Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Fwd: gimmic ppvs

Scott --

They invented all these "gimmick" pay-per-views to make the fall pay-per-view season more interesting: Night of Champions (last year's main event: not a title match), Hell in the Cell (one Cell match, but whatever) and TLC (which at least has a tables match, a ladder match, a chair match and a TLC match). But when they get to Survivor Series, which was the original gimmick pay-per-view, it's more or less a normal card with one "VINTAGE SURVIVOR SERIES" match.

I don't get it? I love the first two Survivor Series (especially those 10-on10 matches with the tag teams), so why not do a bunch of elimination matches instead of the same old thing. Otherwise, what exactly makes a Survivor Series? My thoughts: Team Cena/Ryback + others v. Team Heyman (4 or 5 man teams, I don't care), Team Sheamus v. Team Barrett (here I'd want Cesaro and the three man band with Barrett), Daniel Bryan's team v. Kane's team (I'd break up all the tag teams and put a member on each team, with the winning team winning his team the right to be the "Captain" of Team Hell No), Randy Orton's team v. Alberto Del Rio's team. And a ten-chick match, if they still have ten chicks (I guess they always throw Ryder in there).

I just think a bunch of elimination tag matches, especially with some creative booking (like captains getting eliminated and whatnot) would be more fun then the standard junk. Also, if Barrett, let's say, pins Sheamus in an elimination match, wouldn't that set up a title shot for him the next month instead of some stupid Smackdown Battle Royal?

- Joe

That's thinking about it far too logically for them.  The Survivor Series thing is a vicious circle -- they downplay the history and tradition of the show because it doesn't draw anymore, and it doesn't draw anymore because they've downplayed all the history and tradition.  Honestly, if they actually had feuds that were heated enough to where it would justify settling things in elimination matches and then a title match on top, they'd be fine.  But everyone is mired in 50/50 booking and they can barely even book backwards long enough to justify their stupid Hell in a Cell PPV concept, so of course Survivor Series is going to get the shaft.  You can easily add meaningful stips as well, like whoever eliminates the most people gets a title shot of their choice at the next PPV, or gets #30 in the Royal Rumble, or whatever.  Something to make it seem IMPORTANT.  Which it's not at the moment. 

76 comments:

  1. A few years ago they were actually planning on doing away with the Survivor Series PPV.


    But in this day and age, SurSer really doesn't serve any purpose, to be honest. Back then, it was a way to highlight important feuds that you wouldn't just see on TV all the time, with the added bonus for WWF that they'd get money out of it via the buys. And let's be honest, it wasn't just a way to see top feuds, it was a way to milk them for more money since many of them had already had their day on PPV (Hogan/Andre anyone?). In today's world of overexposure - on free TV, no less - those matches quite simply are nothing special anymore, and the allure is gone.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The thing that makes a Survivor Series is Vince yelling Ring the fucking bell!!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. What's funny is that the current era is almost ideal for a Survivor Series- so many faceless guys looking for stuff to do, and 50/50 booking that has everyone doing so many jobs that they can be easily pinned in a Survivor match and it won't matter! It makes for more entertaining matches when guys are able to be pinned for real (remember how the old Series PPVs got, where even three or four in suddenly everyone was getting DQed or Counted Out, because they were afraid of "damaging" guys?).

    The only problem is that everyone's such a faceless, gimmickless toad, that the matches basically come down to Four Ripped Guys With Short Trunks & Tattoos (vs) Four Ripped Guys With Short Trunks & Tattoos, instead of weird colourful groups like Jake Roberts, the Rockers (in their 80s monstrosity stuff) & Superfly. Or throwing a three-man tag team with Mr. Perfect against two Roided Tassle Guys and the Legion of Doom- stuff like THAT is more entertaining than the generic Cookie-Cutter types.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Survivor Series works if you have honest alliances. Does Kofi really want to team with a person he just feuded with (Miz), or the team who took the tag titles away from him (hell no)? If WWE made teams that like to work with each other and had an honest past, then it would be ok?

    Also, does anyone truly remember what happened at last years or 2010 survivor series elimination matches?

