poshboy

My WWE PPV Dreamlist

Rate this Entry

9 Comments

, 10-24-2011 at 10:31 AM (3687 Views)

Short Analysis of World Wrestling Entertainment Pay Per Views
This is my first blog and whilst watching Vengeance last night, it hit me how poor the PPVS have been in the WWE this year. Bar the exception of maybe money in the bank and the royal rumble, I have found the others to be average to poor. As a result I thought I would write how I think WWE should do their ppvs

WWE in the space of 12 calendar months has 13 ppvs. From September we had NOC to Hell In A Cell to Vengeance. That is 3 ppvs in 5 weeks (what idiot thought that would be good? ) and at a cost of 40 bucks a show, that is almost 520 dollars spent a year way too much. So below is my ppv structure;

January- Royal Rumble. One of the "big four" and perhaps one of the best shows WWE does. The Rumble itself is always full of excitement, well executed wrestling spots and tension and numerous feuds and memorable moments have come from this show.

February- Elimination Chamber. One of the better Gimmick ppvs the WWE does and helps build up the story lines towards Wrestlemania. However 2011 was poor and there should be 2 Chambers instead of "The Miz" fighting a 62 year old commentator.

March- Wrestlemania. Grandest stage of them all which has produced classic moments over the years. However a Money In The Bank match should take place here.

April- Vengeance. Place Vengeance here as the name matches what the losers of Wrestlemania want and allow it to wrap up the story lines from the grandest stage of them all.

Late May/Early June- Money In the Bank. The best show this year and probably the best match stipulation the WWE has come up with in a long time.

July- Summerslam. Another one of the "Big Four" and the summer classic which deserves the place due to tradition.

August- Night Of Champions. I like the idea of every belt being defended and although this show was poor this year, it at least gives some belts that haven't featured predominately on other shows to shine.

September-Stipulation ppv. Instead of having poor "Gimmick" ppvs such as Hell In the Cell or Extreme Rules, why not have a ppv full of different stipulations which would add the excitement and could be used to end feuds after Summerslam and Night of champions. For Example a Hell IN A Cell Match, whereas other matches are Lumberjack, Last Man Standing, TLC etc...

October-Bragging Rights. I actually liked the idea of Raw vs Smackdown and this helps build up potential feuds and teams for Survivor Series.

November-Survivor Series. "Big Four" and full of tradition with a great 5v5 tag team match. Also the beginning of the buildup to Wrestlemania.

December-NONE. I would not have a ppv in December as it lets the wrestlers have time off. Instead have a 3 hour long Tribute to the Troops or Christmas special.

Updated 10-24-2011 at 10:38 AM by Frank

Tags: ppv, wwe

Categories: Uncategorized

Email Blog Entry

« Prev Main Next »

Comments

timfeyenoord - 10-24-2011 11:29 AM
Ok, first off the ppvs havent really been that bad this year.

Now this year's EC had 2 chamber matches and the Lawler vs Miz match wasn't bad.

Now if you're gonna have MITB at WM, you shouldnt also have a MITB ppv since the whole deadline of one year would be pointless and you could have 3 MITB holders at a time with 2 World Championships, doesn't make sense

Now your describtion of the Stipulation ppv is no different from the Extreme Rules ppv

Bragging Rights has been horrible for 2 years in a row

I would make Tribute to the Troops the December ppv
poshboy - 10-24-2011 12:24 PM
well that put me in my place didn't it

Firstly about the ppvs, its all a matter of personal opinion, i will admit the standard has been better this year, however some ppvs such as capital punishment, over the limit, night of champions and to a certain extent wrestlemania have been average or poor.

Now as it is my first blog, you have raised some issues i may have not talked about fully. Now i believe the mitb match at wrestlemania would be for the lower mid card talent and the winner of that match gets to choose the ic, us title to fight for at the mitb ppv, thus giving the lower mid carders chance to shine and an opportunity. Then at the mitb ppv we have the normal 2 matches.

True ec did have 2 chambers, but what i forgot to put was that both should have been for the championships. Also it wasnt a bad much due to the Miz carrying Lawler through it but it served no point, just making it look like Lawler would get his first WWE title. Thanks for agreeing about the Tribute to the Troops ppv idea though
ill write better next time
B-ri - 10-24-2011 06:34 PM
Bragging rights is pointless now with the lack of real brand distinction, it was about 4 years too late to be honest. Also I like extreme rules plus Elimination Chamber was actually a pretty decent PPV this year!
benchch - 10-24-2011 07:59 PM
I think MITB could be replaced with a TLC themed ppv if you have a MITB match at WM. agree with B-ri too bragging rights is pointless now. I really liked the one night stand ppv in a small stadium it would be nice if that was a ppv again even if it was ecw. It had a different tone and atmosphere

Updated 10-24-2011 at 09:11 PM by benchch
Final_Silence - 10-24-2011 09:50 PM
The answer would not be to switch the order. We should have Mania, Summerslam, SS, Rumble, MITB, Vengeance, Elimination Chamber, and one gimmick. That's a count of 8. Every 6 weeks or so. The PPVs are poor because the stories are lacking.
Poot-Hair - 10-24-2011 10:27 PM
I've stated it before and I'll state it again. I don't think WWE should do 12-13 ppv's a year but should moreso do 6-8 a year to allow for proper build up of fueds and allow more 'selling' in the matches themselves. Of course I'm wishful thinking here because if the mighty 'E were to do this they may actually have to be considered a wrestling company *gasp!!* and they wouldn't want that. Hell it wouldn't hurt if they took a page from TNA's book and have a free *double gasp!!* ppv style program once a year.

As far as the tribute to the troops show, it should NEVER be a PPV because why in the world would people want to pay for the tribute show? So a mom who has a child in Afghanistan should have to pay 40 bucks to see a ppv of the country her son in serving in? If anything the 'E could do like I stated earlier and build the Tribute to the Troops up like a normal ppv and broadcast it LIVE and FREE as a treat to their fans, and in honor to those serving in our fine military.

I say this as a two tour veteran of the Iraq war who was injured....
aussie09 - 10-25-2011 09:10 AM
I agree 12 is to many, however if they do put their 8 small ppvs on their network like their planning to do then I think it wouldnt be to bad, just do your big 4 on PPV.