|
|
Post by Famous Rocking Chimes on Apr 24, 2011 6:27:32 GMT -5
In the Live Events section it appears that Night of Champions has disappeared.
Sigh. One of the few gimmick PPVs that didn't feel forced.
|
|
|
|
Post by uprising on Apr 24, 2011 6:33:51 GMT -5
Hopefully it's just a mistake. It was one of the bigger PPV's these days I feel.
|
|
|
|
Post by #RUDO Coco Del Rio on Apr 24, 2011 6:38:05 GMT -5
Yeah, I think it's a mistake. Wikipedia still has it in the schedule. Notice how almost the whole of September has nothing scheduled.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2011 6:47:17 GMT -5
If they're replacing it they have very good reason to do so. Night of Champions 2009 drew 267,000 buys, whilst last year's dropped dramatically to just 165,000.
Plus it seems pointless to have a gimmick PPV where every title is defended. Not only could they do that at anytime on any other PPV, but also they only have 6 titles in the company now so like last year with CM Punk vs. Big Show, they have to pad out the show with non-title matches (which is ridiculous considering the name) or have every match go a long time. I believe Kane vs. Undertaker and the six-way main event both went 20+ minutes.
|
|
Burst
El Dandy
*inarticulate squawking*
Posts: 8,584
|
Post by Burst on Apr 24, 2011 6:48:28 GMT -5
Eh, I hope not. Night of Champions had this epic feeling to it somehow that's been missing from a lot of PPVs lately, between both the name and their orchestral theme they used instead of a generic rock or rap theme.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cactus Jack on Apr 24, 2011 6:51:47 GMT -5
Good riddance. It always sucked.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nic Nemeth on Apr 24, 2011 6:53:51 GMT -5
Problem is there's only six titles and four of them never get defended.
|
|
|
|
Post by baresolid on Apr 24, 2011 7:41:21 GMT -5
Glad someone else remembers the orchestral theme! I think PPVs should generally have these and even though NOC 2010's wasn't a masterpiece, it did make the event seem a lot more epic than the usual fare. I'd wish the WWE would realize that using stuff like that would make people take them more seriously.
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319 
|
Post by mrjl on Apr 24, 2011 8:03:25 GMT -5
If they're replacing it they have very good reason to do so. Night of Champions 2009 drew 267,000 buys, whilst last year's dropped dramatically to just 165,000. Plus it seems pointless to have a gimmick PPV where every title is defended. Not only could they do that at anytime on any other PPV, but also they only have 6 titles in the company now so like last year with CM Punk vs. Big Show, they have to pad out the show with non-title matches (which is ridiculous considering the name) or have every match go a long time. I believe Kane vs. Undertaker and the six-way main event both went 20+ minutes. or bring out a new title. |
|
|
|
Post by Junkenstein on Apr 24, 2011 8:06:36 GMT -5
Well if it's true, it makes sense. If they've not given anybody a reason to give a shit about the other titles anymore, why devote a PPV to them? It would be like having a show called "Night of Tag Teams" or "Night of Trent Barretta"
|
|
|
|
Post by Famous Rocking Chimes on Apr 24, 2011 8:12:42 GMT -5
Well if it's true, it makes sense. If they've not given anybody a reason to give a s*** about the other titles anymore, why devote a PPV to them? It would be like having a show called "Night of Tag Teams" or "Night of Trent Barretta" Here. *hands you a Citten Shield* You'll need this. |
|
|
|
Post by anticonscience on Apr 24, 2011 8:23:02 GMT -5
they better replace it with something. This was supposed to be in Buffalo and I was gonna be there, lol.
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Apr 24, 2011 8:35:29 GMT -5
Well if it's true, it makes sense. If they've not given anybody a reason to give a s*** about the other titles anymore, why devote a PPV to them? It would be like having a show called "Night of Tag Teams" or "Night of Trent Barretta" you give a shit about other titles because they're titles. |
|
|
|
Post by forgottensinpwf on Apr 24, 2011 8:43:12 GMT -5
I don't mind it. I'm all for phasing out the gimmick PPVS.
|
|
|
|
Post by baresolid on Apr 24, 2011 8:48:58 GMT -5
If they're getting rid of it then good riddance. I think the WWE should promote no more than 8 PPVs per year because most of the ones they put on now don't have adequete bulid anyway, and it might force the company to put some decent money matches on TV.
|
|
|
|
Post by FailedGimmick on Apr 24, 2011 9:52:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenny Brockelstein on Apr 24, 2011 9:56:13 GMT -5
Replace it with King of the Ring...that is all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex Shelley on Apr 24, 2011 10:47:11 GMT -5
Night of Trent Barreta would be AMAZING!
|
|
|
|
Post by forgottensinpwf on Apr 24, 2011 10:57:47 GMT -5
Replace it with King of the Ring...that is all. I think after the handling of "King Sheamus", it's probably for the best that KOTR just dies out. |
|
|
|
Post by Raja Lion on Apr 24, 2011 10:59:16 GMT -5
Yeah, I think it's a mistake. Wikipedia still has it in the schedule. Doesnt matter in the slightest if Wikipedia still has it. If WWE is changing the name, Wiki is not going to know first. Very bad barometer to use for information verification. Hell, Wiki had the draft listed as April 18th for months and it was never certain. They've had polls very recently about PPV names, this seems like the one thats getting changed. |
|
