The W
Views: 97896726
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
2.8.14 0142
The W - Pro Wrestling - if WWE, really wants to make this competition look serious...
This thread has 20 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(12166 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (24 total)
The Vile One
Chourico








Since: 3.1.02

Since last post: 4362 days
Last activity: 4239 days
#1 Posted on
Why haven't the pay-per-views split up yet? I mean doesn't it kind of make this false competition ridiculous because both "brands" perform on the same ppv. WWE pay-per-views suck nowadays and there are just too many of them. Why not just knock off 3 ppv's, keep the five original big ones, and have 4 additional ppv's. Like 2 ppv's for smackdown and 2 for RAW. Hell make it 10 ppv's, whatever works, but I think 12 is spreading it thin. And its ridiculous that both brands always have to be on one ppv. I mean c'mon, they are even splitting up the ppv's between two announce teams!!! This is the most obvious change needed for this angle, but WWE seems the most reluctant about doing it. Just another reason we can put on the list why this angle IS a failure.




"It is a strange fate that we suffer so much fear and doubt over so small a thing...such a little thing."
-Boromir
Promote this thread!
WhoBettahThanDeion
Bockwurst








Since: 4.1.02

Since last post: 4302 days
Last activity: 4138 days
#2 Posted on
Me personally, I'm against two pay per views. Why would they split buyrates? You know everyone wouldn't get both. And the WWE seems reluctant to change the price.

Think about it, it's like Blade and Blade 2 coming out on DVD at the same time for 20.99 when you could get the Blade two-pack for 29.99.



An open letter to Andrew Gilkison from me: Sir, I am no longer pleased with your product and thus will not read it. I am the consumer and your product is not living up to my expectations. I could open up an Andrew Gilkison message board and cry about it, but that's a waste of my time. In the meantime, I would suggest you work on improving your product. Thank you.

Watching RAW and Smackdown doesn't cost anymore than your posts do. And so, like a good consumer, I'm tuning you out.



I got two blips on my Ha-dar. Shoot 'em down!
Notorious F.A.B.
Pepperoni








Since: 4.2.02
From: Dudleyville's Gay Ghetto

Since last post: 3943 days
Last activity: 3930 days
AIM:  
#3 Posted on
the plan is still to eventually run separate PPVs but the ability to do it just isn't there yet. the company just down-graded its performance expectations to the stock holders! plus, i doubt wwe could just announce they'll run eighteen shows a year and the PPV companies will all automatically carry them.

...but you want LESS ppvs per year. that will never, ever happen unless the company starts losing money on some shows. overall revenue is down but they aren't going into the hole. taking a couple shows off their line up is the same as saying "let's make LESS money!" that's never going to happen.
Scott Summets
Sujuk








Since: 27.6.02

Since last post: 3823 days
Last activity: 3791 days
#4 Posted on
If they only cut one PPV and have the big 5 co Raw and Smackdown, and then have the other two just for one brand (I say don't have a Feburary PPV), I could see the WWE making more money because they could hype the PPV's better and more people may want to see them. I'm sure 11 good PPV's would be better money makers than 12 PPVs thrown together. The advantage would be in months without the big 5, if Raw is having a PPV, Smackdown could already have matches for its PPV next month announced.



I'm gonna get me an oversized guitar, gain 40 pounds, and become the next D!
WyldeWolf1
Boerewors








Since: 20.6.02
From: Florida

Since last post: 4349 days
Last activity: 4349 days
#5 Posted on
I see two big obstacles:

1) Does the Undisputed Champ appear on both PPVs? If so, then does each brand have a #1 contender? etc, etc

2) With the brands being totally separate, how does one establish the months-long feud needed to lead into a Big PPV where they meet and settle the score?



WyldeWolf1
The Man of 1,007 holds, making him 3 holds better than Chris Jericho!
The Vile One
Chourico








Since: 3.1.02

Since last post: 4362 days
Last activity: 4239 days
#6 Posted on
Wylde Wolfe, the same way they establish a number one contender from RAW or Smackdown.

How? Why not just let the IC and Tag Team champions float between shows, while keeping hardcore and CW (gimmick titles) on RAW and Smackdown.

Fab, les ppv's doesn't necessarily mean less money. Not everyone can afford 35-40 bucks for a ppv every month. And quite frankly if they have less ppv's it will give feuds more time to build up excitement and interest. Not to mention most WWE ppv's now are just basically glorified weekly tv shows with matches that aren't much longer, another sign of WWE's declining creativity. Once again, if any shells out over 30 dollars for a WWE PPV, but better be worth it and then some. And don't try to tell me that Vengeance was.




"It is a strange fate that we suffer so much fear and doubt over so small a thing...such a little thing."
-Boromir
SmooveK
Goetta








Since: 27.6.02
From: Fukushima, Japan

Since last post: 3672 days
Last activity: 3361 days
#7 Posted on

    Originally posted by Scott Summets
    (I say don't have a Feburary PPV)


That's actually a good idea. It adds time to REALLY establish things for WrestleMania, and the WWE could make the show 5 or 6 hours long and charge a bit more for it. It would make it really seem like a monumental, MUST BUY event each year.

