WWE should learn that "Less Is More"

Discussion in 'WWE Discussion' started by d_henderson1810, Jan 30, 2019.

  1. d_henderson1810

    d_henderson1810 Mid-Card Championship Winner

    Oct 12, 2008
    Likes Received:
    Just watched the "Royal Rumble" the other day- all 5 hours of it!

    It got me thinking in many areas WWE seem to be too excessive and not follow the phrase "Less Is More".

    Here are some areas where WWE goes overboard and needs to have less of some of these things:-

    -PPV Running Times- I once had a tutor who told me that I shouldn't study more than two hours at a time without a break, as he said that after two hours, one's concentration wanes.

    I have been watching a lot of the old WWF, WCW and ECW PPVs. Many of them clock in around 2hrs 40 minutes. I actually think this is a good length of a PPV.

    However, I have noticed since WWE got their Network, that PPVs constantly go almost 4 hours or more. Once, only Wrestlemania went that long. Now most PPVs go at least four or more hours. This is too long.

    Also, the fans at the arena are at the show for 5, sometimes 6 hours, on a Sunday night, with work and school the next day, and some shows don't finish until 12.30-1am.

    Solution:- WWE needs to cut down their PPV lengths to 3 hours. Any more and people start to lose interest and crowds get burnt out.

    The length of RAW- SD Live has rated better than RAW over the last year. I think a big reason for that is because RAW goes three hours, and SD goes two.

    When I watch SD, I feel satisfied. It seems like the right length, not too long, not too short.

    But I get bored watching RAW because it drags on for three hours. Now, if they had long matches that went 30 minutes each, it could be forgivable, but it seems really padded out to get it to three hours. I think they should go back to two hours, and it would make for a better product.

    I think this is also because Vince thinks more hours, more commercial breaks, more advertising revenue. It seems a money decision more than anything.

    Solution- Cut RAW back to two hours a week.

    The Roster- I think that there are way too many people on the roster.

    NXT is a good thing. It is vital to the future of WWE, and it is thriving. The problem is, that the roster is getting bigger and bigger every year, and few are leaving.

    There is talk that some of the talent might leave for AEW, and this has forced Vince to use these people more. say, let them leave if they want. There are far too many people as there is.

    Consider this. At Wrestlemania, Cena gets a match, Brock gets a match, Undertaker will get a match, Triple H will, and now Shane McMahon has a yearly WM match. Add to that the current roster on RAW and SD, and then add those in NXT, 205 Live and NXT UK. Now, in five years time, a lot of current talent won't get a WM payday, because spots have been promised to these part-timers.

    I think it is time to future-endeavour some people, mainly those who have not had much TV time. Big Show and Kane aren't used these days, so they should be retired, and put on Legends contracts, that don't pay as much. Some guys like Goldust should become trainers. If the roster keeps growing, the wages bill will be astronomical, and there will be less chances for newcomers to shine, as they have to compete with the current roster, plus part-timers who refuse to retire.

    Solution- Retire some of the veterans (Undertaker, Kane, Big Show, Cena), tell Brock to piss off back to UFC, have Triple H and Shane put their egos in check and retire from wrestling matches and put more of the focus on the next generation of superstars.

    WWE needs to be less excessive in how it does things. If it reduced some of these things, it would make things seem more "special", instead of being the norm. Fans can focus on a 2-hour RAW, or a 3-hour PPVS, with matches by those who are the present and the future of the company, and then the 3-hour RAW "specials" (e.g. 25 years of RAW) , a 4 hour Wrestlemania and the occasional Legend appearance will seem more of a big deal, and create more interest.
  2. Jack-Hammer


    Mar 26, 2009
    Likes Received:
    Plenty have said the same thing over the years, especially the last few where some of the bigger ppvs have become marathons unto themselves. Vince is a proponent of the "more is better" theory and instead of leaving fans wanting more, they're often just left tired or downright exhausted. I enjoyed the Rumble overall, but I was tired by the time it was over and just wanted it to end by the time 11 pm EST rolled around. Much of the time, your standard ppvs are about 4 hours in length, 5 if you include the kickoff show. Late last year, either just before or just after the WarGames TakeOver event, Triple H was giving an interview and was asked why the TakeOver events only had 5 matches and Trips simply said that he wasn't a fan of having more matches on a card just for the sake of their being more matches. That stuck out to me as it's one of the times during interviews in which Trips sort of lays out some of the fundamental differences between himself and Vince in how things should be done. Years ago, not too long after the format of NXT was changed I believe, I remember him being asked if there were any changes he'd made to Raw and his response was that he'd take the show back to 2 hours.

