WWE removes 3 new PPV's from WWE.com

Quote :

WWE.com has confirmed the following 2010 PPV's:
May: Wild Card
June: Fatal Four Way
July: Money in the Bank

Son of a bitch. Why did they have to do a MITB PPV? and what does this do for MITB at Mania? Goddamnit. MITB has become a WM staple and there is no need to make it a PPV. Yes, the PPV will do well because people love the MITB and the matches will probably kick ass, but I hate this idea. The other 2 could be interesting and even cool. I will have to see what Wild Card means, but it could be a cool concept. What the fuck happend to the War Games PPV? Out of all of the ones on the survey, that is the one I really wanted and goddamn it, they have screw up a WM tradition.

What happened to WWE trying to cut down their PPVs?

Gonna suck cause I'm guessing this will mean no more MITB at Mania. Really was an awesome opener or 2nd match for Mania the last few years. And everyone always looked forward to it. The PPV should still be cool but I really don't think it's all that necessary, especially cause they had other good ideas like bringing back King Of The Ring.

babaganoosh wrote:

What happened to WWE trying to cut down their PPVs?

Um, they have a little. There are only 14 a year now. Back in 06, there were 16. I think 12 is a good number personally.

Anyways, practically all these ideas suck. I won't comment on Wild Card as I'm not quite sure what that is but Fatal Four Way? Really, they're limiting fatal four ways now? Of course I still expect the occasional fatal four ways off the PPV. Do we really need a PPV centered around Fatal Four Ways? How is that going to increase the sales? Also, what happened to good PPV names? Does everything have to be named directly after the gimmick. Night of Champions is pretty cool but Hell in a Cell, TLC, and Fatal Four Way? They could at least do some kind of play on it. Like instead of Hell in a Cell try Damnnation (sp).

And Money in the Bank, is nothing scared? You got the biggest show of the year, you think that's the best time to start someones push. Nope, give it it's own PPV. Nobody buys Wrestlemania for the Money in the Bank match, what makes them think they'll buy a PPV based around it. Plus, it's always been an nice addition to Mania, sure it kind of takes away the chance of a ladder match but it's still a staple.

There are a few things that piss me off about this. First of all, the added MITB and TLC did very well last year, so that means there will be 2 ladder match themed PPV and that sucks. Secondly, the names for these new PPV's fuckin suck. Why couldn't they use a cool PPV title with these concepts match on them. For instance, whey the hell did they have to change No Way Out to Elimination Chamber? No Way Out is a great name for the Chamber gimmick themed PPV. Wild Card sucks, why not keep calling it Judgement Day and have the Wild Card theme on the JD PPV? Fatal Four Way is a god awful PPV name. Why not use the names like Bad Blood or Vengence, with teh Fatal Four Way theme? Let me list the new PPV names I dislike. 1. Extreme Rules. Why not keep calling it One Night Stand or call it Bad Blood or something. 2. The Bash. The Great American Bash was just fine and they had to fuck it up. 3. Braggig Rights. 4. Hell In A Cell. Why not have the Cell match on the No Mercy PPV. 5. TLC. That name sucks. They could have the ladder match theme on the Armaggeddon PPV. 6. Elimination Chamber. I have already explained this. Here are some of the PPV names I like, that they are not using. No Mercy, Survivor Series, Armaggeddon, No Way Out, Judgement Day, Badd Blood, Vengence, Great American Bash.

Wild Card sounds like my original idea of having a Roulette PPV.
And why kill the MITB PPV? It's a WrestleMania classic. And Why Fatal Four?. I'm not a big fan of Fatal Four matches as it is, so why would I like it as a PPV?

Concrete Jesus wrote:

babaganoosh wrote:

What happened to WWE trying to cut down their PPVs?

Um, they have a little. There are only 14 a year now. Back in 06, there were 16. I think 12 is a good number personally.

Well 16 before. 14 now, plus 3 more, brings it to 17. Which is more than when they said they needed to cut it down...

babaganoosh wrote:

Concrete Jesus wrote:

babaganoosh wrote:

What happened to WWE trying to cut down their PPVs?

Um, they have a little. There are only 14 a year now. Back in 06, there were 16. I think 12 is a good number personally.

Well 16 before. 14 now, plus 3 more, brings it to 17. Which is more than when they said they needed to cut it down...

These are replacing PPVs. From what I read, Backlash is being replaced by Extreme Rules, Wild Card is taking over Extreme Rules spot. Fatal Four Way is replacing The Bash. Night of Champions is moved to September and Money In The Bank is taking over it's old slot.

It appears that they are not replacing Backlash, just dropping it. In the past, Backlash was the April PPV. This year, WM is on March 28 and the next PPV is Extreme Rules on May 25.

What the hell? No Backlash? What the hell has Vince and crew come to? I mean get rid of Vengeance..ok? GAB..ok? Backlash.. Hell No! Next, he'll want to get rid of SS the Rumble and WM.