-K



See the newly minimalisticated SmooveK.com today. Smoove Komics, pictures, and submit your loyalty to SmooveLand. It's everything you've ever wanted in a website, exactly!

Newest additions to site: July 23 2002 in SmooveLand and pictures
WyldeWolf1
Boerewors








Since: 20.6.02
From: Florida

Since last post: 4349 days
Last activity: 4349 days
#8 Posted on

    Originally posted by The Vile One
    Wylde Wolfe, the same way they establish a number one contender from RAW or Smackdown.

    How? Why not just let the IC and Tag Team champions float between shows, while keeping hardcore and CW (gimmick titles) on RAW and Smackdown.


My point was, they need to establish a system, answer some questions, make adjustments like you suggested, etc before doubling PPVs. I'm not saying it's impossible, just that they need to explain things well for once.



WyldeWolf1
The Man of 1,007 holds, making him 3 holds better than Chris Jericho!
Santa Sangre
Bockwurst








Since: 21.6.02
From: Germany

Since last post: 388 days
Last activity: 276 days
#9 Posted on
They finally are starting to do little things to make the brands different. Given some time, I think we will have seperate ppv's for Raw and Smackdown. All this ppv talk makes me miss clash of the champions. Maybe if the buy rates go down a lot we could get something similar. Maybe it could even replace that Feb. ppv that everyone seems to hate.



She turned me into a newt!!! I've got better.
Notorious F.A.B.
Pepperoni








Since: 4.2.02
From: Dudleyville's Gay Ghetto

Since last post: 3943 days
Last activity: 3930 days
AIM:  
#10 Posted on
i don't think it's a fair assumption that if you remove one PPV more people will buy what's left.

buy rates come from compelling match ups and good storylines. you can say what you want about the creative direction of the company, but eliminating one or more PPVs won't make any match more compelling or make a storyline better.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 1 day
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
I think going to a monthly PPV system has hurt the WWF more than just about any decision they have made in the last 8 years or so. I mean, almost all the (on-air) problems people have can be traced to that.

Devaluation of titles? Needing to come up with a good challenger every month means the belt changes hands with greater frequency in order to keep main event matchups fresh and unpredictable. If you think we see some tired combonations of wrestlers right now, imagine if somebody held the World Title for over a year uniterupted. He would have not only run out of challengers, but he would have also become unbeatable (in a bad way).

Little hype to matches? Lack of memorable feuds? We don't see year- or even months-long buildup anymore, because there would be just too many shows to pass where the two wrestlers in question would have to pass up on fighting each other in order too put off their meeting, and then it will have risked losing momentum.

Bland, repetitive, or lazy writing? That happens when you have to come up with new stories (or new ways to continue existing ones) for approx. 15 guys every month. Of course they're gonna run out of ideas. This also leads to the ignoring of past storylines or feuds because writers need to force something in a hurry with only 5-10 shows between PPVs.



Mean Gene: "You know, I don't think it's a question - Goldberg, I don't think it's a question of who's next, I think it's a question of who's left?"
Goldberg: "No, see, that's where you're wrong. It ain't who's left, it's - WHO'S NEXT?"

"Just how hardcore am I? Well this morning, I drank milk that was two days past the expiration!"
-Norman Smiley

"She is one of them! She's CANADIAN!"
-Stevie Ray
ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 89 days
Last activity: 12 days
#12 Posted on
That's why I've been a big supporter of not only separate writing crews (which they apparently have now), but splitting the PPV's between brands. That way, they get to keep 12 PPV's, but the writers of each brand only have to build toward 6 PPV's a year instead of 12.

Of course, I probably would make Wrestlemania a cross-promotion PPV (so really the split would be 6-5, maybe they could rotate who gets the extra PPV each year). By setting things up this way, you could create a Supercard feel to Wrestlemania.

Also, by each brand having to support a PPV 100% by themselves, it would force each brand to elevate new and/or different talent, as current lower-card performers would have to be on the PPV, not just be filler for RAW and Smackdown while the upper card of both shows fill out the PPV lineups.

I think the idea of ever running something like 24 PPV's (12 per brand) is a pipe-dream. But I do think they could create more interest in the current 12 PPV's by splitting them amongst the brands.
The Vile One
Chourico








Since: 3.1.02

Since last post: 4362 days
Last activity: 4239 days
#13 Posted on
Well Fab, eliminating ppv's would put less pressure on the bookers and wrestlers. One thing you can say to defend the bookers/writers WWE is that there are so many damn shows every month. PPV's will also be bigger and more important if they don't happen so frequently. The problem is that ppv's are just 30 dollar versions of the weekly shows now. They aren't like real ppv's.




"It is a strange fate that we suffer so much fear and doubt over so small a thing...such a little thing."
-Boromir
Retro Rob
Linguica








Since: 18.7.02

Since last post: 3952 days
Last activity: 3864 days
#14 Posted on
The WWE can keep their current schedule, they just have to differentiate between the Raw part of the show and the SmackDown! part. Put all the matches from the same show back-to-back. Put the Raw commentators only on the Raw matches. Change the ring apron and light some fireworks after the first show finishes it's matches. That would improve the PPV's and help seperate the brands.



