way to much. I am not talking about blood and guts, but they barely even use the cage anymore. I think it should be done the way it was supposed to be or not at all.

 

[StaRRStruck]

Hell in a Cell. There is NO other type of stipulation I feel the 'E has just destroyed besides this one. I honestly love the idea of Chambers or even a Extreme Rules based PPV for feuds to end but the main problem with HIAC is that there is more than one on the PPV. These matches were created to end bitter feuds from likes of HBK and Taker all the way to the Edge and Taker. The creation of this PPV has led to sub-par feuds competing in this structure which makes the Cell weak as the purpose of the Cell has always been to end feuds. I actually have no problem with any current gimmick PPV the 'E holds except for this one for the sole reason that it is basically killing the feel the HIAC use to possess.

 

[#SAWFT]

If they make extreme rules, actually extreme, then I'd keep that. But if not, it's gone.

However, I'd get rid of Hell in a Cell and Tables, Ladders and Chairs. They should be used for gimmick matches, at Summerslam and ending of feuds. I'd rearrange them, and have Backlash straight after WrestleMania. I'd also bring back Armageddon, or Cyber Sunday. But with 'Raw Active', I think that Armageddon would work better.

 

[BaraaTZK92]

I think WWE must drop all of its PPVs except for the big four.

One of the biggest problems that the WWE is facing right now is that they have so much PPVs that they can't even build up for a good Championship match.

Put the Money in the Bank match on SummerSlam, and make the HIAC and EC matches unpredictable the way it should be

This way we can have longer title reigns, better build up for the feuds.

they can even put an IC title match once in a while on the main event of one of the Raw shows, or the US or Tag team titles.

This way, with lesser title changes, they can make the titles relevant again.

They may also bring back the King of the Ring PPV to make it 5 PPVs a year.

13 PPV a year is just too much, and you definitely can't build up a great HIAC PPV in just 2 weeks like the WWE is currently doing every year.

HIAC matches are completely useless because of that.

 

[rge2010]

I would go to around 6 a year, giving 2 months build to each PPV. Obviously keep 'the big 4' and then probably have MITB and HIAC. Although I would like them to resurrect KOTR.

I also think the WWE Roster is simply too big. Its about time they had a clear out and get rid of 25% of 'the talent'.

BUT WWE dont lose money on PPV's. Its not just PPV buys to take into account, there are ticket sales and merch sales too. It would make for better TV but maybe not a great business decision. They obviously do 12/13 for a reason and thats to make money.

 

[keehlnate]

It will never happen. That will cost them a lot of money. I mean a LOT of money. The PPV's are fine the way they are now, and I don't see how they can't book a proper championship fight with RAW is now 3 hours and you have Smackdown. Reducing the number of PPV's is not a solution here.

 

[barclayteo]

I for one vote for the idea of making it only 6 ppv's a year. Firstly every ppv would be big, and the ppv's would mean something rather than just the creative throwing together a series of matches.

Because it is obvious knowledge that a main title will only change hands on a ppv, or if someone hasn't cashed in the briefcase which they usually save for a ppv. It would also give the other titles more spotlight because the heavyweight title or the world title wouldn't be the main point of almost every main event.

 

[Loveless]

I've been of the opinion for some time that fewer PPV's will lead to more PPV buys, not 4 though, that's not quite enough.
I don't have the total buyrate numbers in front of me but I'll give the rough economics

Wrestlemania - 1 million buys
The other 12 PPVs - 200,000 each

That leaves total buys at 3.4 million. Let's just take Wrestlemania out of that equation, 12 PPVs at 2.4 buys. Now whatever number you cut the PPVs down to, you have to reach 2.4 total buys or it makes no financial sense.

3 PPVs a year (not counting wrestlemania) would require 800,000 buys
4 PPVs a year (NCW) would require 600,000
5 PPVs a year (NCW) would require 480,000
6 PPVs a year (NCW) would require 400,000

The question is, at what number do PPV's return to being "Must Buy" and can the WWE draw in those kind of numbers by reducing the number of shows.