|
Post by bigshab421 on Apr 18, 2018 8:08:56 GMT -5
Was ending the brand exclusive PPV's a good idea?
In my opinion, with how many main eventers and championships they have, I think its stupid to have dual-branded shows. They are going to start cramming matches into the card just to feature everyone, younger guys who need exposure won't get it, and the PPV's are going to be too long.
I know things get a tad repetitive on TV with exclusive rosters, but thats on the writing staff. They need to figure out how to long term build and draw out storylines without giving the match away on free television multiple weeks in a row.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Apr 18, 2018 8:11:26 GMT -5
What better way to solve the problem of 7 hour WrestleMania fatigue than to build up the audience's tolerance with 5 and 6 hour monthly PPVs!
|
|
|
Post by ~ Cymru ~ on Apr 18, 2018 8:32:09 GMT -5
Are PPV's going to be longer now they're combined?
I liked the PPV shedule, but sometimes I did feel like guys were having matches just to fill the time, especially the smackdown roster...
|
|
|
Post by bigshab421 on Apr 18, 2018 8:37:04 GMT -5
Are PPV's going to be longer now they're combined?I liked the PPV shedule, but sometimes I did feel like guys were having matches just to fill the time, especially the smackdown roster... I believe they are moving to 4 hour format. I liked the old format too, but again if you know you have a PPV coming up, keep the talent thats feuding away from each other till the PPV. Have them in backstage skits, promos, brawls. It really isn't hard to do. Say if Styles cuts a promo on Nakamura, and Shinsuke goes out and smashes a jobber to send a message to AJ, boom you advance the story without it getting stale, instead of tag matches and sneak attacks. Plus they can give more time to someone who isn't really getting utilized like a Tye Dillinger or a Becky Lynch.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 27, 2024 17:48:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 9:01:34 GMT -5
Are PPV's going to be longer now they're combined?I liked the PPV shedule, but sometimes I did feel like guys were having matches just to fill the time, especially the smackdown roster... I believe they are moving to 4 hour format. I liked the old format too, but again if you know you have a PPV coming up, keep the talent thats feuding away from each other till the PPV. Have them in backstage skits, promos, brawls. It really isn't hard to do. Say if Styles cuts a promo on Nakamura, and Shinsuke goes out and smashes a jobber to send a message to AJ, boom you advance the story without it getting stale, instead of tag matches and sneak attacks. Plus they can give more time to someone who isn't really getting utilized like a Tye Dillinger or a Becky Lynch. I agree. I miss the days where every week you were dying for the 2 guys to just lay into each other and most of the time you had to wait 3 or more weeks for it to actually happen. Made the actual match between the two mean something and it gave you a reason to buy the PPV that month.
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Apr 18, 2018 9:41:12 GMT -5
Guys are definitely going to get left off of shows, but that may not necessarily be a terrible thing. Even with the split rosters, a lot of talent was becoming overexposed.
It's a happy coincidence for them, given what's going on with Reigns. They can now line up a bunch of heels people don't care about to get fed to Roman without worrying about mega anti-Reigns reactions or the matches not being suitable main events. Ronda Rousey is the #1 act on Raw, and Smackdown will have a big title match for every show. Reigns can plow through the likes of Mahal, McIntyre, a heel Bobby Roode, heel Lashley, Ziggler, Corbin, etc. - all guys who aren't over enough to be cheered heavily against Roman.
|
|
|
Post by bigshab421 on Apr 18, 2018 10:00:28 GMT -5
Guys are definitely going to get left off of shows, but that may not necessarily be a terrible thing. Even with the split rosters, a lot of talent was becoming overexposed. It's a happy coincidence for them, given what's going on with Reigns. They can now line up a bunch of heels people don't care about to get fed to Roman without worrying about mega anti-Reigns reactions or the matches not being suitable main events. Ronda Rousey is the #1 act on Raw, and Smackdown will have a big title match for every show. Reigns can plow through the likes of Mahal, McIntyre, a heel Bobby Roode, heel Lashley, Ziggler, Corbin, etc. - all guys who aren't over enough to be cheered heavily against Roman. I think you're underestimating the apathy and disdain for Reigns. I think the only person on earth fans would boo instead of him would be Vickie Guerrero.
