|
|
Post by bad guy™ on Jan 14, 2016 21:12:27 GMT -5
So I know this topic has been beat to death over the last few years.
Diehard old school fans will make the case that Survivor Series is still a big 4 because of the massive importance it had until the early 2000's.
But Survivor Series has been the pits the last few years. If they have the traditional team matches, they're normally nothing major, I'd say the last big one was Cena vs. The Authority but the outcome of that match only lead to a few weeks of story before Cena brought The Authority back.
Meanwhile Money in the Bank, once such an overdone concept, since the Summer of Punk, has year after year had some of the biggest and best matches of the year. Matches that would be reserved for big 4 shows. It comes off as if they're building MITB up to be a really big thing, and every year it delivers as one of the most solid PPVs of the year behind the Rumble, Mania and SummerSlam.
Would you guys say that perhaps MITB is slowly starting to take over Survivor Series as one of the big four? Or that maybe the WWE is trying to make a big five or whatever you'd want to call it if they intend on keeping SvS as important as they can because of tradition? Or am I just losing my mind here?
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 15, 2024 16:36:06 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2016 21:21:34 GMT -5
I completely agree with this. Survivor series to me is no longer a "Big Four" event. I do agree that MITB has replaced survivor series as a big four event. The past few years, Suvivor Series just hasn't been the caliber of the Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, or Summerslam. Although, Money in the bank has been on the level of those events.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 15, 2024 16:36:06 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2016 21:26:07 GMT -5
I still think Survivor Series is still a big 4.Sting making his debut there kinda saved it from falling off imo.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheChamp420 on Jan 14, 2016 21:26:14 GMT -5
I'll agree MITB feels bigger just due to the fact that there is something generally important up for grabs.
|
|
|
|
Post by bad guy™ on Jan 14, 2016 21:31:55 GMT -5
I still think Survivor Series is still a big 4.Sting making his debut there kinda saved it from falling off imo. That, and Rock's return to the ring a couple of years prior. But that's my point. WWE relied on Rock, Cena vs. Authority and Sting to prevent SvS from falling off the face of the earth. Money in the Bank hasn't had to do that. It's just always been a well built show top to bottom without relying on some shock value thing to save it. Some might consider Punk's win shock value, but that was also something that happened "organically" and didn't require Rock/Sting/Legends to make Punk/Cena such an important thing, as it's just moved on up from there. Now there have been dud matches on MITB cards sure. But there are duds on Mania. Duds at the Rumble, etcetera. But I just think MITB has taken over Survivor Series as a big four must watch to me. |
|
|
|
Post by HHH316 on Jan 14, 2016 21:56:21 GMT -5
As much as I've held the Survivor Series in high regard, I have a hard time keeping it in the "big 4" category. I feel like there's only a "big 3" now, & if I was forced to pick a 4th, I'd probably go with MITB.
|
|
|
|
Post by jayrod2009 on Jan 14, 2016 22:00:47 GMT -5
The Big Four to me, is now the big 3. Rumble, WM, and Summerslam. Alot of WWE's PPV's are rehash matches from weeks of TV leading up to either a payoff or a rubber match. Its a boring formula. Why let guys in a fued wrestle leading up to a PPV? It makes the culmination at that PPV anti climactic.
|
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Jan 14, 2016 22:02:55 GMT -5
Not really. I'd say you're about right. MITB seems to have surpassed Survivor Series.
Unfortunately, they've more/less ruined everything I loved about Survivor Series. It used to be the place to see unique teams, unique match ups, and potential new feuds. Now it's just another PPV. I had hoped once the network came out they would go back to the old format, but I was wrong again.
|
|
👑🇵🇭⭐️
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
King Of The Ring 2007 - Team Undisputed
Joined on: Feb 4, 2013 13:46:47 GMT -5
Posts: 4,692
|
Post by 👑🇵🇭⭐️ on Jan 14, 2016 22:36:35 GMT -5
I think it's still the 1 of the Big 4. It may be number 4 of 4, but it is still 1 of the Big 4. Maybe it's just the fact that it's the 2nd longest running pay-per-view event in WWE history, behind WrestleMania.
|
|
|
|
Post by TurboEddie on Jan 14, 2016 22:51:31 GMT -5
Yes, but it certainly isn't treated as such.
|
|
|
|
Post by LA Times on Jan 14, 2016 22:59:20 GMT -5
Its just another PPV and has been surpassed by Money in the Bank, which was better than Summerslam from 2010-2014. Surivor Series 2007 and 2008 were 2 of the worst PPVs in recent memory.
|
|
torriefan4life
Superstar
Joined on: Mar 9, 2012 13:27:48 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by torriefan4life on Jan 14, 2016 23:07:54 GMT -5
I agree for the most part, but MITB and SS were both pretty awful last year. That MITB ladder match was boring to watch in the arena so I can't imagine how bad it was on TV.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheLastDude on Jan 14, 2016 23:09:16 GMT -5
Mania, the Rumble, Summerslam, and Survivor Series will always be the "big four" to me just from growing up when all these events started running and seeing them evolve.
Now in the case of the WWE itself, I think they only really view Mania and Summerslam as their showcase cards anymore. Everything else is essentially a gimmick show.
|
|
Miztery
Superstar
Joined on: Dec 30, 2014 0:16:59 GMT -5
Posts: 892 
|
Post by Miztery on Jan 14, 2016 23:15:47 GMT -5
I agree. To me, MITB should automatically be top four. It pretty much guarantees that the guy who comes out on top will be champion. That's pretty important.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Jan 14, 2016 23:15:53 GMT -5
MITB is more important right now and has been since it's inception to be honest.
|
|
|
|
Post by King Silva on Jan 14, 2016 23:19:05 GMT -5
I think it's still the 1 of the Big 4. It may be number 4 of 4, but it is still 1 of the Big 4. Maybe it's just the fact that it's the 2nd longest running pay-per-view event in WWE history, behind WrestleMania. I agree. I think MITB is # 5 even if it has had strong years in the past. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 15, 2024 16:36:06 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2016 23:35:52 GMT -5
The Big Four to me, is now the big 3. Rumble, WM, and Summerslam. Alot of WWE's PPV's are rehash matches from weeks of TV leading up to either a payoff or a rubber match. Its a boring formula. Why let guys in a fued wrestle leading up to a PPV? It makes the culmination at that PPV anti climactic. This is exactly what I was going to say. Well done.  |
|
|
|
Post by IRS on Jan 14, 2016 23:43:31 GMT -5
Nope, MITB has definitely surpassed it.
2014 was the last time in recent memory that I can think of SvS being meaningful.
|
|
|
|
Post by hbkjason on Jan 15, 2016 2:30:19 GMT -5
I think it has not been a big deal for many, many years. To be honest with you apart from Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania all the other PPV's just roll into each other and become forgettable pretty much instantly, but this ties in with the complete lack of personality that most of the product has these days. I think the fact they use pretty much the same damn stage set up every freaking time does not help differentiate them either.
|
|
|
|
Post by hbkbigdaddycool on Jan 15, 2016 2:39:30 GMT -5
I don't think any of the "Big 4" are even close to be called the Big 4 now.
Sure, Wrestlemania is huge, but to me Wrestlemania isn't even a normal wrestling show. It's more of a giant show showcasing entertainment and stars along with the wrestling.
As for the other PPVs, ever since they all air on the WWE Network, each PPV show seems to be just pretty basic. Not too much hype anymore like they had years ago. But that's just my opinion on it.
|
|
