You Know How Everyone Hates the PPV changes...

[Rated_R_Superstar2010]

Updated WWE PPV Calendar: New Themed Events Added
by Nick Paglino
Feb 27, 2010
The following is the updated WWE PPV calendar for 2010:

Wrestlemania XXVI
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Glendale, AZ
University of Phoenix

Extreme Rules
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Baltimore, MD
1st Mariner Arena

Over The Limit
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Detroit, MI
Joe Louis Arena

Fatal Four Way
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Uniondale, NY
Nassau Coliseum

Money In The Bank
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Kansas City, MO
Sprint Center

SummerSlam
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Los Angeles, CA
Staples Center

Night of Champions
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Chicago, IL
Allstate Arena

Hell in the Cell
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Dallas, TX
American Airlines Center

WWE Bragging Rights
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Minneapolis, MN
Target Center

Survivor Series
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Miami, FL
American Airlines Arena

WWE Tables, Ladders & Chairs
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Houston, TX
Toyota Center





After all the PPV changes we hear about i think "dam why are they messing with this"

now i have seen a full layout of the year. and its not bad. i hate fatal-four way. money in the band isn't bad were it is and i like the idea of using the match twice a year. we have night of champions, surviver series, summer slam, mania, extreme rules aka backlash. i guess TLC isn't terrible, not good but not terrible, bragging rights is a decent one, hell is a cell is like TLC the actual match is a good gimmick but when there are 3 in one night its stupid. im not sure wut to say about over the limit, its an ok name its just going to be gay when the announcers say it. haha " Will John Cena be put over the limit" and "which man will be pushed over the limit". it will just sounds funny coming from cole.



so do we over react to these changes....or is it just me??

 

[Papa Shango]

It's not just you.

Backlash has always been a very hit-and-miss PPV. The last couple were actually quite good imo, but some have been plain awful. (O3, 05 come directly to mind).

The whole concept of Backlash has basically over the years become all about Wrestlemania rematches, more or less. That is, in essence what that PPV's "theme" has been for quite some time.

Extreme Rules has been the "hardcore" themed PPV. I like the concept, it's not as restrictive as some of the other new themed PPV's (HIAC, EC), and even though the fact that ALL matches are gimmick matches, WWE usually finds a way to make each match interesting.

So why not combine the two? Despite your opinion on WWE's choice to shake up the schedule, you'd be hard-pressed to find a reason as to why this particular decision is illogical. Backlash has a tendancy to include a few gimmick matches each year (LMS and F4W in particular) anyway.

I have no idea what the Over the Limit PPV will be about. Is it the "Wild Card" PPV just with a different name? I'll reserve my opinion until judgment day... whoops.

Really what's wrong with the rest of the schedule. Summerslam and NoC are back, which is great, Survivor Series is back, which is fantastic. Three PPV's that imo, always deliver.

I like the idea of the MitB PPV. Maybe instead of Mr. Money-in-the-Bank cashing in whenever he wants, he has to do it at this PPV? Not sure. Will there be MitB matches to qualify for lower card titles now? Don't know. Again, jury is out.

Bragging Rights I think will be better this year because I think they'll have a better idea of how to structure it. HIAC and TLC I'm "meh" about. Sure it kinda leaves little room for creativity, but at least we get to see matches that pretty much always deliver.

Fatal 4-Way I'm kinda dreading. I don't see how WWE can base a whole PPV off Fatal 4-Ways. But that's just my opinion.

We also know that Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, and EC are PPV's now also. Rumble and Mania great, EC meh.

So let's tally the votes:

Good PPV's: 6 (Rumble, Mania, Rules, Sslam, NoC,Sseries)

Okay PPV's: 2 (MitB, Bragging Rights)

Not Promising PPV's: 2 (Fatal 4 Way, EC)

Undecided: 3 (HIAC, TLC, OtL)

Seems to me we don't have a whole lot to complain about, and plenty to look forward to, and just enough mystery surrounding some for us to just shut the fuck up and see what happens before we start bitching.

