I dislike the lack of post-PPV selling in WWE

[Deleted]

Something that really irks me in WWE is the fact the roster no longer sells what happened at the PPV on the next TV show. Case in point (but there are several) is Bianca. She does her normal happy entrance like she always does. It takes me out of the story, and I would have wanted her to sell being upset the moment she stepped through the curtain. I'm pretty sure this is a WWE directive, I seem to remember reading about some years back. But it has to be one of the dumbest things in WWE lol.

I remember back in the day when Triple H had his reign of terror, and got beat by Benoit and then Batista. It was a SELLING POINT for me on RAW the next night to see how Triple H acts, how upset he is. That's just... storytelling. WWE says they make movies, well, engross me in the story for heaven's sake. I'm all for sports entertainment and male soap opera and I don't need those seven star high spot matches on my wrestling television, I'm totally fine without if that's the direction, but it puzzles me why they're sometimes so dead set against just basic, normal storytelling.

I remember in 2003 after SummerSlam, Goldberg, who got beaten up and screwed over by Evolution in the chamber match, didn't do his normal entrance to kick off the show; they would play his music, but he just power walked into the ring, immediately grabbed the mic and yelled, commanding Triple H to get his damn ass in the ring. Logical, normal, compelling storytelling! I was hooked, I wanted to see what this character would do.

That's the whole entire point. In any movie or book or TV show, a major storyline development is interesting because it affects the character, you want to see how the character reacts and acts. And sure, Bianca was more serious in the promo, but it's just so off having her come out, shaking her hair and all that, smiling.

And it's not her fault, as I said, I'm fairly certain I've read it's a WWE directive. For whatever odd reason. I guess the idea is to give the kids the entrance they like, or something, but come on. Kids aren't dumbasses. They're kids, but they're not brain dead. As a kid, I was a massive, massive Spider-Man guy. I collected pretty much every single released Spider-Man comic up until to the point I stopped reading. And I was a pre-schooler when I started. And Spider-Man comics were absolute soap opera for kids; you had relationship drama, family drama, major events that affected characters personally, they would react and change, there were even mature themes like drug abuse. And five year old me totally got it and followed and was engrossed.

Kids aren't stupid. Rant over.

[Bo Rida]

Yes it's infuriating. Not ppv but Kofi not caring he lost to Brock was a low.

Aew occasionally screw this up too, FTR losing their big match with the Bucks due trying a flip instead of sticking to fists was interesting. Would it drive a wedge between them, would they expand their style or double down on what worked. They just ignored it.

[Mozenrath]

It has contributed quite a bit to it feeling like virtually nothing has stakes.

[Deleted]

Aug 29, 2021 3:46:03 GMT -5 Mozenrath said:

It has contributed quite a bit to it feeling like virtually nothing has stakes.

Yea, that's exactly it. Imagine if at the end of Terminator, Kyle Reese had just risen from the dead after Sarah finally destroyed the Terminator lol. Or, I dunno, Jack in Titanic. You want to see how those deaths affect the characters for the rest of the story.

[Sam Punk]

They don't even sell during the match.

[The Foreigner™: OffSZN]

Neville's look and mannerisms after losing the Cruiserweight title were gold.

[Deleted]

Aug 29, 2021 4:46:53 GMT -5 The Foreigner™: OffSZN said:

Neville's look and mannerisms after losing the Cruiserweight title were gold.

Nice. That is the look of a defeated man, hah.

[Oh Cry Me a Screwball]

Even worse is how people who did ladder matches or other brutal affairs on PPV would often be put on the injured reserve list for Raw the next night, both in order to give the poor guys a night to recover, and to sell the brutality of the match. If they were doing anything on the show, they would be bandaged up and limping like they aged 30 years in one night.

Nowadays, someone will fall fifteen feet through stacked tables or a ladder bridge, and then just have a match the next night like nothing happened. And I feel like it cheapens all these brutal match types even worse than naming PPVs after them and having them just to have them at some point during a calendar year.

[Deleted]

Aug 29, 2021 4:56:20 GMT -5 Oh Cry Me a Screwball said:

Even worse is how people who did ladder matches or other brutal affairs on PPV would often be put on the injured reserve list for Raw the next night, both in order to give the poor guys a night to recover, and to sell the brutality of the match. If they were doing anything on the show, they would be bandaged up and limping like they aged 30 years in one night.

Nowadays, someone will fall fifteen feet through stacked tables or a ladder bridge, and then just have a match the next night like nothing happened.

And seeing the scars of war was one of the reasons to be excited for the post-PPV television show as a kid.

[Timeless Hayterade]

Aug 29, 2021 4:56:20 GMT -5 Oh Cry Me a Screwball said:

Even worse is how people who did ladder matches or other brutal affairs on PPV would often be put on the injured reserve list for Raw the next night, both in order to give the poor guys a night to recover, and to sell the brutality of the match. If they were doing anything on the show, they would be bandaged up and limping like they aged 30 years in one night.

