|
|
Post by swytch on Oct 21, 2007 15:17:36 GMT -5
WWE has dropped New Years Revolution from its 2008 ppv schedule.
Along with December to Dismember, it's the second PPV dropped in six months.
I, for one, think this is a great thing. With the WWE trying to fill 15 ppv events into 12 months was far too much for both creative to fill and a bit heavy on the pockets of fans.
Personally I woulsd like WWE to go down to just 8 ppvs a year, keeping the big four of Royal Rumble, WrestleMania, Summerslam and Survivor Series with a lesser event inbetween each one.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hollywood Asia on Oct 21, 2007 15:18:48 GMT -5
Good, less PPV's means they mean more which means people will be intrested to buy since they will have nough time to build feuds and matches
|
|
Cmaster05
Main Eventer
My warning level is stuck. And I like it.
Joined on: Jul 3, 2007 14:54:54 GMT -5
Posts: 1,096
|
Post by Cmaster05 on Oct 21, 2007 15:20:33 GMT -5
this is OLD news. it was reported like 3 months ago.
|
|
ssxviper382
Main Eventer
Joined on: Nov 12, 2005 21:31:11 GMT -5
Posts: 1,030
|
Post by ssxviper382 on Oct 21, 2007 15:21:39 GMT -5
This is great new they should have the big 4 and then have No way out, Backlash, no Mercy and Amragedon
|
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Oct 21, 2007 15:24:20 GMT -5
They could stand to drop one or two more in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by tnaimpact123 on Oct 21, 2007 15:28:01 GMT -5
This is how I think it should be done:
January - Royal Rumble
Febuary - No Way Out
March - WrestleMania
April - Backlash
May - Judgment Day
June - King of the Ring
July - Vengeance
Augest - SummerSlam
September - Unforgiven
October - No Mercy
November - Survivor Series
December - Armageddon
|
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Oct 21, 2007 15:32:20 GMT -5
This is how it should be done:
January - Royal Rumble.
(First sunday) April - WrestleMania
August - SummerSlam
November - Survivor Series
|
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Oct 21, 2007 15:46:57 GMT -5
This is how it should be done: January - Royal Rumble. (First sunday) April - WrestleMania August - SummerSlam November - Survivor Series To be honest, I think it would be tons more entertaining this way. It would make some feuds mean something. And it would also make for more exciting regular TV in my opinion. They could have small feuds leading into bigger feuds to give other wrestlers chances to shine in the main events. |
|
|
|
Post by yungking23 on Oct 21, 2007 15:49:59 GMT -5
I actually am a little dissapointed about their decisions to drop PPVs because I think that the more matches they could give us, the better. Plus, I never pay for PPVs anyway so this just takes away the hype for a PPV event.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago on Oct 21, 2007 15:53:51 GMT -5
This is how it should be done: January - Royal Rumble. (First sunday) April - WrestleMania August - SummerSlam November - Survivor Series To be honest, I think it would be tons more entertaining this way. It would make some feuds mean something. And it would also make for more exciting regular TV in my opinion. They could have small feuds leading into bigger feuds to give other wrestlers chances to shine in the main events. Also, lesser ppvs could lead to more ppv-caliber matches being shown on all three brand's television shows each week. I really wish WWE would cut down on their number of ppvs; 6 or 8 at the very most would be plausible. |
|
dimshady
Main Eventer
Can never get his Avater to work!
Joined on: Dec 3, 2006 9:33:28 GMT -5
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by dimshady on Oct 21, 2007 16:00:02 GMT -5
here here, lets knock a few more off 8-12 a year is good enough.
WWE only upped theres because WCW did during the war.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 17, 2024 12:38:56 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2007 16:00:20 GMT -5
This is how it should be done: January - Royal Rumble. (First sunday) April - WrestleMania June - King of the Ring August - SummerSlam November - Survivor Series fixed. I wouldnt mind that schedule with a Cyber Sunday involved between SummerSlam and Survivor Series |
|
|
|
Post by GreatJunta36 on Oct 21, 2007 16:00:27 GMT -5
That's a change that I def. agree with. 6 PPVs a year would be absolutely perfect though
|
|
|
|
Post by Stevo on Oct 21, 2007 16:01:42 GMT -5
6 or 7 PPVs would kick ass. Maybe the Royal Rumble in later January, Wrestlemania in early April, King of the Ring in late May or early early June, Summerslam in early August, UnforgiVen in late September or early October, and Survivor Series in late November. Thats 6 PPVs.
There's enough time that angles wouldn't be repetitive (remember, angles rarely happened every week back in the 80s, so four PPVs would be too little) and WWE wouldn't be crunched on time. Storylines today usually last 2 or 3 PPVs anyway, so I don't see any harm in 6 PPVs.
Also, have a SNME the week before Wrestlemania (exactly one week before the Hall of Fame) and one before Summerslam.
|
|
|
|
Post by rkolegendkilla on Oct 21, 2007 16:01:54 GMT -5
January: Royal Rumble
February: Saturday Night's Main Event
March: WrestleMania
May: Vengeance
August: SummerSlam
November: Survivor Series
|
|
|
|
Post by lowki21 on Oct 21, 2007 16:07:07 GMT -5
I'd love to see less ppv's as well. Sadly, considering how much revenue they pull in from even the crappiest ppv show, it won't change anytime soon. They'll drop to 12 a year at the most.
|
|
|
|
Post by ericbischoff on Oct 21, 2007 16:08:05 GMT -5
That 's good, because WWE have too much PPV. And I prefer 12 PPV per year like as old time, that's more make an sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Edgeman05 on Oct 21, 2007 16:20:44 GMT -5
Sounds great. Im glad there doing this.
|
|
|
|
Post by fattic on Oct 21, 2007 16:24:12 GMT -5
Thank God.
|
|
albireo
Main Eventer
The cake is a lie, the cube is forever.
Joined on: Jun 23, 2007 15:39:59 GMT -5
Posts: 2,649
|
Post by albireo on Oct 21, 2007 16:33:35 GMT -5
1 per month is the way to go imo
|
|