 

[lghikas]

Well just based on the name of Over The Limit I am already in love with it. It has a very "In Your House" ring to. Which I wonder if you know some history May 23rd this year will be 11 years to the day Owen Hart die. What was the name of the ppv of the event? Over the Edge. So my initial thought and it still is, that they got the name from Over the Edge which for a name I like as well. Both don't point to a whole gimmick ppv and they have a nice ring to it imo. But the name isn't wht makes the ppv good. Good solid booking will make people forget about the name or the gimmick ppv.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

A lot of people hated the idea of the three gimmick ppvs that the WWE ran with last year, but they turned out to be pretty good. Last year wasn't a great year ppv wise for the WWE, but the gimmick ppvs drew good numbers and drew better numbers than the ppvs that they were replacing.

I've said it before, one of the most common complaints I've heard about the WWE in 2009 is that it's stale or predictable or some stuff like that. Even when the WWE tries something different, a significant portion of the IWC shits all over it almost on principle. Many of them were against the gimmick ppv changes the WWE made last year and the move turned out to be a success, many hated the WWE putting the title on Sheamus and it also turned out to be a success as it generated a lot of renewed interest and buzz about the WWE Championship and Raw main event scene. I can't even begin to tell you the hate that WWE NXT garnered even before anyone knew anything about the show other than its name and it's turned out to be a great show. I guess my point is that the WWE has proven several times over the past several months many within the IWC don't really know what they're talking about.

A problem the WWE had definitely in 2009 was lazy booking and that doesn't seem to be the case in 2010, at least thus far and let's keep our fingers crossed. For the most part, the gimmick ppvs were booked strong, or at least booked pretty good and WWE programming overall has gotten better in the past few months.

 

[wushady]

I'm interested to see if the changes work I understand they want switch things up. I think fatal fourway is a stupid concept for a ppv. Money in the bank should stay on wrestlemania. I find it odd they would call the May ppv Over the Limit considering it was at one time called Over the Edge. They changed it when Owen Hart died at the show.


Even worse it's being held on May 23 the exact same day he died back in 1999.

 

[HBK = Greatest Ever]

I hate the new themed ppvs' cause who wants to see 3 hell in a cell mates in a card and also the rivalrys have to be built up into a point were a hell in a cell match would make sense. I would change the Money in the bank ppv to a king of the ring, have 8 men compete on that night and the winner gets a title match in the main event of Summerslam. It would be the rumble/mania of the summer. I would keep the big four wwe originals and have the others just be new every year like do a : In your house, or a hog wild or a bash at the beach. it would be fresh for the fans to have new ppv's every year and increase buyrates.

 

[vertigolowe]

The entire ppv is not just those themed matches. Hell in a Cell (or Hell in THE Cell as it seems to be called now) had 3 of the match but other matches as well.

TLC I think was done well with a Ladder Match, a Table Match, a Chair Match and a TLC match.

Fatal 4-way will probably have a 4-way for the 2 world titles and maybe one for the tag belts. I'd hope they mix it up a little and have one of them be a standard 'Sudden Death' type 4-way and the other an 'Elimination' 4-way but we'll see.

When they did the survey thing to see what concept ppvs people wanted (can't believe War Games didn't get the nod but that's another issue) their description of it was that there would be qualifying matches throughout the night with the Ladder Match as the main event. It will remain to be seen if they run 2 MitB Ladder Matches every year, but I think they like having the guy cash it in but don't want to have to wait as long between winning it & cashing it in and/or waiting for a new 'Mr Money in the Bank' to be crowned after the previous one cashed it in.

Conspicuous by its' absence is Breaking Point. I thought the submission-based ppv had a lot of promise. Plus it had a cooler name than 'WWE Submission'.

To touch on War Games, I think it would awesome if that was the main event for Bragging Rights. The big issue was always the two rings, but if they have one ring with the blue ropes and one with the red they could make it seem like neither show wants to work in the other's ring. But then again that ppv was mostly Raw vs. Smackdown matches anyway so that probably wouldn't work.

 

[>HERO<]

