The Unconquered Sun
King Koopa
He has no pants! What a heathen!
Lord of Storms and Kittens!
Posts: 11,548
|
Post by The Unconquered Sun on Aug 30, 2014 12:31:46 GMT -5
Isn't it the quality of PPV we should be worried about?
|
|
|
Post by The Trashman on Aug 30, 2014 13:05:26 GMT -5
6 is a good number. Rumble, Mania, Summerslam, Survivor Series for sure and then maybe a June PPV between Mania and Summerslam(King of the Ring return?), one in late sep/early oct(Night of Champions/MITB). Originally I thought 8 but it was hard to fit 2 more in. One every two months seems about right with SPECIAL 3 hour Raws on the months without a ppv(hopefully making Raw 2 hours again but I know thats not happening).
|
|
|
Post by JTG Fan on Aug 30, 2014 13:08:04 GMT -5
12. The product would lose all sense of direction without a monthly PPV.
|
|
|
Post by Vice honcho room temperature on Aug 30, 2014 13:09:06 GMT -5
I like 12 its a good rhythm especially now that they are only 10-13 bucks to watch them. Before when you had them at 30-40 bucks a pop... I could see the argument of less is more. Now its a matter of playing with the extra PPVs and doing interesting things that while not worth 30 bucks worth of intrigue it provides a fun night of wrestling.
|
|
nate5054
Hank Scorpio
Lucky to be alive in the Chris Jericho Era
Posts: 7,013
|
Post by nate5054 on Aug 30, 2014 13:25:53 GMT -5
Before the network I would have said 4-6. But with it, as long as they keep following the same model, I'm fine with them once a month, as long as people understand that half are just going to be glorified Raws. Which sorta was the case before yet people were dropping 40 bucks on them.
|
|
Jiren
Patti Mayonnaise
Hearts Bayformers
Posts: 35,163
|
Post by Jiren on Aug 30, 2014 13:33:15 GMT -5
It'd be nice if the misc PPVs had a more upper Midcard - divas focus.
Have the WWE title for the big 6, It'd make them more special and add more development to the lower cards.
But this is WWE they couldn't book a piss up in a brewery
|
|
RI Richmark
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 21,108
Member is Online
|
Post by RI Richmark on Aug 30, 2014 15:33:55 GMT -5
The Royal Rumble (including an 8 man King of the Ring tournament) No offense, but I don't see that working. A 8 man tournament would seven matches (maybe 6 if there was a bye involved). And since the Rumble itself goes about an hour, you would need to fit those matches into two hours and also have time for backstage segments, interviews and other stuff. If you want to do a one night tournament it needs to be it's own PPV.
|
|
Jiren
Patti Mayonnaise
Hearts Bayformers
Posts: 35,163
|
Post by Jiren on Aug 30, 2014 16:07:36 GMT -5
The Royal Rumble (including an 8 man King of the Ring tournament) No offense, but I don't see that working. A 8 man tournament would seven matches (maybe 6 if there was a bye involved). And since the Rumble itself goes about an hour, you would need to fit those matches into two hours and also have time for backstage segments, interviews and other stuff. If you want to do a one night tournament it needs to be it's own PPV. Have the tournament be the Summerslam Main event challenger
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Aug 30, 2014 16:24:43 GMT -5
The Royal Rumble (including an 8 man King of the Ring tournament) No offense, but I don't see that working. A 8 man tournament would seven matches (maybe 6 if there was a bye involved). And since the Rumble itself goes about an hour, you would need to fit those matches into two hours and also have time for backstage segments, interviews and other stuff. If you want to do a one night tournament it needs to be it's own PPV. Cut it down to a 4 man tournament then. Two semi finals and the final, like the 1996 King of the Ring. Then you could have the quarter finals on the go-home RAW before the Royal Rumble.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2014 16:28:26 GMT -5
I feel TNA had the right idea I'm so in shock that these words were combined in this order on this site, that I need a moment before I go back and actually read your full post.
|
|
|
Post by PsychoGoatee on Aug 30, 2014 16:30:24 GMT -5
I like seeing the WWE World Heavyweight Championship defended every month, and a PPV seems like the best place to see that. Plus I have the network, so I'm more interested in PPVs than ever personally.
Of course it'd be nice if those 12 PPVs were all booked very well, but I don't think having a lower number would make that more likely necessarily.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Aug 30, 2014 16:52:26 GMT -5
8 to 10 at the most. Preferably 8, because that's a good number between having enough events to attract subscribers and being able to properly build up the hype between them.
|
|
|
Post by No Name is needed Bro Beans on Aug 30, 2014 16:58:40 GMT -5
5 the 4 original ones and a king of the ring
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Aug 30, 2014 16:59:32 GMT -5
12 or more. Remember, the PPV era has been replaced with the WWE Network. You're not being asked for 35-40 bucks a show. It's 10 bucks a month. Quite honestly, if I got the network, I WANT more PPVs just to get use out of it if I'm not all that enamored with the old PPVs anymore and I don't care about NXT or their other stuff.
Without a PPV (or special event) every month, the show loses direction. It's ideal of have a show every 4 weeks with the exception of Wrestlemania. That build should be 6-8 weeks.
|
|
|
Post by An Old Villain on Aug 30, 2014 16:59:52 GMT -5
Two. WrestleMania and SummerSlam.
Each month, sans WM and SS months, should have a special-event on the network and those two should still be actual PPVS that go 4 hours and are booked to be big deals.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 39,000
|
Post by fw91 on Aug 30, 2014 17:04:00 GMT -5
with the network 12, but perhaps the title doesn't have to be defended on each of them. WCW was good at that. Have a mid card feud be the focus, with the champ not even on the card or in a tag match. Now would be the time to do it with Brock as champ. Rollins/Ambrose is a blood feud that can handle main eventing a "Network Special"
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hawkfield no1 NZ poster on Aug 30, 2014 17:13:56 GMT -5
In a perfect world they would go back to the original big 5 with a few smaller IYH Style 2 hour PPVS around them.
|
|
|
Post by Session Moth is over on Aug 30, 2014 17:18:53 GMT -5
Jan - Royal Rumble April - Wrestlemania June - King of the Ring August - Summerslam November - Survivor Series It's not 1995 anymore. Thankfully we won't be going back to this. 12 per year is the ideal number.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Aug 30, 2014 17:46:32 GMT -5
Isn't it the quality of PPV we should be worried about? The two issues are related. The more PPV's, the less meaning they have. When you add that to 3 hour RAWS and 2 hour Smackdowns, it oversaturates WWE, especially in the absence of jobbers, which means we see WWE wrestlers in every possible combination so many times, it makes PPV's relatively meaningless.
|
|
Jiren
Patti Mayonnaise
Hearts Bayformers
Posts: 35,163
|
Post by Jiren on Aug 30, 2014 17:57:12 GMT -5
Isn't it the quality of PPV we should be worried about? The two issues are related. The more PPV's, the less meaning they have. When you add that to 3 hour RAWS and 2 hour Smackdowns, it oversaturates WWE, especially in the absence of jobbers, which means we see WWE wrestlers in every possible combination so many times, it makes PPV's relatively meaningless. Either get rid of Smackdown or Make it the undercard show, Let them develop on there or use it to build people back up (Wyatt/Sandow) If they did that I'd watch SD more often because I hate the current "Raw testing ground" it is now. Raw = the soap/variety/Story format SD = Wrestling matches/Character development
|
|