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

[crippler]

The only Gimmick PPV should be the Royal Rumble to me a ppv called Hell in a cell, TLC or Money in the bank all the matches should be that type.The only gimmick PPV most people like is the Royal Rumble

 

[R.K.O]

I would have about 7 gimmick PPVs a year.

I would of course keep Royal Rumble and Survivor Series as they are the big 4 and the bigger events of the year.

I would also keep Extreme Rules, Elimination Chamber and Money in the Bank as they are solid PPVs that has delivered for the past years.

I would bring back King of the Ring as it is one of the best concept WWE has came up with, why they have removed it I couldn't understand.

Lastly I would create a PPV similar to Breaking Point that features submission wrestling. It doesn't have to be submission matches but maybe have a stipulation where the wrestler with most submission victories will get a title shot at this PPV. I really liked TNA's BFG Series where submission victories matter more and WWE could use something similar.

My PPV lineup with be:

Royal Rumble
Elimination Chamber
Wrestlemania
Backlash
Extreme Rules
Unforgiven
King of the Ring
Summerslam
Night of Champions
Money in the Bank
Breaking Point
Survivor Series
Armaggedon

 

[Boourns]

I can agree with Hell in A Cell losing some of its impact but, the others to me never really added all that much of a surprise element. It's not like Triple H ever said to the Undertaker "Me and you are gonna take this up a notch by having a ladder match..." nope it's always "Hell *snort* in A Cell *grunt*" (Followed by immense marking out.) but, I feel that they could remedy this situation by making the Hell in a Cell a big deal for superstars and making it a turning point i.e a time of year where face champions become cowardly heels and monsters shine and get pushes (kind of like now...) only, in future to do it because they have seen what the cell can do. You could have heels that try and take out their opponent before their match so they don't have to face them or at least injure them because they want the shortest match possible. After all that, when the Cell seems like the demonic structure it's claimed to be, when someone asks for the match at a time other than the PPV or even just claims that they're glad that the match is coming so they can brutalize their opponent it would be just as impressive as it used to be.

 

[suleman09]

in my own opinion they shouldnt have any gimmick PPVs, and if they have to have at least one it can be Extreme Rules, just because the name of it itself tells you some crazy matches are going to happen. But when you have a PPV for Hell In A Cell, MITB, TLC, Elimination Chamber..it kills the hype and the shock and intense value of it.

Like for example, the Hell In A Cell used to be a match where great feuds came to an end, now its a tradition where we have like 2 HIAC matches a year. We used to have it either once a year or even every other year, and when someone would say "One on One....in HELL IN A CELL!!" The fans would erupt, but now we know every year when it's coming and we know which feuds will be in it so there is no shock anymore. Like this year we KNOW 100%

WWE Championship Hell In A Cell
CM Punk vs John Cena

Now if it was called 'Vengence" and we were told like 3-4 in advance "Hell In A Cell!!" I would be excited, but when this last PPV ended, i knew from then it would be punk cena HIAC.

 

[HBKistheHOF]

I think there should be 4 Gimmick PPV's a year; Money in the Bank, Hell in A Cell, TLC, & Elimination Chamber.

I like the fact that these are established and we are guarenteed one of each every year. I like it better that way than just occasionally springing one up at a Summerslam or No Mercy.

My 2 problems are:
1.) The Names: Why not keep the old, better sounding names but just have the HiaC or Chamber happen each year at the same PPV? Seems REALLY unoriginal just to have the event named after the match your having that night.
&
2.) Elimnate the other Useless Gimmick PPV's:
-Extreme Rules: Are sometimes cool but only some matches are "extreme" & it's PG now. Just have a couple matches with stipulations & call it Backlash.
-Over The Limit: Every match has a stipulation that pushes guys "over the limit".....NEXT!
-No Way Out: Was MUCH better when it wasn't a concept PPV. They only had a single cage match too.
-Night of Champions: The titles should be on the line at every PPV.

 

[Rowdy Robby Piper]

Hell In A Cell has lost its luster. It's more or less become a standardized cage match, instead of being truly "Hell." There's no bloodshed or ooh/ahh factor to it anymore, nor does it end/settle any feuds. Just like the Elimination Chamber match is a water-downed version of War Games, with a pier-six elimination style brawl instead of 5-on-5 team warfare. There truly is no "gimmick" match anymore, other than the Royal Rumble match itself. I don't think there's anything that WWE can do that would make me say, "Ooh, I need to buy this PPV" anymore. But I have an idea....