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Apr 18, 2018 10:18:55 GMT -5
Guys are definitely going to get left off of shows, but that may not necessarily be a terrible thing. Even with the split rosters, a lot of talent was becoming overexposed. It's a happy coincidence for them, given what's going on with Reigns. They can now line up a bunch of heels people don't care about to get fed to Roman without worrying about mega anti-Reigns reactions or the matches not being suitable main events. Ronda Rousey is the #1 act on Raw, and Smackdown will have a big title match for every show. Reigns can plow through the likes of Mahal, McIntyre, a heel Bobby Roode, heel Lashley, Ziggler, Corbin, etc. - all guys who aren't over enough to be cheered heavily against Roman. I think you're underestimating the apathy and disdain for Reigns. I think the only person on earth fans would boo instead of him would be Vickie Guerrero. I'm not, but they likely are. I don't think the aforementioned method is going to work, I just think it's probably what they're planning. In principle, I agree with the idea that those opponents are likely to induce less of a strong negative reaction to Reigns, but I think it's going to have an unintended effect - more apathy toward him in general. I don't think they'll get behind Reigns because his opponent isn't all that over. I think they'll just tune out of the feud entirely. It's already started happening over the last two weeks. The vitriolic, guttural hatred toward Roman is fading. It's not being replaced with cheers, though, just silent murmur. They've pretty much hit worst-case-scenario with him.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Apr 18, 2018 10:40:38 GMT -5
I think, in theory, this will actually help the gimmick matches. Because of the women, we now get two gimmick matches a show that are actually different. If you're doing split rosters inside those gimmick matches it becomes a little more dynamic and creative on top of just the gender split. So for MITB, if you do 4 Raw superstars and 4 Smackdown superstars, it makes it more difficult to predict a winner, which is nice.
I'm curious to see if they release some talent, though. The rosters do seem huge and the influx of talent coming from NXT isn't going to stop. Like are we going to get Nikki Cross with Sanity? I honestly think she's the star of that group. EC3 could be on the main roster right now. Aleister Black, Undisputed Era, Pete Dunne, Gargano, Ciampa, Ohno, Moustache Mountain and Candice LeRae could all come up immediately if WWE was so inclined. Baszler and Velveteen Dreamer are likely going to get hot shotted to the main roster if I were to guess. There doesn't seem to be any kind of effort to limit the roster to a set number of talents. So I get not wanting to over expose talent but if the rosters continue to increase in size it could end up seeming silly not to have brand specific PPVs at this pace.
Dean Ambrose, Jason Jordan and potentially Big Show are pieces that are going to get back in the mix eventually this year, as well. Tons of talent right now.
|
|
👑🇵🇭⭐️
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
King Of The Ring 2007 - Team Undisputed
Joined on: Feb 4, 2013 13:46:47 GMT -5
Posts: 4,674
|
Post by 👑🇵🇭⭐️ on Apr 18, 2018 11:05:22 GMT -5
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. WWE pay per views and NXT TakeOvers should only have Championship Title matches. That would be 9 matches on WWE pay per views and 5 matches on NXT TakeOvers. If you’re not a Champion or a Championship Title contender, then you shouldn’t be on the big shows. Non-Title feuds should only take place on Raw, Smackdown, and NXT. The only exception to this rule that I would implement is the Royal Rumble match and the traditional Survivor Series Tag Team Elimination match.
Let’s take WrestleMania 34 for example. We had a total of 14 matches, which includes 3 pre-show matches. There were 9 Championship Title matches, 1 of which was on the pre-show. Here’s how I would have change things around.
I would keep the WrestleMania Battle Royals on the kickoff show, but move the Cruiserweight Championship match to the main card. This would keep the SuperStars not defending / challenging for a Championship on the card, but also gives more importance to the Cruiserweight Championship and the division as a whole, taking its rightful place on the main card. Not everyone will notice it, but there is a big difference between being on TV at 6:45 PM and being on TV at 7:15 PM during WrestleMania Sunday. Just ask the Usos about that.
I completely understand why the 3 non-Title matches on the main card took place on the “Grandest Stage Of Them All”, but the tag team matches involving the McMahon Commissioners should have just main evented the go-home episodes of Raw and Smackdown respectively. I’m sure those in attendance at the Raw go-home show would have enjoyed a 20 minute mix tag team match between WWE COO Triple H and Raw Commissioner, Stephanie McMahon vs. Raw General Manager, Kurt Angle and “Rowdy” Ronda Rousey. I’m sure those in attendance at the Smackdown go-home show would have enjoyed a 15 minute tag team match between Smackdown Commissioner, Shane McMahon and Smackdown General Manager, Daniel Bryan vs. Kevin Owens and Sami Zayn.