    A lot of little things, a few tweaks made here and a few adjustments made there, can add up to a whole lot of positive changes
  3. wwe fan2009

    wwe fan2009 Pre-Show Stalwart

    Jun 8, 2009
    Likes Received:
    Yes agree. it doesnt need to go to midnight 11:15 to 11:30 is fine
  4. GetTheTables

    GetTheTables Dark Match Jobber

    Oct 22, 2017
    Likes Received:
    I agree with everything about this post. I think the ppv solution would be going back to brand ppv's. I know we see the same matches over and over, but that happens anyway. This would give more guys ppv time and cut the shows of down. I was tired as crap after the Rumble and would have killed for a three hour show. We don't care to see Shane in so many matches, they need to build up who they have.
  5. Psykohurricane55

    Psykohurricane55 Moderator
    Staff Member Moderator

    May 13, 2011
    Likes Received:
    It's all about how what you do with the time in my opinion. If the show is entertaining like the rumble was, i'm not going to mind if the show is 5 or 6 hours long, but if it drags like some of the minor PPV have a tendency to do, then i agree they should stick to the 3 hour format.

    The thing is, the whole doing a 6 hours event doesn't just happen in WWE, New japan does it as well for their big shows, so it's not just WWE doing it.

    As far as Raw is concern, like i've mention elsewhere, it's not up to them to decide how long the show is, that's a USA Network decision. They pay for the content and they decide how long they want to show to go and WWE can't say anything about it. I've read a interview HHH gave last year and somebody ask him that question why Raw wasn't going back to 2 hours. He pretty much say that if it was his call, the show would go back to 2 hours but it's not, USA wants Raw to be 3 hours and WWE has to deliver.

    As far as the roster is concern. First of all while the mania brand what attract fans to buy the show, they still want to see stars on the Show, Lesnar is a star, HHH is a star, Shane Mcmahon is a star. Who on the main roster at the moment can even be considered in the same league as the three name i've just mention. The answer is nobody. Yes you got your Rollins, Mcintyre, Strowman, Bryan, Styles just to name that, but you still have to paired them with somebody and that's where the part timers came in. Just this year, Having Rollins face Lesnar at Mania will make Rollins a bigger star then if he was facing somebody like mcintyre or Corbin. Shane doesn't want to be put in that position every year but he's one of the most popular characters on smackdown and he still draw enough that his match feel like a special attraction. Same goes for HHH and Taker. As far as the mania payoff are concern, from what i've read recently, everybody gets one even if they aren't on the card which is a rarity as most of the guys and girls on the main rosters gets on the mania card one way or another anyway. I think last year if you don'T count the cruiserweight division, i think most of the roster had a match on the card. So there you go, if your a smart business man, if you're able to keep somebody like Lesnar around for special occasions, you do what ever it takes to keep him, same goes for the part timers.

    But one thing i do agree with is that they have way too many wrestlers for pretty much all brands and should really considers doing a spring cleaning of all the dead wood they have on Raw, smackdown and NXT. I get that HHH and Vince don't want to give some of their stars away to other promotions they might considered as future competition and they have the money to keep them but at the same time if you're not using them, why keep them. i know that the plans is to expand the NXT brand to other country and open new NXT territories in other countries which means that they would have to signs even more wrestlers to contract, so what i would do if i was them, i would just go through guys that they don't use presently on all three major brand and ask talent if they would mind relocating somewhere else to be one of the stars of whatever NXT brand they want to start. Maybe some that live in the u.s or canada wouldn'T mind moving to another country if that mean getting some exposure on another brand.
  6. GhettoV1

    GhettoV1 Pre-Show Stalwart

    May 29, 2015
    Likes Received:
    Why Raw can't just go to 8-10pm(or 9-11pm) and call it a night and use that third hour to maybe tape either 205 Live or relaunch Superstars or Shotgun Saturday Night.