    ReplyDelete
  5. That was last year, in fact. It was basically getting the Rock to work the show that saved it from the scrap heap. Wouldn't be surprised if they did kill it by next year, either.

    ReplyDelete
  6. And even that was secondary to the real purpose of Survivor Series: shutting JCP out of the PPV market.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think they should go back to having King Of the Ring to bring back the big five. Then the other PPV names, random stipulations and such can be picked via the Raw Active bullshit.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Survivor Series used to be a fun little PPV that actually had continuity on some things, like Bad News Brown walking out on his team one year, then having his new team shocked when he did it the VERY next year. Plus, it gave us the big (good one at least) suprise angle that introduced the Undertaker, who then went on two years later to defeat Hogan in the first singles match at SurSer. And the tag team match in 89(?) actually featured a double turn in Demolition turning face and Powers of Pain turning heel when Fuji sided with them. And I loved the Ultimate Survivor match they had that foreshadowed the eventual Rumble showdown that helped buildup the Hogan_Warrior match. You can tell at one poin, it was given actual thought and oplanning, since you didn't have 12 PPV's a year, and so they meant something back then. That concept wouldn't work anymore when you have six man and eight man tag team matches every few months on tv. The original concept just doesbn't work for today, because there's very few guys that haven't interacted enough already to have any excited anticipation for anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Survivor Series used to be a fun little PPV that actually had continuity
    on some things, like Bad News Brown walking out on his team one year,
    then having his new team shocked when he did it the VERY next year."


    If the team was shocked the second time around, wouldn't that indicate a lack of continuity?

    ReplyDelete
  10. The very first year of it they had Hogan teaming with Paul Orndorff...only a few months removed from one of the most heated feuds in WWF history!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wasn't him walking out the 2nd year an audible or something? I want to say his entire inclusion in the team wasn't the original plan.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Or they could do full on 'wild card' matches, like they did in 1995.

    Just have Vince, or Teddy, or Vicky say that team-mates are being 'randomly' put together for matches. Then you get to have Daniel Bryan and Kane on opposing teams, and doing the 'we don't want to hurt each other' storyline, you get to have everyone accuse Rhodes Scholars of cheating to be on the same team, and witness the awesome that is The Great Khali vs Ryback!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Are you going to rant on it this year? Can't say I blame you if you say no, with that card...

    ReplyDelete
  14. What's "Fwd" on all of these posts? For Web Discussion?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I generally post by forwarding questions directly from Gmail to the blog and I can't edit the title since they changed the Gmail interface.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Saying a PPV concept doesn't draw is IMO bullshit, because if you have interesting matches and feuds and wrestler, then EVERY PPV can draw. Even a King of the Ring or a Survivor Series. You just have to make it interesting, so that you actually could CARE about the matches and results.

    With Johnny Ace, Heyman, CM Punk, Cena, Foley etc. they could have startet a feud where Ace as RAW GM could feud against Foley (as SD GM) with Team Ace vs Team Foley for the undisputed rulership over the WWE. If team Ace wins, he could be GM of RAW AND SD.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Don't forget about Orton, the guy who humiliated Kofi at MSG and arguably took away his confidence. The Survivor Series booking has been a mess with all the last minute changes in a PPV that only had three weeks to build to begin with. The "nobody trust the Miz" angle could be interesting if that was the original plan and they had time to build on it. And while I hope someone turns heel to really cement everything (they are hinting Orton but Kofi would be the more interesting choice). Plus the changes keep on coming since it is likely that Cody Rhodes will likely miss the SS due to his injury at the Main Event taping. Is there even a credible substitute at this point since the WWE has done such a crummy job building their midcard the last few years that all the remaining heels do not have enough credibility to take Cody's spot in the match?


    There are only four announced matches and a preshow match. No one else will care about whatever else fills up the show since other than what's been announced so far there are no other real programs and the ones that are on the show are not really that compelling (maybe they will stick in some iteration of Mysterio and Cara vs. the Prime Time Players). The one program they have spent a lot time on the last month, AJ-Vickie Guerrero, does not look like it will have any payoff at this card (just book a match where AJ destroys Vicki and get it over with). The Survivor Series really reflects the lack of development of the WWE undercard over the last few years.