i completely agree with jack-hammer. internet fans have become so cynical towards the whole wrestling/sports entertainment, that they would criticise anything and everything that wwe does irrespective of wwe doing good or bad. they think that criticising gonna make them look like dave meltzer or wade keller. some of the fans don't have a slightest idea of what they are saying but still would say that with huge confidence as if they are life-long experienced.
for instance...one of them says, '' oh wwe has become so boring, it sucks, vince mcmahon is an idiot, wwe is killing the sports-entertainment business and blah blah blah.'' , so what do they propose to overcome the problem, '' they should bring back the rock and austin and have rock/austin 4 at WM.'' this is their solution.
some say, ''PG era is killing the ratings, wwe should bring back attitude era and make show adult, and the ratings will rise'', really?!?! As far as i know, the show was adult till 2005/06, but ratings were almost the same as they are now. Even back in 2002, when the rock made surprising return, and beat taker at vengeance, even then ratings were 3.7/3.8 average. so making the show adult is not a solution.
now im not advocating wwe here. i also think that they are not at thier best now. but the show is average/above average. Have stable ratings. I have seen very very few fans that actually have an idea of what they are saying, and they give credit where it is due. So i urge you ''rated r superstar 2010'', not to jump on conclusions and wait till the actual pay-per-views take place and then judge WWE.

 

[AnthonyMango/NoFate007]

First off, very glad to see Survivor Series is back. I was pissed that they were thinking of taking it away. Obsolete my ass, pay attention: a mixture of the economy and a lack of interest is causing your low buyrates, not people saying "meh, I've seen Survivor Series before". If that were the case, the Royal Rumble would have dipped down too.

No more Backlash, which I'm kind of fine with, though I would have been ok if they kept it as well. I'm just glad they didn't get rid of Extreme Rules as I like the idea of different no-dq matches covering the entire card. If they tone it all down though and just make it "the top three main events are no disqualification and the rest of the card is full of normal matches" then that'll suck ass. It's much more fun when you've got Falls Count Anywhere and a bunch of other stuff all mixed together.

Over the Limit....what's that supposed to be? Can't judge until we know.

Fatal Four-Way...why not just have the Scramble instead? That was a fun concept and it had 5 people in it. You could build it around that. 4 corners + champion in the middle. It still gives you a card with lots of people on it, but it gives the match something different, some sort of edge to it to make it interesting.

Money in the Bank...why would they have this twice a year? If they make it so you have to cash it in at that ppv, that'd be stupid and ruin the entire point of it, and if they make it so that's the deadline to cash it in, that's equally as bad. I can't see how they think this would be a good idea to do twice a year. Actually, I don't think they'll keep this at all. I think they'll just end up replacing it once they realize that this is a bad idea.

I'm still not a fan of HIAC and TLC having ppvs. It takes away from the meaning of the matches. Remember when a HIAC match was maybe once a year and it was used to cap off a big feud? Now it's just been degraded to whatever random shitty matches they decide for that time. TLC, that was stupid as fuck with the "Chairs Match". They need to replace that ppv as well.

Bragging Rights I kind of liked, but I wish they'd move it further away from Survivor Series as both are tag team ppvs. Why not have Bragging Rights after Extreme Rules, as that'll be after the draft? That way you have brand new rosters and they have to fight for their supremacy right off the bat. Lots of in-fighting where heels come over and say "now that I'm on the brand, I should be the captain because I kicked ass on the other brand" and someone who's still there from before going against that idea, people that weren't used to each other being forced to team up, tag teams that were split up are now having to face each other for their brand, etc. Something I'd like to see them change though is not to have the tally up score thing, as we all know it would end up coming down to the final tag match anyway, but instead, make it a handicap kind of thing. The more matches your brand wins, the more your team gets an advantage in the big tag match. Maybe you get an extra member per win or something. I agree with Vertigolowe above, it'd be cool to see them merge the War Games concept with Bragging Rights.

Breaking Point is gone. Good. I liked the title, but the ppv itself was boring.

What I'd like to see them do is start incorporating some of their gimmicks into their 3-Hour Raw episodes. The Draft works extremely well with this, as did King of the Ring, so they should keep/redo that. But why not also do Cyber Sunday's concept on a 3-hour Raw? Have the fans vote before and during the show. Might boost some ratings instead of just having these specials be normal shows.

 

[Jebus205]

I understand where yall are coming from. HiaC, to me, just kills the unpredictability that the match once had. When someone (namely, the Undertaker) would say that he and his opponent would face off in a HiaC match, everybody's eyes would blow up. They would shock us with these gimmick matches. These new ppvs just kill that unexpectedness. Now we know that certain matches will happen at certain ppvs. just kills the excitement for me.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

What in the fuck man, way for the WWE to run around like chicken with its fuckin head cut off. HEY LETS CHANGE THIS SHIT EVERY THREE WEEKS DERPITY DERP

To think, people get paid for this shit. Can you imagine.

