Another PPV...

[Rockhound]

That didn't amount to more than an episode of RAW or Smackdown!. Add to that another PPV where no titles changed hands. And the WWE wonders why it's losing it's hard core fans.

[Moonwalkin' Capt. Crow]

I agree to an extent. Cyber Sunday had some decent matches, along with great feud buildings. Though for the money to be spent for the PPV...we could have seen a better ending for the WWE title match and MVP vs. Kane (espically since that one has nothing to do with the current storyline for MVP).

However, I will agree that No Mercy was a waste of money...it was nothing but a 3 hour Raw that WWE saw fit to charge 40 bucks though....

[lildude8218]

Title changes = Good PPV?

[Rockhound]

lildude8218 said:

Title changes = Good PPV?

Once upon a time, title changes were spontaneous. They would happen from time to time when WWF had cards in big cities like Philly, Boston, or NY. Rarely did you see title changes on t.v.

Then came the advent of the PPV then all of a sudden you rarely, if ever, got to see title changes at house shows or t.v. with the exception of Saturday Nights Main Event which was on only one a month or so and before long, title changes were almost exclusively on PPV's.(tag titles were more likely to change hands on t.v. than the world or ic title) This was the reason why alot of us fans bought the PPV because it was the only time we got to see title changes and those matches were usually great matches(see Savage/Steamboat WMIII).

Then in recent years, we've seen every title possible change hands on RAW and Smackdown and when the PPV's come around, title changes still happen but they are no longer a special thing because we sometimes see the titles change on free tv. Then, you get PPV's that come and go with no title changes and matches that we could have seen on free tv. So, answer me this, why am I going to shell out $40-$50 to see the same matches on regular TV? Not to mention that in this PPV we also were blessed with schmozz endings? When was the last time we had a count out let alone a count out on a PPV involving a title? We have to go back, what, over 15 years? WTF?

So, in short, yes, title changes do make a good ppv. If not for title changes, then why buy the ppv?

[MolotovMocktail]

Normally I'd blame the short space in between ppv's for the lack of emotion and effort that goes into the feuds, but I was looking back at the 97-99 period, and every monthly ppv had several really good matches, at least one great one, and some boring, but still somewhat entertaining, stuff crammed in.

[Joekishi]

ppv's are continuing stories especially these ppv's

the big 4 are the ones where big things happen, though last month there was a lot of title changes

[Lair of the Shadow MaDaBa]

You can't have a title change at EVERY PPV, 'cause then we'd have the exact same problem--too predictable.

[lildude8218]

rockhound said:

lildude8218 said:

Title changes = Good PPV?

Once upon a time, title changes were spontaneous. They would happen from time to time when WWF had cards in big cities like Philly, Boston, or NY. Rarely did you see title changes on t.v.

Then came the advent of the PPV then all of a sudden you rarely, if ever, got to see title changes at house shows or t.v. with the exception of Saturday Nights Main Event which was on only one a month or so and before long, title changes were almost exclusively on PPV's.(tag titles were more likely to change hands on t.v. than the world or ic title) This was the reason why alot of us fans bought the PPV because it was the only time we got to see title changes and those matches were usually great matches(see Savage/Steamboat WMIII).

Then in recent years, we've seen every title possible change hands on RAW and Smackdown and when the PPV's come around, title changes still happen but they are no longer a special thing because we sometimes see the titles change on free tv. Then, you get PPV's that come and go with no title changes and matches that we could have seen on free tv. So, answer me this, why am I going to shell out $40-$50 to see the same matches on regular TV? Not to mention that in this PPV we also were blessed with schmozz endings? When was the last time we had a count out let alone a count out on a PPV involving a title? We have to go back, what, over 15 years? WTF?

So, in short, yes, title changes do make a good ppv. If not for title changes, then why buy the ppv?

I'm not even gonna bother reading your whole story because it was entirely too long and I didn't need a wrestling history lesson. I'm just answering your last question. For a big match where you don't know the outcome beforehand?

Seriously, a title change does not necessarily make a great PPV. In fact, most people hate when titles constantly change hands. Since all the titles on the line, except for the U.S. title, are in the hands of people that just recently got them, why would they change hands?

[Mozenrath]

I agree with lildude on this one. If title defense never worked, then the belts would be meaningless.