Nowadays, someone will fall fifteen feet through stacked tables or a ladder bridge, and then just have a match the next night like nothing happened. And I feel like it cheapens all these brutal match types even worse than naming PPVs after them and having them just to have them at some point during a calendar year.

It's funny that you bring this up because I was instantly reminded of the Triple Threat Ladder Match at TLC 2015. The next night on Raw, none of the teams sold what happened to them.

[Citizen Snips]

Aug 29, 2021 5:17:30 GMT -5 Timeless Hayterade said:

Aug 29, 2021 4:56:20 GMT -5 Oh Cry Me a Screwball said:

Even worse is how people who did ladder matches or other brutal affairs on PPV would often be put on the injured reserve list for Raw the next night, both in order to give the poor guys a night to recover, and to sell the brutality of the match. If they were doing anything on the show, they would be bandaged up and limping like they aged 30 years in one night.

Nowadays, someone will fall fifteen feet through stacked tables or a ladder bridge, and then just have a match the next night like nothing happened. And I feel like it cheapens all these brutal match types even worse than naming PPVs after them and having them just to have them at some point during a calendar year.

It's funny that you bring this up because I was instantly reminded of the Triple Threat Ladder Match at TLC 2015. The next night on Raw, none of the teams sold what happened to them.

A few years ago, Kevin Owens and Dean Ambrose opened the Rumble PPV with a Last Man Standing match and then competed in the Rumble itself. Dean nearly won the Rumble. Really sold how brutal the LMS match was.

[Ozman]

I remember after Seth Rollins cashed in his Money In The Bank contract at Wrestlemania 31 against Brock Lesnar and Roman Reigns, Brock came out on the next Raw and beat the shit out of Michael Cole, JBL, and Booker T!!! Brock was so mad at what happened at Wrestlemania, that he took out the entire announce team!!!

[Bang Bang Bart]

Aug 29, 2021 6:05:56 GMT -5 Ozman said:

I remember after Seth Rollins cashed in his Money In The Bank contract at Wrestlemania 31 against Brock Lesnar and Roman Reigns, Brock came out on the next Raw and beat the shit out of Michael Cole, JBL, and Booker T!!! Brock was so mad at what happened at Wrestlemania, that he took out the entire announce team!!!

IIRC, Brock lost his shit because Seth seemed like he was gonna grant him a rematch, but he ran off. Then he went off, leading to a kayfabe suspension to explain why he’d be gone for a month or so.

[héad.casé]

Aug 29, 2021 2:27:19 GMT -5 Teemu said:

Something that really irks me in WWE is the fact the roster no longer sells what happened at the PPV on the next TV show. Case in point (but there are several) is Bianca. She does her normal happy entrance like she always does. It takes me out of the story, and I would have wanted her to sell being upset the moment she stepped through the curtain. I'm pretty sure this is a WWE directive, I seem to remember reading about some years back. But it has to be one of the dumbest things in WWE lol.

I remember back in the day when Triple H had his reign of terror, and got beat by Benoit and then Batista. It was a SELLING POINT for me on RAW the next night to see how Triple H acts, how upset he is. That's just... storytelling. WWE says they make movies, well, engross me in the story for heaven's sake. I'm all for sports entertainment and male soap opera and I don't need those seven star high spot matches on my wrestling television, I'm totally fine without if that's the direction, but it puzzles me why they're sometimes so dead set against just basic, normal storytelling.

I remember in 2003 after SummerSlam, Goldberg, who got beaten up and screwed over by Evolution in the chamber match, didn't do his normal entrance to kick off the show; they would play his music, but he just power walked into the ring, immediately grabbed the mic and yelled, commanding Triple H to get his damn ass in the ring. Logical, normal, compelling storytelling! I was hooked, I wanted to see what this character would do.

That's the whole entire point. In any movie or book or TV show, a major storyline development is interesting because it affects the character, you want to see how the character reacts and acts. And sure, Bianca was more serious in the promo, but it's just so off having her come out, shaking her hair and all that, smiling.

And it's not her fault, as I said, I'm fairly certain I've read it's a WWE directive. For whatever odd reason. I guess the idea is to give the kids the entrance they like, or something, but come on. Kids aren't dumbasses. They're kids, but they're not brain dead. As a kid, I was a massive, massive Spider-Man guy. I collected pretty much every single released Spider-Man comic up until to the point I stopped reading. And I was a pre-schooler when I started. And Spider-Man comics were absolute soap opera for kids; you had relationship drama, family drama, major events that affected characters personally, they would react and change, there were even mature themes like drug abuse. And five year old me totally got it and followed and was engrossed.

Kids aren't stupid. Rant over.

With the Goldberg after the Chamber stuff you mentioned, I remember hearing they originally wanted Goldberg to wrestle Test the night after on RAW, and Goldberg said “It doesn’t make sense for me to wrestle tonight after I got beaten up with a sledgehammer last night”.

