Toggle sidebar

WWE: Premium Live Events (not the big 4 shows)

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jussi said:
Click to expand...


I don't know why the WWe feels the need to double up(male and female) on Money in the bank and Royal Rumbles. They do realize with all these "premium" events they could have a Male Rumble in Jan and female Rumble in February, or maybe even better save the female rumble to build up the the main event for Summer Slam. In this case why not have a male/female money in the bank match now then do the other like 6 months from now
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fro and sansabri
boredmale said:
I don't know why the WWe feels the need to double up(male and female) on Money in the bank and Royal Rumbles. They do realize with all these "premium" events they could have a Male Rumble in Jan and female Rumble in February, or maybe even better save the female rumble to build up the the main event for Summer Slam. In this case why not have a male/female money in the bank match now then do the other like 6 months from now
Click to expand...
aye. hated how i was supposed to get pumped for a HIAC match when they'd have two on the same f***ing show

i'd also do away with the whole MITB briefcase. the idea that someone can just show up at the end of a match and 'cash in' is f***ing stupid. it should simply be a no.1 contender match for w/e belt
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: boredmale
sansabri said:
aye. hated how i was supposed to get pumped for a HIAC match when they'd have two on the same f***ing show

i'd also do away with the whole MITB briefcase. the idea that someone can just show up at the end of a match and 'cash in' is f***ing stupid. it should simply be a no.1 contender match for w/e belt
Click to expand...

The biggest problem I find with modern wrestling(and this goes on many level beyond the doubling up of gimmick matches on the same Premium Live Event) is they don't seem to pay much attention to the law of diminishing returns
 
boredmale said:
The biggest problem I find with modern wrestling(and this goes on many level beyond the doubling up of gimmick matches on the same Premium Live Event) is they don't seem to pay much attention to the law of diminishing returns
Click to expand...
we're prob no longer the audience they want and it's the fans who chant 'we want tables' almost every match who buy their merch
 
boredmale said:
I don't know why the WWe feels the need to double up(male and female) on Money in the bank and Royal Rumbles. They do realize with all these "premium" events they could have a Male Rumble in Jan and female Rumble in February, or maybe even better save the female rumble to build up the the main event for Summer Slam. In this case why not have a male/female money in the bank match now then do the other like 6 months from now
Click to expand...
Wait, people complained for years that there's too many PPVs/PLEs and now you want to add more? Does not compute.
 
Jussi said:
Wait, people complained for years that there's too many PPVs/PLEs and now you want to add more? Does not compute.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's what he said but one of my internet pet peeves is when people say "so everyone wanted it this way, but now you want it another way..." as if @boredmale's opinion is the same as whatever other wrestling opinions you've read.

And if he is saying he wants more PLEs, do you know that he has complained in the past about there being too many?
 
Money in the bank is among the biggest things they do. It’s a huge show that when done correctly creates bigger stars.

The Royal Rumble, they run stadiums for that show. They can’t do more than one, otherwise it diminishes.
 
GKJ said:
Money in the bank is among the biggest things they do. It’s a huge show that when done correctly creates bigger stars.

The Royal Rumble, they run stadiums for that show. They can’t do more than one, otherwise it diminishes.
Click to expand...
This. It makes no sense to do these special matches at other PLEs, it only diminishes the importance othes special shows if not all gimmick matches are not on them.
 
Megahab said:
I don't think that's what he said but one of my internet pet peeves is when people say "so everyone wanted it this way, but now you want it another way..." as if @boredmale's opinion is the same as whatever other wrestling opinions you've read.

And if he is saying he wants more PLEs, do you know that he has complained in the past about there being too many?
Click to expand...

Thanks, yeah I would move them to other existing PPVS,
 
Jussi said:
Makes no sense.
Click to expand...

There is 12 events a year?(give or take). They can do special gimmick matches in 11 of them and have Wrestlemania. Hell do one of the money in the bank matches at Wrestlemaina. I am fairly certain you can space out the gimmick matches that you don't need to do 2 of the same kind in the same PPV

Given all the TV time they have they can do the odd gimmick matches as a main event for Raw or Smackdown if there isn't enough PPVs
 
boredmale said:
There is 12 events a year?(give or take). They can do special gimmick matches in 11 of them and have Wrestlemania. Hell do one of the money in the bank matches at Wrestlemaina. I am fairly certain you can space out the gimmick matches that you don't need to do 2 of the same kind in the same PPV

Given all the TV time they have they can do the odd gimmick matches as a main event for Raw or Smackdown if there isn't enough PPVs
Click to expand...
If you don't have the gimmick matches in the same PLE that they're named after then what's the point having the PLE named after it?
 
Megahab said:
I don't think that's what he said but one of my internet pet peeves is when people say "so everyone wanted it this way, but now you want it another way..." as if @boredmale's opinion is the same as whatever other wrestling opinions you've read.

And if he is saying he wants more PLEs, do you know that he has complained in the past about there being too many?
Click to expand...
@Jussi What about this?
 
GKJ said:
Money in the bank is among the biggest things they do. It’s a huge show that when done correctly creates bigger stars.

The Royal Rumble, they run stadiums for that show. They can’t do more than one, otherwise it diminishes.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. It doesn't make sense from a business perspective to spilt these shows up. MitB is more a Big 4 PPV at this point then Surviver series is. It would be interesting to maybe do the men's at Mania and the women's at summerslam, but cutting one of your best drawing PPVs to do that doesn't make sense.

Rumble is maybe their 2nd best drawing show behind Mania and is now exclusively a stadium show. Not going to take one Rumble match off of the Royal Rumble.

I get the argument that having these gimmicks all on one show might come across as diminishing, but I'm not sure I agree. I think you go into that show looking forward to the whole thing.

Both shows uniquely draw a ton of speculation from fans trying to guess who is going to win the rumbles or the briefcases.

Maybe a compromise is new gimmicks for some PPVs in other parts of the year? Not TLC or HIAC as those are match types that should only happen when the feud demands.

But maybe it's time KOTR returned as a yearly PPV? Winner gets the crown but also a title shot at Summerslam or Survivor Series?

Or a new tournament, or hell a G1 type deal?
 
WWE doesn’t have the discipline to do an annual ‘major’ tournament like you see in Japan. AEW doesn’t do it, either. In fact, no one on this side of the world does.
 
I like the concept of MitB being its own "PPV". Still though, WWE needs to cut way back on total PPVs. Should be about 6 (I know the money-making side laughs at this).

WM, RR, Summerslam, Survivor Series, MitB, and maybe one more between RR and WM.
 
Emperoreddy said:
Pretty much this. It doesn't make sense from a business perspective to spilt these shows up. MitB is more a Big 4 PPV at this point then Surviver series is. It would be interesting to maybe do the men's at Mania and the women's at summerslam, but cutting one of your best drawing PPVs to do that doesn't make sense.

Rumble is maybe their 2nd best drawing show behind Mania and is now exclusively a stadium show. Not going to take one Rumble match off of the Royal Rumble.

I get the argument that having these gimmicks all on one show might come across as diminishing, but I'm not sure I agree. I think you go into that show looking forward to the whole thing.

Both shows uniquely draw a ton of speculation from fans trying to guess who is going to win the rumbles or the briefcases.

Maybe a compromise is new gimmicks for some PPVs in other parts of the year? Not TLC or HIAC as those are match types that should only happen when the feud demands.

But maybe it's time KOTR returned as a yearly PPV? Winner gets the crown but also a title shot at Summerslam or Survivor Series?

Or a new tournament, or hell a G1 type deal?
Click to expand...
Seems the PLEs named after those are gone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom