You tell me what you feel the purpose of weekly television should be?

[Ambiguous Turd]

You get to be the boss!

The topic is in the thread title. Very simply, tell me what you think the main purpose of WWE and TNA weekly television should be and tell me HOW do you best execute that strategy? What is the end goal of the show?

After you determine that, tell me your strategy to best accomplish that goal. What type of programming content do you put on to achieve that goal?

In doing so, you should probably assign percentages to the following:

(Keep in mind that none of these necessarily have to be used each week ... it's whatever you want it to be ... tailor it however way you feel is best to achieve your goal)


- "A" caliber Matches (11+ minutes)
- Announcer Banter between matches
- Authority Figure appearances
- "B" caliber Matches (5-10 minutes)
- Backstage Angle
- Backstage Interview
- Backstage Promo
- Divas Gimmick Matches
- Divas Matches
- Gimmick Matches
- In Ring Angles
- In Ring Interview
- In Ring Promo
- PPV hype
- Squash Matches (< 5 Minutes)
- Tag Matches
- Title Matches
- Total In-Ring Time
- Video Packages


So you have a variety of means at your disposal if you would like to participate in this exercise and again, those are just suggestions in some tools you could use to accomplish your goal.

But first and foremost, I would like you to tell me what you feel the purpose of weekly television is, and then tell me how you would go about accomplishing that purpose with the viewer. Which techniques and how much?

What would your strategy be?


Please Note that the Booking Tools Percentage Exercise isn't required for this thread, but if you would like to participate in that and go the extra step, then by all means.

 

[trendkiller]

Ugh... I had such a good reply and then it went poof on me Oh well, I'll try again.

The purpose of weekly TV events for me is to put over the young talent and to sell PPVs. This is of course making a few assumptions, such as there being a roster of curtain jerkers, mid-card guys and main eventers, that this roster has some semblance of talent and that I know and recognize their strengths and weaknesses.

Week 1, the focus is about 90% on the main eventers. They get to mop up their angles from the previous PPV and move on or continue the feuds, as well as sell re-runs of the PPV. No rematches to be booked unless necessary due to injuries and whatnot - this, I feel, kills the potential re-run sales.

To start the show, I'd go with the most over star in the ring cutting a promo on his previous opponent, either furthering the feud or declaring it dead.

Then we go through the main eventers that were in the top half of the card, to update the viewers on where their feuds are at and give them an outline of what happened at the PPV. The above should take only up until the first commercial break.

After the first commercial break, the mid-card gets a match - if possible a feud resolver, if not, then something that furthers a mid-card angle. This would be used as an opportunity to also get the mid-carders over.

Then we move on to further furthering the main eventer angles and feuds, including tag-team angles and upper mid-card angles. No backstage segments here, just backstage promos and backstage interviews (with mouthpieces for those who are weak on the stick god fucking damn it).

Mixing it up for the rest of the night, will be main eventer segments and promos, coupled with a main event where the top-feud main eventers are involved somehow, without actually having a match.

Week 2, we're going to focus on the new guys. This is the show where debuts happen, so obviously there will be a squash match or two here from time to time. The main eventers will barely get a promo, except for the top-feud, instead the mid-card is displayed in all its glory. The other main event feuds and angles are promoted through video packages and the announcers.

Matches will be heavily featured, as well as in-ring promos and some authority figure intervention as necessary. As I said, debuts also happen on this show, so there is room for plenty of flexibility.

The main purpose is to put over the mid-card and the up-and-comers.

Week 3, I'd have a really good main event for the top-feud (something like a triple threat with the top-feud plus another guy that gets involved, a tag-team match with the feuders on the same side, etc). The match would be given plenty of time and would focus on getting that feud very much over heading into the next PPV. This is where PPV hype is really starting to pick up, too.

This will be a more mixed card, with the feuds and angles that will be featured on the PPV more prominently displayed. Up-and-comers take a slight back seat to the established characters, while the main eventers are not the sole focus of the show.

A title-match for a mid-card title that ends in no-contest would also be a good candidate for co-main event.

Week 4, the week before the PPV, there would be a lot of hyping the PPV by everyone involved and the card would be constructed to build suspense and "what happens next" apprehension for the PPV. This is the show where everyone that is involved in a feud that will be featured is let loose with a microphone - interviews, promos prior to and after matches, segments, etc - and the main event would involve the second-to-top-feud, though of course not give the match away for free.

The top-feud, though, would be featured heavily and with lots of camera and mic time.

All the focus is on the PPV and the card, this is the real selling-show.

Pay-Per-View!

