6) “Are you for, against or indifferent about WWE splitting WrestleMania into two nights”
MANGO: In this situation, I’m 100% for it. I actually was planning on writing up an article of fantasy booking Mania as if it were a two-night show based on Wrestle Kingdom, which became redundant. It’ll be interesting to see if WWE possibly likes this and does it again next year. At the very least, this should be safer and make more sense to film it this way for this event, so I see no negatives.
PUGLIESEE: I have been joking for a long time that it is so long that they should split between two days, so I’m fine with it. It is also ethically and morally responsible. Limit how many are there at one time and than disinfect the PC (or other places they might be holding it)
BALAZ: Under normal circumstances, I’m all for it; if it gives us 2 4 hours shows as opposed to 1 7 hour marathon. But, I do suppose now is as good a time as any to try something new. When the show has no to low expectations because of the virus, might as well start throwing things at the wall.
MITCHELL: I’m intrigued by how they’ll do two nights. I would think each night gets three hours to split what would’ve been a 6 to 7 hour normal WrestleMania. Just no kickoff show matches, put those on the first night’s main card so those superstars can get main card pay.
ABSLER: I would normally be 100% against it, but because no fans will be in attendance, it is okay for this time. I believe WrestleMania should be a spectacle contained to one night, but no fans gives WWE a little more leeway to expand the show.
EWING: I feel they could have waited and done this next year. Why split up the show when you have no fan base to show for it? I go back to WrestleMania II, when WWF(E) aired from three different locations. The move was unprecedented and unique. You had three different audiences with matches booked for each venue. The move would have worked best for WrestleMania 37 or beyond that. Now is not the time to be splitting up WrestleMania 36 when you have nothing to show for it or make it the event special.
SCAFIDE: The best decision for WWE to keep the intrigue alive. Otherwise, the one-night event, *taped* I might add (just a strong rumor), would have been completely pointless to watch. I’m interested in how they air the two shows, if matches go longer or shorter, will there be more or less backstage shenanigans, etc. I honestly think there is more to the two-night event that isn’t being shared publicly (other than the second location to be named later).
CASSADA: For a while, there’s been criticism about Wrestlemania being too long. I think splitting Wrestlemania into two nights is a good idea that way fans won’t get too tired after a long show. Plus, since there’s always a debate on which match should main event the show, this will give WWE the opportunity to give fans two Wrestlemania main events.
HIRSCH: I think the two nights is a good idea because of the circumstances they were presented with. Seven hours in an empty performance center would drain me big time.