From what I've read, the PPV was decent, but not what one would of hoped for. I can accept that, it happens.

I think the format hurts it since you can't prepare much. This is why I think the votes should be tallied a week ahead. It would give much more time to prepare, and for the wrestlers to be up for it and know who they're working.

[nerdinitupagain]

It's PPVs like this that make me think WWE should instituate the old IYH format where they promote their big PPV's as their big shows and the other monthly PPV's as bigger shows, but not the HUGE ones. Charge less for the lesser PPVs, but every once in awhile give away some big matches.

Hell, 20 bucks for a WWE PPV would actually get a lot of people to watch

[Mozenrath]

nerdinitupagain said:

It's PPVs like this that make me think WWE should instituate the old IYH format where they promote their big PPV's as their big shows and the other monthly PPV's as bigger shows, but not the HUGE ones. Charge less for the lesser PPVs, but every once in awhile give away some big matches.

Hell, 20 bucks for a WWE PPV would actually get a lot of people to watch

I'd be for it if they did one or two to test that concept. It might help sales. It might just cut profits.

[bindergang]

I don't mind it as recently, they seem to be going for the "long title reign" approach with most titles.

However, it seems since they started to do this, the WWE has had tons of bad luck. The title holders, who are trying to be built up as long term champions, all end up either A) getting suspended or B) getting injured. They usually have to put together a quick match to exchange the title or vacate the title and hand it off to someone else at the next show...and with their luck that show is usually a television event.

So we're seeing all these sporadic title changes on free TV and then they start building up the new champions with victories at PPV's...and than that guy goes and messes it up and restarts the cycle.

Whew. Anyone see what I'm saying?

[Rockhound]

I think you guys misunderstand. I guess what I'm trying to say is that there are more title changes on free t.v. than on ppv's anymore. I'm not asking to go back to the attitude era when the world title changed hands almost as often as the hardcore title. I'm just asking that give the fans something. I mean, last night we had Kane vs. MVP. Huh? Where did that come from? Batista wining cleanly over 'Taker? This one I'm not mad at because it legitimizes Batista's title reign. Is he as exciting as watching gras grow? Absolutely but it wouldn't have made sense to have him take the title from Khali and give it to Taker. I guess I want a reason to watch a PPV again. Give me something. Give me TLC matches for the tag titles...hell, give me a tag team division. Personally I'm considering ordering TNA PPV's for no other reason than something different.

[Hiroshi Hase]

rockhound said:

lildude8218 said:

Title changes = Good PPV?

When was the last time we had a count out let alone a count out on a PPV involving a title? We have to go back, what, over 15 years? WTF?

Actually we'd only have to go back about 10 months with Lashley and his feud with Test and that Rumble where Test in the title shot he wanted so badly, walks away from it and gets himself counted out.

As for the PPV's, I don't care for any of them except for the Rumble, Wrestlemania and Survivor Series to a lesser extent. All these other PPV's like Cyber Sunday and No Mercy are just filler to me and not worth bothering myself to spend money on nowadays.

EDIT: Batista/Edge in June ended in a countout for their World Title match as well. I forgot about that encounter.

[Fantozzi]

rockhound said:

When was the last time we had a count out let alone a count out on a PPV involving a title? We have to go back, what, over 15 years? WTF?

4 months, edge-batista at vengeance

[Hiroshi Hase]

gigietto79 said:

rockhound said:

When was the last time we had a count out let alone a count out on a PPV involving a title? We have to go back, what, over 15 years? WTF?

4 months, edge-batista at vengeance

Forgot about that one too.

[Rockhound]

yjc1019 said:

rockhound said:

When was the last time we had a count out let alone a count out on a PPV involving a title? We have to go back, what, over 15 years? WTF?

Actually we'd only have to go back about 10 months with Lashley and his feud with Test and that Rumble where Test in the title shot he wanted so badly, walks away from it and gets himself counted out.

As for the PPV's, I don't care for any of them except for the Rumble, Wrestlemania and Survivor Series to a lesser extent. All these other PPV's like Cyber Sunday and No Mercy are just filler to me and not worth bothering myself to spend money on nowadays.

EDIT: Batista/Edge in June ended in a countout for their World Title match as well. I forgot about that encounter.

A count out for the ECW title? Another joke.