Anyway, looks good to me. As I have said repeatedly, its all well and good to have gimmick PPVS, but dammit, you had BETTER NOT have those gimmicks on any other shows, period, or you are totally trashing the value of said matches. With this in mind, it makes having Extreme Rules be the first show of the "wrestling year" so you dont have it clashing with the gimmick shows at the end of the year. I dig that. Also, it will be fun to blow off the WM feuds with crazy ass gimmick matches, which IMO, is probably the primary reason they made that move.

Also very glad to see Survivor Series back. Tradition is tradition, and I would be severely disappointed to see it go. Stack it up with elimination team matches, and a few title matches, that are booked well, and there you have it. I felt this years Survivor Series was perfectly serviceable, and you can likely blame shitty, lazy build up, and not commiting to an event structure for poor sales. Glad to see it back.

 

[Planty]

Most interesting.

I'm happy to see Survivor Series back purely because I feel if an argument has been made, it needs to be justified after as well as before. Its all good throwing around random facts saying that due to buyrates etc, that it just doesn't draw anymore. But it could just be a matter of line-up... Cena/HBK/HHH for example. There will be more factors. I think this would be good as a make-or-break Survivor Series. I've not been a huge fan of its recent direction and given the last few Survivor Series PPV's, it should more than likely go. Though lets give it one last try, try and give it some GREAT card. Make it feel like a big four PPV again rather than an after-thought. Team names, an elimination match that would mean something afterwards feud-wise, that sort of thing. I'm all for Survivor Series staying if this one works out well, otherwise, no. And that's exactly how it should be. You've made your case Vince, now... if any time, its your chance to prove it.

As for Over the Limit. Good PPV name, but why change WWE Wild Card for it? Out of F4W, MITB and that... I liked that most. Purely because it had the feel that it was going to use "randomised" matches. That would have been interesting. I like it, I just think it should have replaced Fatal 4 Way. I kind of worry they'll be a WWE Triple Threat PPV coming...

With Over the Limit. I do have one fear. Time Limits. Or beating the clock. When I hear limit, I think time. Why can I imagine Beat The Clock challenges?.. with the winner facing the Champion at the end of the PPV. Actually, that doesn't sound that bad. But I think the Champion should have an exhibition match of some sort beforehand so it would be even, both men would realistically be slightly fatigued.

Fatal 4 Way, just no. Call me old fashioned, but I love my one-on-one matches. Using these occasionally makes them just right! I only mind this because I feel both Smackdown and RAW will have Fatal 4 Way's on the same night. Not fun.

MITB. I've made an argument before, for this:

I honestly would be really infuriated if WWE went ahead with the Money In The Bank idea.

Let me tell you now,
If WWE makes the Money In The Bank PPV. It will kill the match.

Lets look at the winners and their position in the WWE when they won:
Edge (Upper Midcard), RVD (Upper Midcard), Kennedy (Upper Midcard), CM Punk (Midcard), CM Punk (Upper Midcard, WWE fucked up his first title run).

Okay, the positions may be debateable as to what I've rated them but the bottom line is- none of these men were WWE main eventers before they won MITB.

Do you really think we're going to see so many upper midcarders in the MITB match if WWE goes ahead with this as a Main Event to a PPV?

I like how WWE currently is adding unfamiliar faces to main events as far as the scene goes, with Kingston, Dibiase, R-Truth, Morrison etc involved in Elimination Chamber matches so you know for sure if they did this MITB PPV that you would still see some form of fresh faces. But I always thought part of the beauty of the MITB match was that it rarely features a true main eventer even.

Now with this as a main event at its own PPV? We can say hello to the people that don't even particularly need the contract.

Right now, the Royal Rumble has been the showcase event for Main Eventers to often win it. Lets keep MITB for those who desperately need it. The contract being able to be cashed within the year means the superstar can have time to progress and get more over before used.

Honestly, this could be the death of Money In The Bank as we know it, and it wouldn't suprise me if a lot of disillusioned fans look past this and give it a high level of interest.

Whether they keep MITB at Mania regardless aswell, I still feel it is the death of the whole concept. If a midcarder won at Mania and didn't cash it in until after the MITB PPV where a main eventer may have won a briefcase, their status just looks unsuperior. This needs to go. I wish people would actually see this point. It is absolutely horrible. Just mark my words here, Money In The Graveyard.