    ReplyDelete
  18. that's a joke right? I mean they JUST did that match at Wrestlemania

    ReplyDelete
  19. What's funny about the disdain for gimmick PPVs (not that I disagree) is that three of the original five PPVs were built around a specific gimmick.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Heck that same card had Savage and Steamboat teaming with each other only a few months after their epic Wrestlemania III match.

    ReplyDelete
  21. They were so close to having a couple of matches this year that made sense. Although they announced the teams way too early, only to change their minds a week later, the whole Team Foley vs Team Punk had several feuds intertwined, and freed up Cena/Ziggler for their own match. And now... Miz is a face(?!) and Ziggler is undermined yet again. Sigh.

    Few random things... I really like Daniel Bryan's subtly altered tights - matching tag team gear FTW. And did anyone see Cody Rhodes fall on his neck in the Main Event match? Nasty.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Survivor Series needs one thing: War. Fucking. Games.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I think the key is that there were only five PPVs back then. It's much easier to build towards a gimmick match given several months of planning. Having said that, they seem to have forgotten how to build towards anything now aside from Wrestlemania.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The original idea for Survivor Series was awesome. Since you didn't see guys interact as much back then, the entire concept of five top faces on one team against 5 top heels seemed so fresh. Generally you had 3-4 feuds across the two teams, then an extra guy or two per team. There were enough mid-card feuds to do that. Now there aren't. You would be just tossing random mid-card guys on teams because of their heel or face alignment. Wins and losses meant so much more back than as well. When Andre survived and Hogan didn't, the fans thought of that as huge. Bigelow's performance was a star-making, even though he messed it up by being difficult backstage. You could continue a feud where one guy really wasn't going over the other in a singles match by having them eliminate the other at the Survivor series.



    Maybe it's nostalgia but it just seems like today, with all the tossed together tag matches on Raw ever week (or pretty much the past 10 years or so), it's just not as special to see guys team up like it once was. Warrior and Hogan on the same team? That was huge. But now, Cena has teamed before with Punk and Orton and Big Show and Sheamus and pretty much everyone else in some random Raw main event.



    I think another issue that hurt the concept was after the first 2 or 3 years, WWF started getting cute with the eliminations and worrying too much about protecting certain guys. Screwjobs, countouts, DQs, etc. were the norm rather than the anomaly. Ultimately it was a concept that was neat for a few years but then got tired. They reduced the elimination matches in the early 90s then went back to more of them in the mid 90s. In recently watching those mid 90s elimination matches, there is almost no heat compared to 87-89. And then during the attitude era they dropped the elimination matches again.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Hell, the whole point of Hogan's team in 87 was could he trust them. He had Orndorff, who he just feuded with, Patera, a former Heenan Family member, Muraco, who he feuded with and had just turned face saving Billy Graham, and the unknown Bam Bam Bigelow. It made the match more entertaining because you were waiting to see if one of the 4 would turn. Same thing with Savage's team, you had Savage, Steamboat and Roberts on a team, three guys who feuded previously. Damn, now I gotta go rewatch my original PPV feed of the first Survivor Series.

    ReplyDelete
  26. TechnicallyTaker debuted at 90 SS and beat Hogan in 91. Just saying

    ReplyDelete
  27. I think he was a substitute in 88, as were a lot of guys I believe. BNB was the sub for Akeem. But I think there were a few other names that were changed Windham and JYD off the top of my head were announced and replaced by Earthquake and Scott Casey respectively. Casey for Dog, seems like a drop in talent?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Now you see how interesting WWE really is, if you can easly forget such a big story. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  29. That is IMO one of the main problems. They only building feuds really good for wrestlemania - but they ignore the new guys and using mostly old stars for the main events. Anyone wondering, why there are no new Austins or Rocks? When they had Austin he was in WM ME 98, 99 and 2001. Rock was 99, 2000, 2001, 2002 (kind of). What about CM Punk? In which Wrestlemania Main Event was he? Or Sheamus? Or Alberto Del Rio?