    Have the WWE Cruiserweight belt float between Raw and SmackDown instead of keeping them separate from both rosters. Use the hour that is for 205 live to either relaunch SSN , Superstars or Sunday Night Heat.
  7. Radical

    Radical Championship Contender

    Mar 28, 2012
    Likes Received:
    Agree with the whole general concept of what the OP is saying. Yes, less is more in this case.

    Isn't the first rule of show business "leave them wanting more"? Then why shouldn't it be that way for the sports entertainment business? It should.

    Yes, shorter shows. Raw to 2 hours and PPVs to max of 3 hours, maybe with WrestleMania as the exception.

    And, I know this might seem insensitive, but I think WWE really needs to think about a yearly spring cleaning of talent after WM. Especially the ones who haven't been seen much and maybe had their day but don't have much going for them anymore. Let them go.

    And all these old guys hanging? Their job should be to PUT OVER new stars. If they are over 40 they should consider a max of 3 years to be under contract and the goal should be to be in programs that ultimately should help put over new, younger stars. That doesn't mean that the older guys shouldn't win ANY matches, but if they are in a feud with another wrestler, and let's say they have 3 matches, the younger wrestler should win 2 out of the 3 at least.

    I think having more actually established teams/stables of more than 4 wrestlers would also be a huge help.

    Back when Evolution was around, for example. Triple H could send out Ric Flair to have a match 'for him' against a rival, and Triple H watches from the side, gets involved and furthers a storyline and builds to the actual match where Triple H will fight the opponent, but doesn't give the match away so soon.

    Right now, there are so many individual wrestlers that they are either in the show in a match or not in the show and doing pretty much nothing. And the 2-man tag teams are seen as just tag teams so that doesn't do anything except for the tag division.

    If WWE really wanted to excite the fans they would announce a BRAND NEW WWE Draft after WrestleMania. The WHOLE roster to be shaken up. NO ONE is safe, and if wrestlers aren't drafted they are released as free agents. And the WWE could tease new signings not just from NXT can be added to Raw or SmackDown.

    If I heard about a major WWE full roster draft, I would certainly tune in for that. It would be pretty refreshing.
  8. TDFG

    TDFG Championship Contender

    Feb 5, 2014
    Likes Received:
    The night after WrestleMania normally pulls in good viewing figures + hostile crowd. A draft/trade week should be kept for the week following the PPV after WrestleMania.

    I think WWE is probably contracted to producing a 3hr RAW every week now and advertising revenue likely plays a part in keeping it live rather than cutting it to 2hrs or having a review/preview of the goings on in the WWE Universe for 1/2hr-1hr of RAW.
  9. Spencesc11

    Spencesc11 Getting Noticed By Management

    Jan 30, 2013
    Likes Received:
    I completely agree. You want to leave the audience wanting more.

    1) Raw - 2 Hour show (8pm to 10pm just like Smackdown)
    2) Smackdown - keep it as 2 hour show
    3) PPV's - eliminate the pre-show matches and just have a 30 minute commentary start at 6:30pm then PPV's should start at 7 and end no later than 11pm. Kids are still a large portion of the fan base and have school the next day so a 5 hour PPV is way to long and ridiculous.
    4) More fluid shows (7-8 matches per show) that gives them reasonable time and keeps the show from getting to stagnant with so many promos.
    5) Purge rosters after Mania every year. (Raw/Smackdown - 25 male singles wrestlers, 5 male tag teams, and 15 women stars on each brand). NXT - keep similiar or maybe even a few less.
    6) Also quit doing the big matches every week on the weekly shows. McIntyre vs. Rollins shouldn't be happening on Raw so much if you want it to headline a PPV at some point.
    BestSportsEntertainer likes this.
  10. ilapierre

    ilapierre Getting Noticed By Management

    Jun 3, 2010
    Likes Received:
    Come on Jack. The reason Triple H is in favor of less matches and less PPV time is so that he can hog one third of the show instead of one fifth. The ONLY reason Vince would want 'more matches' is so that somebody else other than his middle aged sons Paul and Shane can get a chance to shine. What good is the future of the company if the younger talent aren't making it onto the card? You are the #1 Triple H apologist and it's hilarious. The guy is a complete parasite. Do you get paid to do PR for him? Because every time I read your one million posts on this site, that's all that comes to mind. Like who could possibly be this obsessed with a guy who brings very little to the overall product??

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"