As we move into PPV, I wouldn't rely on gimmick matches unless it was to conclude an angle or feud. The match would have to be relevant to the angle, too, not just any old cage match "because I said so" - there has to be a reason for a gimmick match, or it's just... well, a gimmick.

No squash matches, but very much competitive stuff.

The card would start off with an up-and-comer versus a mid-carder. We move on to a tag-match or possibly an upper mid-card match. We roll on with a mid-card match that may or may not involve a title, and follow-up with the second-to-top-feud getting a co-main event match. Then there's a leg-stretcher as we have a solid mid-card match over a mid-card feud and finally we wrap it up with the main event.

Interviews and segments would be sprinkled in amongst the action, but promos should be kept short and sweet, since we don't really need to sell the PPV anymore and the main eventers are already plenty over from the exposure through-out the week. Most interviews and promos would instead serve to update the fans on what the mid-card feuds are all about - recaps, if you so wish to call them.

And as we go off the air, John Cena turns heel

Please note that I didn't differentiate between "mid-card" and "Divas", for example, as I see no reason to classify them as anything other than competitors, and thus would have some kind of hierarchy on the female roster. Mid-card or main eventer might mean divas as well as male competitors.

The product would be aimed mainly at the 14-35 male demographic, with less focus on the 14-30 female one. There would be some catering to the smaller children, such as comedy jobbers and funny segments, but mostly the targeted demographic would be the one with an interest that are also prepared to open their wallets.

Lots of sexy content, though not explicit (save for a diva getting her top ripped off, running around topless for a few seconds - on PPV mind you). Edgy stuff would be fairly prominent, though kept on a low key and blood would be reserved for special occasions. Matches with weapons would only be used if the angle warranted it.

That's an outline at least, though of course it's more complex than such

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I think it's pretty obvious that the goal of the weekly shows should be to sell PPV's and make big events out of them, in addition to stimulating House Show revenue, and keep people tuning in for more weekly TV. So with that being said, can someone justify to me why WWE or TNA should be giving you guys the 4 or 5 star matches you demand on weekly Television each and every week, only for you to not purchase the PPV?

That doesn't sound like very good business strategy to me, and that is why the fans that advocate as such should be completely disregarded.

Weekly TV shows should be more about talking and storyline with SOME wrestling to achieve that goal and get people actually interested in wanting to see the PPV. Repeating the same matches for free on weekly TV, and expecting them all to be 4 or 5 star matches only deflates interest in the PPV's, which is supposed to be where it's supposed to count.

Biggest thing that is wrong with the WWE today, in my opinion. This is something you smarks got wrong, plain and simple. And it's no wonder why WWE is criticized on a daily basis for having stale main events and matches nobody cares about anymore.

So congratulations. You guys blew it and ruined it yourselves because you are too Fucking greedy, and Vince is to blame for listening to the people who advised him that he should cater to your interests.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

"Holy fucking brilliant thread, Batman!"

"Watch your mouth, or it's back to the orphanage."

That's out of my system now. Anyway, ever since reading his book, I officially subscribe to the James J. Dillon school of professional wrestling thought. The purpose of television is largely two-fold; to sell PPV's and create enough interested in the programs as to improve house show revenue and attendance. What Dillon explains in his book is that PPV Buys and House Show Attendance are the two biggest revenue streams that pro wrestling promotions can capture. Perhaps sale of merchandise is tertiary on this list. All three put money in the pockets of both the wrestlers AND the promoters.

So, as a result, here are my assigned percentages based on those two goals.

- "A" calibre Matches (11+ minutes)

8%, or one, at most, per show. Make it good, because they need to be few and far between. If classic matches can be seen on free TV, it takes away from the need to go see house shows or buy PPV's. At the same time, these great matches make you WANT to see more.

- Announcer Banter between matches

1 - 2%. Great announcers such as Gorilla Monsoon, Bobby Heenan, Jim Ross, etc. make their points during the rest periods of the matches. That's also what solid Play-by-play guys are for. No need to waste time on it between matches as well. I do want to see some banter at the start of the show to set the stage.

- Authority Figure appearances

3-5%. Depends on how relevant it is. If the "authority figure" is supposed to announce matches, then it's fine. If he or she is there to drive feuds, that's cool too.

- B calbre Matches (5-10 minutes)

10-15%. Your "B" matches are the ones that "sell the milk without giving away the cow." The main event matches will sell the PPV's, but the mid-card and B matches will earn that peripheral business, create a buzz for the younger guys, and set up future main event feuds.

- Backstage Angle

8%. The backstage was blown open by WCW in 1996, so why close it? Fans love the backstage work, just make it relevant to the feuds. Instead of useless celebrity guest host banter, let's see some more sneak attacks, verbal sparring, etc.