    ReplyDelete
  30. I'm more of a fan of Vince's "IT'S THE SURVVVVVIVOR SERIESSSSSSSS"

    ReplyDelete
  31. Worst part of the card is that they have a cena/ryback/punk three way and they just did the same fucking thing at summerslam with big show as the third guy. Can't we just have a punk vs cena 4 star plus match?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Didn't we have on at NOC?

    ReplyDelete
  33. i didnt wanna be that guy

    ReplyDelete
  34. with no blood, or heat? ill pass.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Yeah it was a great match with a double pin finish. Can't they just blow that off with another crazy match instead of lumping the fucking steroid monster in there? The summerslam triple threat was dragged way down by the big show and I think show is a better worker than ryback

    ReplyDelete
  36. Maybe we'll get lucky and they'll do a Cena/Punk ladder match at TLC...

    ReplyDelete
  37. I always thought Survivor Series, like the Royal Rumble, should be an easy PPV to book. They got it right from 94-97 - a big World Title match, 5v5 or 4v4 matches mixing feuds & starting new ones, and then another attraction-type match (Taker/Yoko in 94, Goldust in 95, Austin/Bret in 96, Kane/Mankind in 97).

    It's not exactly rocket science and you can have fun booking the elimination matches. Look at 97 as an example, they used the Survivor Series matches to kick off 2 feuds (Vader/Goldust, Rocky/Shamrock) that were featured matches at the Royal Rumble. I mean, it's like Wrestling 101.

    So of course, the WWE can't figure it out anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I can't remember a single elimination match that was actually interesting. I think people have created false memories of what the show was really like (sort of the same way everyone fondly remembers the Attitude Era when the TV show was actually far more nonsensical than it is now)

    ReplyDelete
  39. oh, I have known this for quite some time....just glad that you were being a joker

    ReplyDelete
  40. I have some:

    -The 10 tag team match from Survivor Series 88. Great action and a shocking twist.

    -Survivor Series 90 - Dibiase's team vs. Rhodes' team. The debut of the Undertaker. The mini-classic between Bret and Dibiase at the end.

    -Survivor Series 95 - The Wild Card match. Just great action all around.

    -Survivor Series 95 - the Underdogs match. Once again, just great action from guys 240 lbs or less.

    -Survivor Series 97 - The Nation vs. Shamrock, LOD, and Ahmed. Watching Shamrock and the Rock towards the end (and the debut of the People's Elbow) was like looking into a crystal ball of what the future would be.


    -SS 2006 - DX, The Hardyz, and CM Punk. Perhaps, the best team ever.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I don't mean at this year's version. And there would need to be some changes of course, to allow for blood and the more traditional version. Not saying it will happen, it would just be something worth doing correctly to freshen up the PPV brand. I think dudes like Punk, Foley, Ryback, Cena, Bryan, Kane, etc. could pull off a really good one, if WWE lifted some obvious limitations. Of course, the current WWE would probably deliver something more akin to the Hulkamaniacs vs. Dungeon of Doom debacles, which would render the whole exercise pointless.

    ReplyDelete
  42. If they did it this year--perhaps Cena's Team (Cena, Ryback, Sheamus, Foley) vs. Punk's Team (Punk, Lesnar, Rhodes Scholars)--and made it the most violent thing ever, the utter contrast to the PG product could really be something unique in today's WWE climate. And it's on PPV, so it's not like the TV networks could get all up in arms about it. Just an idea.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Maybe if they gave the winning team a big trophy...

    ReplyDelete
  44. I'm 35 and probably going half senile, and have to try and remember birthdays and anniversaries not to be locked out the house now, so not being crystal-clear on exact dates for wrestling angles is a forgivable offense.

    ReplyDelete
  45. That was what I meant I guess. the fact that they ran it the second year and even had the announcers question the whole match if he could be trusted to stay with his team is something you just don't see much anymore. If Ziggler walked out on his team mid-match this year, and did it next year, would it even be acknowledged, or even remembered by the fans after a year of constantly changing stories and angles?

