Scott:
Do you think WWE after doing PPVs for almost 3 decades has finally found the perfect PPV formula? The past two PPVs [Payback & MITB] had three things in common: Both were 7 match PPVs, both devoted no time to prematch video packages, and the pre-show match was given 10+ minutes and were actually matches that were good enough to be on PPV. IMO, this is the perfect formula for PPVs. Last night, Shield-Usos, Henry-Cena, Dolph-Del Rio, and the World title match each got about 15 minutes and the WWE title MITB match got 27 minutes. The other 3 matches got about 10 minutes each. How many matches should a 3 hour PPV have in your opinion?
It's a good formula, although you can never eliminate the human element so even the best laid out show can go south for a variety of reasons. But MITB showed that if you give good workers some time to work, you get good matches. Mind-boggling, I know. 7 or 8 matches is about the limit for a 3 hour show, although if you cut all the inane self-aggrandizing video packages for games, magazines, movies and developmental centers, you can add another decent-length match.
Agreed with all of the above, except I don't see why they've cut down on the pre-match summary videos. They did them perfectly, and they help hook casual fans.
ReplyDeleteThey may have found a good formula for the regular PPVs, but the WrestleMania formula needs to change ASAP. The 4-hour shows with about a full hour of filler and looooong entrances are awful.
ReplyDeletepoint in case when you look back at the WCW ppv's in their dying days. Loading 12 plus matches in a show almost never works
ReplyDeleteWWF did this for a decade and it worked out well for them. ('85-'95)
ReplyDeleteI have one issue with current WWE PPVs. Yes, just about every match is in the *** star range, but that makes every very interchangeable and, to me, forgettable. Will anyone remember these matches in a few months? In the past, you could hear the name of a random PPV and be able to correlate a couple or three matches to it. Now, I can't remember which Punk/Ryback, Del Rio/Ziggler or Kofi/Barrett match was on which PPV, for example. All of the PPVs look and feel the same. Not bad, just the same.
ReplyDeletePersonally, the formula is far from perfect. They are asking me to pay $50 for a show that gives you a lot of solid wrestling but not quite worth the asking price. I suppose people with local wrestling friends can get together and split the cost, which is not in the cards for me anymore and hasn't been since high school.
ReplyDeleteThe early Wrestlemanias featured a ton of matches, many of which were time-wasters and not at all needed to make the events feel special. Would anyone care is WM3 didn't have Hercules vs. Billy Jack Haynes or Butch Reed vs. Koko B. Ware?
ReplyDeleteSummerSlams were even worse with matches that didn't seem to matter.
I think the last two ppv's are the prime example of how WWE should generally do PPV's, I'm not expecting every ppv to be a money in the bank '11 or extreme rules '12, but i enjoyed the last two ppv's immensely, it just helps when you are filling your time with guys that your audience genuinely want to see in matches that people can get excited for. If we are talking about comparing now to about 4-5 years ago or even 10 years ago...then yes, regardless of any dip in overall product quality, WWE seems to know how to pull off a good ppv.
ReplyDeleteAlthough it does seem they know how to pull off their B ppv's better than they do the big 4.
I agree. The only way I can watch them is on a free stream. My friends haven't watched wresting in over a decade and before that it was another decade. I guess they are due to start again now that I think about it. Unlikely though.
ReplyDeleteBilly Jack vs Hercules was one of the main matches for WM III despite it being on second. So I would of been pissed if it was left off. Koko vs Reed I agree with, I guess they needed something after the intermission so everybody had time to get back to their seats.
ReplyDeleteI don't like how they give us all these recap videos that they are supposed to use to SELL the PPV but they air them ON the PPV to those that already bought it thus taking away more time.
ReplyDeleteThe early 'Manias were my favorite because even though they were "time-wasters" in your words, they all had months of back story to them.
ReplyDeleteSome of them did, yeah, but there were a lot of matches in the early Manias that were just tacked on to get everyone a pay check. There was no storyline for Curt Hennig and the Blue Blazer, or Tito Santana and about half of his Wrestlemania opponents.
ReplyDeleteSo are we ignoring that whole thing where Brad Maddox had a 10 minute segment including a video for Vickie Guerrero, the performance center got a vignette, and I saw several commercials for Dead Man Down (though some of them were probably on the pre-show)?
ReplyDeleteThe problem wasn't that they had 12 matches, the problem was that Vince Russo was booking the 12 matches.
ReplyDeleteWrestlemania either needs longer matches or they need to trim all the ads and crap from the show.
ReplyDeleteOr wrestlemania needs more matches.
ReplyDeleteAnd those videos usually do get me re-energized for the match ahead, since WWE production can make even the shittiest feud look exciting for 2 minutes.
ReplyDeleteWrestlemania is really the Super Bowl for wrestling. Not breaking ground there, but in terms of how many feel the real last week of the football season is Championship Weekend because the game itself is an after thought during the Super Bowl after the commercials, pregame shows and halftime performances. I feel it's the same with Wrestlemania, where you'll actually get a better show at the smaller PPVs.
ReplyDeleteI really can't believe how expensive these shows have gotten. A decade ago they were what, $30? Same length as then but $20-$25 more. HD isn't THAT expensive, is it?
ReplyDeleteI'd personally love if they re-created Heat on Sundays from the PPV venue, with some minor matches and just use it as a pre-show type thing. I used to love seeing the sets for the PPVs and sometimes I'd get my parents to order them. Just fun and I think you'd get some last minute buys out of it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I can't imagine sitting through those early Wrestlemania's that had 12 or so matches. I'd say 7 would be the ideal number.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, as a smoker / stoner who can't smoke inside, I do like having a few breaks to go do a little puff puff before big matches - so I appreciate some of the fluff to make room for bathroom breaks and various other activities. I know if you have a DVR you can just pause, but I don't have one.
ReplyDeleteI would totally enjoy it if they pulled from boxing/UFC and had a two-hour undercard show on free TV in the two hours leading into the PPV. You don't have to use the full stage lighting or pyro, not even use Cole/JBL/King, have a guy and a superstar like Saturday Morning Slam, and just have some guys lace up and wrestle, while setting some time to plug away the event.
ReplyDeleteTito was just looking for Martel and kept stumbling into matches every year. He wasn't the speediest Gonzalez.
ReplyDeleteI have found that Raw is better stoned then drunk. PPV's are better drunk then stoned.
ReplyDeleteArriba!
ReplyDeletehaha, alas I'm stuck at work during Raw and PPVs, so typically when I DO watch wrestling live it's with the replay of a PPV that I typically watch with my friend who I've known since grade-school who is a shut-in who lives in his parent's basement.
ReplyDeleteBut this isn't 20 yrs ago and this isn't RAW.
ReplyDeleteYou really want a 5 minute Rtruth/JTG, 3 minute tons of funk/3MB, 4 minute Alex Riley/Khali added onto a ppv, so the main matches get less time?
Please do explain