WWE changing Approach to PPV's

[molson5]

This is how is was for the first 6 months of the brand split at least, wasn't it? I don't see the big deal. PPVs are now "supershows" with both brands. That's probably a good move, since most of the smackdown-only PPVs aren't as good as the free tv shows.

[Designated Drinker]

Don't like the sound of that plan at all.I know it would never happen but i'd like to see them go the In Your House direction and have their PPV's (aside from the big 4 of course) be 2 hours and 20-30 bucks a pop.I assume that there are quite a few people like me who have never bought any WWE PPV's outside of the big four because of the price,regardless of what the card is.

[Scott]

I love that Vince is using UFC as an example. I'm not sure exactly how many PPVs they have a year, but there was a good 3 or 4 months to build up Liddell/Ortiz so you anticipated the showdown. Imagine Hogan/Andre if there was only one month to build that up?

[spmkillie]

a rather stupid idea imo... either scrap the brand idea all together... or be strict with who appears on who's shows, in order to get a brand loyalty. Your casual wwe fan isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, and your just gonna confuse them vinny

[HRH The KING]

Vince's obsession with mainly pushing muscleheads has IMO made the brand split redundant. It could have been used to push more stars at the mid-card level, but with a few exceptions it really hasn't happened. The brands have become stale. I lost count of how many "Carlito vs Masteroid/Shelton" matches I saw. When guys like Test and Sparky Plugg are getting title shots, then something is wrong.

[molson5]

hrhtheking said:

Vince's obsession with mainly pushing muscleheads has IMO made the brand split redundant. It could have been used to push more stars at the mid-card level, but with a few exceptions it really hasn't happened. The brands have become stale. I lost count of how many "Carlito vs Masteroid/Shelton" matches I saw. When guys like Test and Sparky Plugg are getting title shots, then something is wrong.

The main benefit of the brand split isn't to push guys at the mid-card level, but to give more guys a chance at the main event level. Would Orton, Benoit, Mysterio, Booker T ever have been able to hold world titles without the split? Guys like Kennedy certainly wouldn't have already had the chance to contend for world titles at PPVs.

It's debatable whether that's a good thing or not, but the day the brand split ends, EVERYONE except Cena goes down a notch. fringe main eventers become midcarders, fringe midcarders are off to heat/jobberville, and the lower tier guys are completely gone. That's be a stupid move. Not only does TNA get a talent influx, but the American wrestling scene as a whole becomes worse - there'll be less tv-experienced guys for the WWE, or any new company to utilize. (And despite what some people think, you can't just throw the trendy indy guy of the week on TV and expect anyone to care)

And the "all or nothing" approach just doesn't make sense - why not have best of both worlds?

[chibidiablo]

It's a cach-22. If you end the brand split it means less shitty guys on tv, but it also means decent guys getting bumped down the card.

[HRH The KING]

The main benefit of the brand split isn't to push guys at the mid-card level, but to give more guys a chance at the main event level. Would Orton, Benoit, Mysterio, Booker T ever have been able to hold world titles without the split? Guys like Kennedy certainly wouldn't have already had the chance to contend for world titles at PPVs.

But you have to develop a mid-card too. Not everyone needs to be world champion. I would much prefer a smaller top-line tier and more talent spread across the card, from top to bottom. Rather than stretching the roster over three brands, I would much prefer one solid brand.

[Allison Reynolds]

jinxed said:

I like it. Its modifing the brand split with out ending it. The big names will move between shows and the lower card will still have a home and not have to worry about being fired like if it ended.

That's exactly what I'm thinking. Bigger roster, overall and decent roster size for each brand. They can go to each others brand like what they are doing now, but still keep their "home show" that they frequent, are mainly a part of.

[KingPopper]

Cool, everyone has their home show. But the interbrand stuff will make things interesting again. Think of all the dream matches we missed out on because of the brand extenion.

[molson5]

hrhtheking said:

The main benefit of the brand split isn't to push guys at the mid-card level, but to give more guys a chance at the main event level. Would Orton, Benoit, Mysterio, Booker T ever have been able to hold world titles without the split? Guys like Kennedy certainly wouldn't have already had the chance to contend for world titles at PPVs.

But you have to develop a mid-card too. Not everyone needs to be world champion. I would much prefer a smaller top-line tier and more talent spread across the card, from top to bottom. Rather than stretching the roster over three brands, I would much prefer one solid brand.

Agreed, but the midcard's going to be an issue for the WWE no matter how many brands they have, simply because unlike the old days, the main event angles are featured on free tv. Everyone talked about how well developed mid-card angles were in the 80s, but that's because you had to go to a live show to actually see Hogan do anything, for the most part. The TV shows were reserved for developing Steamboat/Savage, etc.

I don't know what the answer is to improve the midcard - it isn't like they haven't tried to give guys like Shelton, Nitro, the Hardys angles. They're just never going to have as much heat as the main event scene, so they'll seem underdeveloped by comparison

[Dynamic Dude Johnny]

I still think Undisputed world and tag champs could work with the brand split. first you have a three way elimination match between the WWE, Smackdown and Raw champions. The winner is the undisputed champion. The losers keep their belts but get demoted to brand champions, not world champions. the winner gives up his brand championship and gets promoted to world champ(his brand championship is filled with a tournament on that brand to decide a new brand champion. whenever the world champ is defeated, wether by a brand champion or anyone who is from a particular brand, the person who defated him is now world champ and the former world champ replaces him on his brand. use the same formula for the tag champions. Since ECW has no tag champions you would just have Raw vs Smackdown tag champions. the winner is world tag Champions, the loser get demoted titles, and a tournament to fill vacant Brand titles on now world tag team champs old brand is set up. whoever beats the world tag champions is moved to world tag team champ status and the former champions replace them on thier brand. the womens and cruiserweight belts are defened on all three brands(where ever there is a chalenger who fits the title).

The US champion remains on Samckdown, the IC champion remains on Raw. eventully the ECW tag belt, and a second tier belt to the ECW brand belt(the ECW TV title) is set up.


Here is an example of how it could work. Cean vs Lashley vs Batista for the world belt. Lashley wins, Cena and batista are Raw and Smackdown champ, not world champions. A new ECW brand champ is decided upwn somehow( a tournament,a battle royale ect.) lahsley is defeted by Edge on Raw two weeks later. Edge is now world champion and Lashley is on Raw.

The world Champion and the world tag champions are reqired to defend there belts on tv in each brand within the month. so if you defend on raw in week one, ECW in week two, you have to defend the world belt on Smackdown in week three or four of the month. the extra week of the month can be a non title match on a brand or a return to a specific brand if needed.

[Person With A Hat]

dagreenguy said:

I guess I'm in the minority that actually likes the brand split?

Actually, I do like the brand split. And this idea would make sense if they had LESS PPVs. Interbrand matches on the big 4 and maybe one per PPV, with different guys than always the same people.

I figure this may not even help the PPVs at all. It'll just give the PPV a new audience for those who'll depart, thinking this is bullshit. I'm probably wrong in my assessment, but they'll have to think of something else if they want to make more people buy the PPVs.

[revolver86]

I refer back to my WWE Triple Crown championship thread as an example of how to make the top tier important again without ending the brand split. The champ should only fight on PPV.

[Red 'n' Black Reggie]

i like the brand split. mainly because if every show had the same booking team, chances are that stephanie mcmahon and the tv writers on raw would be in charge, as opposed to the aweome booking of dusty rhodes and (i think) micheal hayes on smackdown.