    ReplyDelete
  46. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEqoi4vyo-k

    ReplyDelete
  47. since i posted the surser theme, imma do the RR one

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ6VWYutfHU&feature=endscreen&NR=1

    ReplyDelete
  48. look at how awesome this used to be. how many fueds were going on?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ih5vk3yabD8

    ReplyDelete
  49. Dusty Rhodes/Brutus Beefcake/Tito Santana/Red Rooster vs Big Bossman/Bad News Brown/Honkeytonk Man/Rick Martel

    i really like that match

    ReplyDelete
  50. LETHAL LOTTERY, BITCHES!

    ReplyDelete
  51. I like this. They could even market it beforehand as "something you definitely won't see on TV." Then after the fact they'll only show black and white stills of it on TV to remind people that PPV is the only place to see action like this.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Chamber. Of. Horrors.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Yes. Bring back the old appeal of PPVs. For years, there has been nothing to really separate Raw from a PPV. Why would I drop $50, or whatever it is now, instead of just DVRing an episode of Raw (which I don't do either anymore), when they are basically the same.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Oh man, I could totally see them doing it too. hahaha

    ReplyDelete
  55. Exactly, the only current full-time Superstars to actually close out a Wrestlemania are Big Show and John Cena.

    ReplyDelete
  56. WWE can't even do a good hell in a cell match anymore. There was no reason for it in the UT/HHH match they barely used it, how would they do War Games effectively?

    ReplyDelete
  57. C'mon Scott post one of @The_Fuj:disqus's emails

    ReplyDelete
  58. I've long said that they should go retro for one of these PPVs. Do it completely old style... not unlike their RAW Throwback not too long ago, but you know... without all the stars of the past.... well Mean Gene doing interviews in front of those lockers that just happened to be at every arena, but just that.

    ReplyDelete
  59. I smell a running gag!

    ReplyDelete
  60. The fact that Big Show and Miz are on that list rather then Bryan, or Punk, or even Sheamus makes me sad

    ReplyDelete
  61. Or we will curse the existence of the PPV if we get the rumored Punk vs Foley match ( I don't think they would let Foley take crazy bumps in his shape but...)

    ReplyDelete
  62. There is a difference between Raw and a PPV: Raw is longer.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Maybe those are all the seeds for a Kofi heel turn? Next night on Raw he can explain it all clearly then feud with Orton.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Hey, bad news. The IWC have all met up and taken a vote and well... you're out. I didn't want to have to be the one to tell you. Sorry, man.

    ReplyDelete
  65. The beauty of the internet is that if you can't remember any being good, you can head over to YouTube and give it another go. The original 1987 Survivor Series is great from start to finish. And whichever one has the Jumping Bomb Angels on it. 88 I think.

    ReplyDelete
  66. "I'm thankful for hating Ricky Rude. (kiss)" I fucking love Piper!

    ReplyDelete
  67. http://youtu.be/Vhb79V4ae70

    ReplyDelete
  68. i think that sums up why i find everything so lackluster now.

    ReplyDelete
  69. OOOH the IWC has kicked me out? Well, however will I go on? Probably just have to spend time with my fiance and kids. Obviously my life is over.

    ReplyDelete
  70. If you want to get THAT technical you need to add Curt Hawkins and Zack Ryder.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Yeah, great point. haha

    ReplyDelete
  72. Yeah, they would definitely have to let the right guys craft it. They have guys like Arn and Heyman there. Maybe they could talk to old Dusty as a consultant, just to make him feel important for a few minutes. haha

    ReplyDelete
  73. That's why 87 is my favorite year of wrestling. WM3, the first Survivor Series, the debut of Bigelow and so much more.

    ReplyDelete
  74. A SurSer match between Bryan and Kane for the tag team championships would totally rock. Bryan could've brought in three NXT guys as teammates (Rollins, someone else and Aiden English), Kane can bring in three demons/big goofs in masks who get a chance to play broomstick/demolish Aiden English for the PPV audience. It ends with Bryan v Kane, where they exit the ring and hug it out for a double countout. Of course, as my example points out, traditional SurSer matches tend to require more PPV payouts, and Mr. McMahon may not want to give those out this year, for some reason.

    ReplyDelete