Undertaker should have just brawled with John Cena at the Showcase Of The Immortals, culminating in a Casket match on the post-WrestleMania Raw or on the post-WrestleMania Smackdown, after the Greatest Spectacle in Sports Entertainment. There was no need for a 3 minute squash match at all. Imagine if they announced this match taking place on Monday or Tuesday during WrestleMania.
Now let’s look at the Greatest Royal Rumble. Triple H vs. John Cena and Undertaker vs. Rusev in a Casket Match?? Make these matches main events on Raw and Smackdown and watch the ratings pop that week. I’d also replace these with Women’s Championship Title matches, but I understand why they won’t.
My point is, the WWE should make the pay per views all about the Championship Title Belts. All of the non-Title feuds should be used on the weekly episodic television shows, which could also help in the ratings anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Rated [R] NinJa on Apr 18, 2018 11:44:14 GMT -5
SmackDown would've really benefited by still having solo PPV shows after the shake up last night, their roster is STACKED! I completely understand why the 3 non-Title matches on the main card took place on the “Grandest Stage Of Them All”, but the tag team matches involving the McMahon Commissioners should have just main evented the go-home episodes of Raw and Smackdown respectively. I’m sure those in attendance at the Raw go-home show would have enjoyed a 20 minute mix tag team match between WWE COO Triple H and Raw Commissioner, Stephanie McMahon vs. Raw General Manager, Kurt Angle and “Rowdy” Ronda Rousey. I’m sure those in attendance at the Smackdown go-home show would have enjoyed a 15 minute tag team match between Smackdown Commissioner, Shane McMahon and Smackdown General Manager, Daniel Bryan vs. Kevin Owens and Sami Zayn. I know your gimmick is title belts and stuff but to say Ronda Rousey's in-ring debut and Daniel Bryan's return to in-ring action after 3 years should've happened on RAW and SmackDown is absurd. Not to mention NXT TakeOver's MOTN (potential MOTY) Gargano vs. Ciampa wouldn't of happened by your logic and those two and Ronda all stole the show at their respective events. In wrestling there are feuds BIGGER than title pictures and they deserve to be on PPVs and even headline them IMO.
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Apr 18, 2018 11:50:32 GMT -5
I have always hated dual branded PPVs every month. They have enough talent to fill the shows. It’s the terrible booking that made a lot of them lackluster. SDL is stacked now, but with dual branded shows every month I can see a lot of guys getting lost in the shuffle.
|
|
Thunder Chunky
Main Eventer
Joined on: Aug 1, 2010 21:57:30 GMT -5
Posts: 4,490
|
Post by Thunder Chunky on Apr 18, 2018 11:59:05 GMT -5
I feel like WWE signs guys just so other companies can't. The roster is huge now, no way they can feature all of them.
|
|
|
Post by McBlake on Apr 18, 2018 12:14:46 GMT -5
Good point. I think they could have had found a happy medium. The big 4 dual branded as well as Money in the Bank and Clash of Champions. Then rotate the others every year by brand.
I see why they changed it, some of the matches particularly on SDL PPV's were barely TV worthy, but these stacked rosters could definitely embrace big events to themselves.
|
|
|
Post by bigshab421 on Apr 18, 2018 13:07:36 GMT -5
Just take a look at Backlash, a card filled with so many pointless matches (Miz/Rollins & Joe/Reigns) plus the women's titles, US title & Tag titles. There's already upwards to 7 matches on the card and guys like Balor, Braun, Lashley, New Day, Usos, Asuka, etc... are all left off.
I just think this is another stupid and impulsive move by Vince to jack up Network subscriptions. But it is obvious that he continues to only hurt the product. The length of the PPV's are likely to increase which most people think anything over 3 is rough. You may stack the shows with RAW/SDL combined, but you also have to leave a ton of talent off the pay per views because you just expanded your rosters nearly by doubling. them.
I don't know man, maybe I'm just a dumb wrasslin' fan, but this is going to kill a ton of momentum for a ton of guys and girls out in the WWE.
|
|
enigmafigs
Superstar
Sup.