I like all the other PPV's though. Particularly like the idea to replace Backlash with Extreme Rules. I always dug the Backlash name and logo, but come to think of it. That's about it. Extreme Rules could feature some rematches or new beginnings with extreme implications straight after Mania now. And I really dig that.

On the whole, good move WWE. I hate when people slate the gimmick PPV's without a justified argument. You're on a wrestling board, you have a keyboard (I hope), use it.

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

One thing I've been pondering over is the MITB PPV. The MITB match at WrestleMania is to give a push to an up and comer, so what will that mean for the PPV? Will it just be a by the numbers PPV with a big ladder match at the end or will there be 2 MITB matches, one for Raw and one for Smackdown?

I know this may draw some arguments about buy-rates etc, but what if the MITB PPV was just about the players in the Mid-Card? The match itself is to give those kinds of wrestlers a push, and if say Cena, Orton, HHH, Jericho, Edge etc AREN'T there, then would this encourage fans to get more behind wrestlers they want to see get a push, eg Christian, Shelton Benjamin, Morrison. If the fans know these kind of guys will be headlining then it may prepare them for if/when they move into the main event title picture, rather than being overshadowed by the bigger names, some of whom are probably moving on in the next few years.

One final thing, does Over The Limit sound like a bit of a weak PPV title to anyone else? Over The Edge made sense as it's a fairly widely used soundbite, Over The Limit just sounds like something associated with trucking. But maybe I'm just nitpicking

 

[thedriffter50]

These names will be the death of WWE...everyone with a mind would know there trying to change their identity they took so much years to actually build

 

[DL23]

Rather then changing the themes for PPV's maybe WWE should take a different approach, maybe change the PPV name ever year, minus the the top 4 (assuming Survivor Series stays) and Extreme Rules, Night of Champions. Use them 6 has your main PPVs, and the other 6 or 7 change the name to suit a feud like back in the attitude era,

Rock Bottom, Judgement Day, St Valentines Day Massacure, Fullyloaded like when they had the In Your House concept, then it leaves the elimiment of surprise, and the name sells the PPV rather then a bunch of same gimmick matches.

 

[Takerfan93]

In my opinion, these gimmick pay-per views are terrible and desperate. Having Hell In A Cell matches, TLC mathces and Elimination Chamber matches all on designated nights takes away from the maginitude of them.

HIAC are supposed to be used to end a rivalry that has got really big. The same goes for TLC to an extent. Elimination Chamber matches being on the same pay per view every single year has also damaged that match and the road to Wrestlemania because it makes it more predictable in a way. Also, having more than one of each on one pay per view is ridiculous. I know everyone knows all this but I've just joined and haven't had a chance to rant yet

Anyway, I believe gimmick pay per views are great, BUT only when they are actual gimmicks, not these awful ones which are based on a match type. Survivor Series is a gimmick pay per view, but a great one, I don't mean the pay per view has been great the past few years but the concept is original and exiting. The same goes for King of the Ring, which in my opinion should be brought back. I would also love to see some old WCW pay per views back, like War Games.

In my opinion these are the pay per views WWE should run and why:
January - Royal Rumble - one of the big four, great concept, unpredictable, exiting, unique
Febriary - Fully Loaded - bring it back because it is on the road to wrestlemania, so it doesn't need some big gimmick to sell, the fact that it is part of Wrestlemania build up is enough (the name also suits it because it is on the way to WM)
March - nothing to allow more time for WM build up
April - Wrestlemania - Obviously
May - Extreme Rules - exiting, based on match types but by no means limited so that it's stupid like other PPVS (HIAC, EC, TLC)
June - King of The Ring - great concept, good to help with pushes, very unique to other PPVs
July -no PPV because if there are onl 10 PPVs a year, it allows more build up time for each one and the best time to miss out a second one is in July because during the summer, viewing figures are lower since people are on holidays.
August - Summerslam - one of the big four, second biggest, enough to sell assuming the matches are booked right
September - War Games - really fun match to watch, has history behind it, would be something new to younger fans
October - No Way Out - bring the name back but change the gimmick. could be similar to Lockdown, all the matches would be enclosure type matches, not necessarily only ones with cage type structures but others too
November - Survivor Series - again a really good gimmick PPV, different
December - Night of Champions - it is a good idea to put it at the end of the year because it could be a way to celebrate the past year by defending all the championships on the last PPV of the year, if that makes sense