- Backstage Interview

10%. Where has this art form gone!? These interviews and promos would set up feuds, announce matches, and tease new #1 contenders for titles. Just stop making the backstage announcer a moron or a hot chick who is just holding the mic. Sean Mooney, Alfred Hayes, Kevin Kelley, and Jeremy Borash are great examples.

- Backstage Promo

See above.

- Divas Gimmick Matches

Less than 1%. Either have them wrestler or don't. Pillow fights don't prove shit, and I can't even use them to their full potential unless my wife has already gone to bed, and for the same amount of time I could go watch internet porn and have a payoff. Click click...deleted.

- Divas Matches

As the WWE is currently constituted, one match per show. If they listen to me and merge the Women's and Diva's titles into one Women's Division, then 2 on whichever show the title is featured on. For TNA, 2 per show.

- Gimmick Matches

1-4%. They have to advance some sort of storyline. Spare me Hornswoggle vs Chavo in a giant boxing gloves match and give me Kofi vs Orton in a #1 contenders steel cage match. That way, Legacy could cuff Kofi to the cage, allowing Orton to escape and win, while not snuffing Kofi's heat.

- In Ring Angles
- In Ring Interview
- In Ring Promo

10-25%. Most focus should be on the ring action so live fans feel more connected.

- PPV hype

Hard to say, because you can hype the PPV's with the vessels above. I do miss the "Control Centers" they used to have for the PPV's where Gene Okurlund would hype the matches, review the promos, tell the story of how they got started, and announced new matches. I remember when Ultimate Warrior vs Randy Savage at Summerslam was announced on a Control Center. I almost shit myself.

- Squash Matches (< 5 Minutes)

5-10%. Enhancement talent has a place. If you see an interesting wrestler squash guys on TV, maybe you want to see him face a legit challenger at a house show.

- Tag Matches

Included above.

- Title Matches

2-5%, max. Title matches on free TV should be minimized. WWF used to have an "rule" stating that a champion had to defend his / her title on TV every month. Well, there's a PPV every month, so no need for bi-weekly title matches. Most TV fans know that major title changes on TV are rare.

- Total In-Ring Time

More than half the active (non-commercial) show if you count promos, in-ring interviews, and matches.

- Video Packages

Depends on how it advances the storylines.

 

[Okay Fabian]

Good Stuff Guys!

Ultimately, for me the goal of weekly TV should be to Sell the Superstars.

Unless a talent is on leave, injured, or otherwise written off TV, he or she should make some appearance on the program, or at least be mentioned.

It is notoriously hard to attract the casual viewer to the WWE product, so it is imperative that they introduce (or re-introduce) and feature their talent on every episode. If a viewer does not know who someone is or what they are up to then they will not care to follow their storylines, and subsequently, the product, or buy the PPVs.

How many times have we asked: “Where in the world is (insert name)?”If I was booking/writing for WWE I would be sure that this didn’t happen.

So, what it all boils down to is a flip of the old adage: quality over quantity. This time it’s QUANTITY over quality. When I watch RAW, I know the formula, and I know the schedule. I know that after each match/promo etc, there will be less and less of the show left. And while I am excited for main events, I typically dread them because I know that this is pretty much it.
So, as a fan, I would much rather see ten 4-minute matches over four 10-minute matches, because I’d get to see more Superstars & Divas.

I would definitely bring back Squash Matches. This would definitely allow for some of the mid-card wrestlers to get some credibility back after jobbing out to the main-eventers, and actually allow them to hit their finishing moves for once. Also, you could use squashes to showcase major stars that are involved in title feuds without giving away the in-ring action between the stars that are feuding.

I would institute Superstar Spotlight or Superstar Showcase videos on TV a la WWE.com’s Superstar/Diva of the Day. These would feature the talent who would not be attending the show, or who would be competing in dark matches. These would give basic info about the talent for the newer fans, but also present some obscure facts for more devoted fans.

The trick of featuring a large amount of talent in a non-wrestling capacity would be the diversification of how they are featured. You would want a balance of in-ring/backstage promos/angles, etc. You would want to create a standard for the audience, like the old pre-match interviews. The backstage segments need to seem less of an afterthought. If WWE puts time and effort into these then fans will stay tuned to watch them more often than not.

Okay, I didn’t complete the exercise entirely, but I think I brought up some decent ideas. So, yeah, showcase your talent, and more of it.

One last thing: The less matches they announce ahead of time the better. One thing I love about watching RAW is trying to guess who is going to face whom, and whose music is going to hit next. The more we know about the show, the fewer surprises are in store for us. Sure, you probably want to announce your main event, but asking “who’s going to main event?” or “what’s going to happen next?” keeps us tuned in.