Bring back the King Of The Ring PPV, and combine it with the Money In The Bank title shot gurantee. The winner - note the singular and not plural - gets a title shot of their choosing within one calendar year. And as an added effect said winner cannot run down to the ring and tease whether they're going to cash in or not; if they say they're going to then they have to do it - no if's, and's, or but's. If someone runs into the ring with the MITB briefcase match (for example), and there's a ref present...sorry Charlie, you just cashed in. Put up or shut up.

 

[TheHorndogSays]

Ever since WWE first started using Gimmick PPVs, I've always felt their should be more, just not with the current format WWE uses. I've always felt WWEs biggest issue is the amount of one on one WWE/WHC title defenses. With there sometimes only being 3 weeks of build, it becomes hard to have solid builds; however, if you use the gimmick PPVs themselves to build the overall picture it will help. People will buy the PPV for the gimmick not for the resolution of the event. Bring back Wargames, Scramble, Lottery, and the traditional Survivor Series match. Here is how my PPV schedule would look

April: Money In The Bank. This to me seems a better use than having the PPV in June or July as people know if it isn't cashed in by Wrestlemania, it will be cashed in then and not after so have it immediately after Wrestlemania with the holder being able to go up to Wrestlemania. The champions either get the night off in ring action (maybe commentary for their match) or some sort of payback match from Wrestlemania.

May: Night of Champions. In my list this is always the one month I have the hardest time figuring out because all of my gimmick matches are booked. This is mostly here to fill a spot.

June; Wargames. No singles matches. Just a series of the classic wargames concept similar to Survivor Series

July: Scramble. Bring this back with the one catch being that it isn't FOR the title but rather to determine the number one contenders for the title at...

August: Summerslam

September: Extreme Rules. Treat this like you would Extreme Rules in April with it being the aftermath of Summerslam

October: Lethal Lottery. For those of you who don't remember this concept, you have a set amount of randomly picked teams (friends or foes) and they compete in a tournament where the winning team faces off to determine the number one contender to determine a new number one contender who determines his opponent at Survivor Series (similar to MITB but the match is known in advance)

November: Survivor Series. I say bring back the ORIGINAL one where it's all 4 on 4 or 5 on 5 and the survivors from each compete at the end to determine the ultimate survivor in a battle royal with winner getting shot at HIAC

December: Hell In a Cell.

January: Royal Rumble

February: Elimination Chamber. Have the Royal Rumble Winner choose his opponent before event and this will determine number one contender for the other title

March: Wrestlemania

 

[UltimateCMPunkMark]

WWE have a PPV almost every month. Unlike the WWF, they don't even have enough time to build up any feuds/momentum regarding the PPVs. I personally think that in order to have a proper PPV, you actually need to leave some time between one PPV and the other in order to have a decent fight card, good feuds and proper preparation in general. If you actually go and watch any PPV from the Attitude Era and compare it with a current WWE PPV, you will understand what I mean. But hey, this is my opinion. Do you agree on making a PPV almost every month or do you think they should have some time between every PPV and the other?

 

[strasaphere]

The Attitude Era still had 10+ PPV's a year. I don't see your point. It's not the lack of time to build up storylines, it the shit storylines themselfs.



I mean, Del Rio vs Sheamus had Months and Months of build, but did you really care about it?

No.

 

[CleverName51]

The only 2 major differences between 2000 and 2012 are...


1) Talent up and down the roster....a typical 2000 PPV went something like this

European Title match featuring Al Snow/Regal/Saturn/Eddie/other jobbers

A Hardcore title 24/7 segment or two

Some combination of the Dudley's Hardy's and E/C in an epic tag match

The Outlaws/Too Cool/APA/RTC in another solid tag match

an IC title match made up of some combination of Kurt Angle/Benoit/Jericho/Venis/Godfather

a Main Event of Rock/HHH/Angle/Kane/Undertaker

that roster was loaded



2) Midcard build. Al Snow's European title storyline was actually featured in solid segments on Smackdown, the Tag Titles would Main Event Raws/Smackdowns on occasion to build to the PPV matches

There would be TALKING segments involving midcarders only, Smackdown from 8:30-9 on Thursdays in 2000 usually featured the RTC "censoring" someone before a match, this made it possible to care about the midcard

now in 2012, those midcarder talking segments are dedicated to 50,000 replays of Main Event level segments...making it harder to build main event talent since the midcard gets very little build time...



As for monthly PPVs keep them, they make a ton of money and that's all that matters