- Rob

http://www.thesmartmarks.com
The Vile One
Chourico








Since: 3.1.02

Since last post: 4362 days
Last activity: 4239 days
#15 Posted on
yeah but Rob, I mean, they are both wrestling on the same ppv, kind of defeats the purpose. If they brands were fighting against each other on the same show, YEAH there you go....




"It is a strange fate that we suffer so much fear and doubt over so small a thing...such a little thing."
-Boromir
Notorious F.A.B.
Pepperoni








Since: 4.2.02
From: Dudleyville's Gay Ghetto

Since last post: 3943 days
Last activity: 3930 days
AIM:  
#16 Posted on
the problem isn't how long story lines are, it's how good the story lines are. the number of shows per month has nothing to do with either. they need compelling stories and rivalries and they need to stick to them.

case in point - the HHH / Angle / Stephanie love triangle. your opinion may differ, but that story was aces all the way through and it spanned both shows every week and multiple ppvs.

outside of the big five events per year, the ppvs are just supercards. no mercy, no way out, etc, etc. you can't put on a Big Event every month and they aren't trying to. they'll try to SELL you every one though, because they're a business and that's what they do.

it's just not a fair assumption that less shows automatically make better shows. the writing can suck for a three month feud (edge / regal) or it can suck for a three month feud (the invasion).

(edited by Fab on 24.7.02 2230)
Alex
Bratwurst








Since: 24.2.02

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 1 day
#17 Posted on
In addition to sharing Wrestlemania, they could share the Royal Rumble...there could be disputes over who gets the coveted "30th man that doesn't ever win" slot, and maybe more!
auroralye
Weisswurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: Jersey City, NJ

Since last post: 4121 days
Last activity: 3407 days
AIM:  
#18 Posted on
Not that I am in any way arguing for less complex storylines with faster payoffs, but one major problem in building up a feud that spans several months is the problem of putting too much emphasis on a storyline that never pays off. Injuries are common enough in wrestling that one wrong move could ruin a long feud and compromise future storylines (i.e. Triple H's injury that interrupted his evil alliance with Stone Cold last spring and even Kevin Nash's most recent injury required a lot of last minute rewrites.) But often its not even injury that disrupts these feuds. I slightly disagree with Fab's assesment of the Triple H/Steph/Angle love triangle. That very drawn out (though interesting) plotline lost a lot of its impact because it never really had a strong ending. Triple H got a clean PPV win and it was implied that there was more to this feud, but they ended it with one quick nontitle Raw match because thay had to re-turn Triple H heel to correct the horrible payoff to the "Who ran over Stone Cold?" fiasco. The whole love triangle feud fizzled out and when it ended in such a lackluster way, I know it turned a lot of casual fans off. (Most of which were my female friends, but still...) I think before the WWE needs to start worrying about epic feuds, they need to concentrate on being able to keep the same "Era" for more than two weeks at a time. All these constant reboots remind me of WCW in its death throes. Nothing spells desperation more than self-proclimed "new eras."




"Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is: never try." - Homer Jay Simpson
Notorious F.A.B.
Pepperoni








Since: 4.2.02
From: Dudleyville's Gay Ghetto

Since last post: 3943 days
Last activity: 3930 days
AIM:  
#19 Posted on
that's cool about the love triangle, auroralye. to each their own. i loved the pay off because steph and hunter stayed together when the predictable thing (some will say "better") was for steph to go with angle. she was with hunter for two years and that rules for me.

i agree with everything else you said, too.
Saruman
Salami








Since: 25.1.02
From: Kirksville, MO

Since last post: 4373 days
Last activity: 4343 days
AIM:  
#20 Posted on
Personally,
I'd cut out No Way Out, and go back to the traditional Royal Rumble/Wrestlemania two month corridor build. Those two would have to be cross-brand.
Next, Survivor Series goes back to being, well, a survivor series between the two brands.
Finally, KotR gets to be cross brand for the tournament.

Now, RAW gets 4 bi-monthly ppvs, and Smackdown gets 4 bi-monthly ppvs, with Summerslam being the headliner for the RAW brand and Backlash being the headliner for Smackdown. Hmmm....
January: RR
February: Nothing
March: WM
April: Backlash
May: RAW ppv
June: KotR
July: Smkdn ppv
August: Summerslam
September: Smkdn ppv
October: RAW ppv
November: SS
December: Smkdn & RAW ppvs, they could stagger these okay, or put one in the beginning of January and hold the rumble back for the last weekend.
Eh, just my pointless 5 am theory of the day.




"I'm bi a lot of things, but lingual's not one of them."

Pages: 1 2 Next
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: In the beginning
Next thread: Must Have Matches...
Previous thread: NWA TNA
(12166 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
I NEVER get to watch SmackDown, even though I rightfully should, given the fact that Mysterio, Eddie, Benoit, Angle, and Edge are on the program, not to mention Hurricane and Kidman. But for some reason or another, I'm usually unable to catch it...
The W - Pro Wrestling - if WWE, really wants to make this competition look serious...Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.435 seconds.