[Final Countdown Jones]

Having people sell the consequences of the night before emotionally or physically would be trying to tell a story. WWE isn't telling a story, they're being a brand, and every wrestler has to be beholden to the brand. If that means your entrance is lots of energy and posing, then you have to do it, because doing the entrance and expressing the brand is more important than telling a story. Story is for the pre-match hype package where they have to piece together all the pieces of television they put on to make it look like a story was being told all along out of the mismatched chunks that TV gave them.

[thehottag]

It boils down to WWE treating it's talent like action figures. The mentality seems to be 'people have paid to see this star do their act, so they better do it!' But it completely takes the stakes out of any narrative you're trying to tell, & means the audience becomes less invested.

John Cena was an obvious example of this for a long time. Regardless of whether he'd lost the title, won MITB or just been fired, he would come out smiling & holding up his little flannel regardless. It's easy to pick in Cena (so I will), but in fairness it's much more noticeable with him because he was often involved in big angles on PPVs & would be featured on Raw the next night. Most WWE wrestlers are told to act this way.

[EoE: Well There's Your Problem]

Aug 29, 2021 6:31:00 GMT -5 Final Countdown Jones said:

Having people sell the consequences of the night before emotionally or physically would be trying to tell a story. WWE isn't telling a story, they're being a brand, and every wrestler has to be beholden to the brand. If that means your entrance is lots of energy and posing, then you have to do it, because doing the entrance and expressing the brand is more important than telling a story. Story is for the pre-match hype package where they have to piece together all the pieces of television they put on to make it look like a story was being told all along out of the mismatched chunks that TV gave them.

This gives me an idea for a stat thing to do for the next few minutes... How many people did Hell In A Cell/Elimination Chamber matches and then worked TV matches within the next week. Basically anyone in those matches should not be working a match the next night on RAW or even the next Friday for SmackDown depending on the damage. I feel like this would be greatly weighted towards the timeframe after the introduction of the PPVs of the same name.

[EoE: Well There's Your Problem]

Aug 29, 2021 6:44:34 GMT -5 EoE: Well There's Your Problem said:

Aug 29, 2021 6:31:00 GMT -5 Final Countdown Jones said:

Having people sell the consequences of the night before emotionally or physically would be trying to tell a story. WWE isn't telling a story, they're being a brand, and every wrestler has to be beholden to the brand. If that means your entrance is lots of energy and posing, then you have to do it, because doing the entrance and expressing the brand is more important than telling a story. Story is for the pre-match hype package where they have to piece together all the pieces of television they put on to make it look like a story was being told all along out of the mismatched chunks that TV gave them.

This gives me an idea for a stat thing to do for the next few minutes... How many people did Hell In A Cell/Elimination Chamber matches and then worked TV matches within the next week. Basically anyone in those matches should not be working a match the next night on RAW or even the next Friday for SmackDown depending on the damage. I feel like this would be greatly weighted towards the timeframe after the introduction of the PPVs of the same name.

Final Countdown Jones

Early findings from the Hell In A Cell part of the research... Of the 111 instances of people fighting in televised Hell In A Cell matches since the introduction of the concept in 1997, 41 of them (36.94%) worked one or more TV matches within the next week. Roman Reigns worked three matches in the week after a Hell In A Cell match once, and of course this year we had Bobby Lashley doing Hell In A Cell matches on back-to-back nights.

Using my arbitrary dividing point (the introduction of the Hell In A Cell PPVs in 2009)... Before this point, 13 of 41 HIAC entrants (31.71%) worked TV within the next week. After this point, that increases to 28 of 70 (40.00%).

[Nr1Humanoid]

Sadly logic is Vince's kryptonite.

[Final Countdown Jones]

Aug 29, 2021 7:28:59 GMT -5 EoE: Well There's Your Problem said:

Aug 29, 2021 6:44:34 GMT -5 EoE: Well There's Your Problem said:

This gives me an idea for a stat thing to do for the next few minutes... How many people did Hell In A Cell/Elimination Chamber matches and then worked TV matches within the next week. Basically anyone in those matches should not be working a match the next night on RAW or even the next Friday for SmackDown depending on the damage. I feel like this would be greatly weighted towards the timeframe after the introduction of the PPVs of the same name.

Final Countdown Jones

Early findings from the Hell In A Cell part of the research... Of the 111 instances of people fighting in televised Hell In A Cell matches since the introduction of the concept in 1997, 41 of them (36.94%) worked one or more TV matches within the next week. Roman Reigns worked three matches in the week after a Hell In A Cell match once, and of course this year we had Bobby Lashley doing Hell In A Cell matches on back-to-back nights.

Using my arbitrary dividing point (the introduction of the Hell In A Cell PPVs in 2009)... Before this point, 13 of 41 HIAC entrants (31.71%) worked TV within the next week. After this point, that increases to 28 of 70 (40.00%).

One wrinkle I'm curious about, more for the later years of the process, is what the numbers look like if you dropped part-timers out of the equation, on the basis that they wouldn't be working television matches anyway. I know it's pretty blatantly sweetening the numbers to fit my agenda, but I can see definite arguments for omitting them due to the reality of how they were booked often to not even be there the next night period.