Joined on: Nov 26, 2017 13:37:26 GMT -5
Posts: 648
|
Post by enigmafigs on Apr 18, 2018 13:22:41 GMT -5
I feel like WWE signs guys just so other companies can't. The roster is huge now, no way they can feature all of them. They’ll just keep making new brands with 6 different championship titles on each until they have a 3 hour live show every day of the week.
|
|
👑🇵🇭⭐️
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
King Of The Ring 2007 - Team Undisputed
Joined on: Feb 4, 2013 13:46:47 GMT -5
Posts: 4,674
|
Post by 👑🇵🇭⭐️ on Apr 18, 2018 13:28:10 GMT -5
SmackDown would've really benefited by still having solo PPV shows after the shake up last night, their roster is STACKED! I completely understand why the 3 non-Title matches on the main card took place on the “Grandest Stage Of Them All”, but the tag team matches involving the McMahon Commissioners should have just main evented the go-home episodes of Raw and Smackdown respectively. I’m sure those in attendance at the Raw go-home show would have enjoyed a 20 minute mix tag team match between WWE COO Triple H and Raw Commissioner, Stephanie McMahon vs. Raw General Manager, Kurt Angle and “Rowdy” Ronda Rousey. I’m sure those in attendance at the Smackdown go-home show would have enjoyed a 15 minute tag team match between Smackdown Commissioner, Shane McMahon and Smackdown General Manager, Daniel Bryan vs. Kevin Owens and Sami Zayn. I know your gimmick is title belts and stuff but to say Ronda Rousey's in-ring debut and Daniel Bryan's return to in-ring action after 3 years should've happened on RAW and SmackDown is absurd. Not to mention NXT TakeOver's MOTN (potential MOTY) Gargano vs. Ciampa wouldn't of happened by your logic and those two and Ronda all stole the show at their respective events. In wrestling there are feuds BIGGER than title pictures and they deserve to be on PPVs and even headline them IMO. In Kayfabe, there is absolutely nothing more important that the Championship Title Belts. No SuperStar in the history of Professional Sports Wrestling Entertainment comes into this business thinking, "I want to have a personal feud with (insert SuperStar name here), and steal the show!!" Every SuperStar in the history of Professional Sports Wrestling Entertainment comes into this business thinking, "I want be the World Champion!!" What does "stealing the show" even really mean?? I know where you're coming from, but those matches could have stolen the show on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday respectively. My way would have given the fans in attendance something extra special, and it would not have hurt the WWE financially as far ticket sales or buy rates or Network subscriptions are concerned. I truly believe that Ronda Rousey's and Daniel Bryan's involvement didn't add more revenue from WM. I truly believe that the DIY Explodes match didn't add revenue from TakeOver. I'm not saying you're wrong. In fact, you're either right, or you're blindly following the WWE way, which I usually do myself. I'm just saying this is how I would have preferred it to be.
|
|
|
Post by ahunter8056 on Apr 18, 2018 13:43:12 GMT -5
No, it's a terrible idea. With the sheer size of today's roster, there are so many talented stars that aren't going to be given the exposure that they've worked for, on a consistent basis. At this point, WWE should either go back to brand exclusive PPVs, or reduce the size of their roster. This a problem that WWE should be working to prevent, rather than cause.
|
|
|
Post by TheLastDude on Apr 18, 2018 15:09:35 GMT -5
What we saw, especially in 2017, is that WWE is in the overexposure era. The shows are too long, too often, too oversaturated. Just because they can run up to 19 PPVs a year at 6 hours does not mean they should. 1 PPV a month at three hours, less the big four, is good. 12 in a year has been a good standard. The unique PPVs per brand ran the problem too with putting b.s. matches on the card to make it full, just because it gave more people time or just anyone time wasn't necessarily a good thing. Sometimes less is more, WWE needs to learn this concept. Agreed. Look at the NXT shows. They're not 5-6 hour marathons, but you leave feeling satisfied. Hell, there have been Takeovers where I thought "there's no way this show is going to be top shelf with four or five matches"...and I'll be damned if they don't pull it off almost every time.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 27, 2024 17:48:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 15:36:58 GMT -5
I'm glad to see the co branded ppvs because it can help focus on better long term feuds rather than one-off matches that don't make sense
|
|