This has gotten beyond ridiculous, and beyond predictable. What happened to saving a gimmick match's announcement for a week prior to the match? Even an inferno match would get annoying if we knew it was coming every year. TNA has the element of surprise over WWE right now big time, and I think WWE may be in for a shock if TNA gets enough exposure.

ayatollahofrocknrolla wrote:

What the hell? No Backlash? What the hell has Vince and crew come to? I mean get rid of Vengeance..ok? GAB..ok? Backlash.. Hell No! Next, he'll want to get rid of SS the Rumble and WM.

Personally, I find it a bigger tragedy that WWE got rid of the Great American Bash as that has been around since thats been around since the eightes whereas Backlash has only been around since the late nineties. Although, I'm most pissed about no more Survivor Series but I can see the business decision in that.

^^GAB is orginally a WCW/NWA PPV. Honestly, I was surprised when they brought it back in 04 because Vince is so hell bent on not using WCW ideas like War Games. I watched WWE for years without GAB, so I am cool witht at one be out. I am far more upset to see Backlash gone. Upset really isn't the word, but I don't like it very much. As far as TNA having the element of surprise, they have tons of gimmick match themed PPV's. They just don't title the PPV after them. Ultimate X will happen at Division X, Lockdown has about 8 cage matches in one night, the King of the Mountain Match happens every year at Slamaversary, BFG has the Monsters Ball. None of that is a surprise.

I'm seriously hoping that Vince will realize sooner or later than too many gimmick PPVs are OVERKILL. This isn't the way to go if you want buyrates. How about better cards instead?

Blah, this sounds stupid tbh. I love the MITB match, but mainly because it takes place at WM.. making a PPV just for is just going overboard. The same with the fatal 4 way one... I love those matches, but I don't want to watch a whole bunch of them together.

EdgeHead wrote:

I'm seriously hoping that Vince will realize sooner or later than too many gimmick PPVs are OVERKILL. This isn't the way to go if you want buyrates. How about better cards instead?

I see what you are saying, but the gimmick PPV's have seen results. TLC was one of the most bought PPV's. I think this is overboard too, but it has been profitable. The only way they are going to stop doing this is for it to stop being profitable.

^ We know this CJ ... BUT they were the first of their kind. So of course they will rate well.

Sykesy wrote:

^ We know this CJ ... BUT they were the first of their kind. So of course they will rate well.

Sure and if buyrates tank this year, they will change. WWE is trying to do whatever they can to boosty buyrates. I don't like it, but that is the business side of the wrestling business. If TLC becomes unviable, they will change it. Not every new concept sold well last year. Breaking Point was one of the least bought PPV's. I think the card+the gimmick match theme=high buyrates. A lot of people, maybe not hear on CGS, but a lot of fans, wanted to see DX win the tag titles. That match+the TLC stip gave WWE good buyrates.

Concrete Jesus wrote:

^^GAB is orginally a WCW/NWA PPV. Honestly, I was surprised when they brought it back in 04 because Vince is so hell bent on not using WCW ideas like War Games. I watched WWE for years without GAB, so I am cool witht at one be out. I am far more upset to see Backlash gone. Upset really isn't the word, but I don't like it very much. As far as TNA having the element of surprise, they have tons of gimmick match themed PPV's. They just don't title the PPV after them. Ultimate X will happen at Division X, Lockdown has about 8 cage matches in one night, the King of the Mountain Match happens every year at Slamaversary, BFG has the Monsters Ball. None of that is a surprise.

I know GAB is originally a WCW/NWA PPV, that's why I still find it a bigger shame. It still has a lot of history and a lot more than Backlash.

Concrete Jesus wrote:

EdgeHead wrote:

I'm seriously hoping that Vince will realize sooner or later than too many gimmick PPVs are OVERKILL. This isn't the way to go if you want buyrates. How about better cards instead?

I see what you are saying, but the gimmick PPV's have seen results. TLC was one of the most bought PPV's. I think this is overboard too, but it has been profitable. The only way they are going to stop doing this is for it to stop being profitable.

The thing about TLC is that it's not gimmick overkill. Sure, we know what's going to happen but there are five different gimmick matches. A table match, a ladder match, a chair match, and a TLC match, so the fans are still getting a variety of different match types and can't get bored with repition. Which isn't the same with any other gimmick PPV they have.

Breaking Point had 3 different styles of Submision matches, Bragging Rights had 3 SD vs. Raw Matches, HIAC had 3 Cell Matches. To me, that is the same concept TLC had.

Concrete Jesus wrote:

Breaking Point had 3 different styles of Submision matches, Bragging Rights had 3 SD vs. Raw Matches, HIAC had 3 Cell Matches. To me, that is the same concept TLC had.

The three cell matches are all cell matches. That's not even different in slightest. I wouldn't really call adding falls count anywhere to a submission match all that different. Bragging Rights shouldn't even be mentioned here because that's a different concept then any of the other new PPVs (the other new PPVs gimmicks focused on match types, this focused on interpromotional battles). Plus, four different match types to three still gives the edge to TLC.

These 3 new PPV's have been removed from WWE.com. As of now, the only PPV on the schedule is Mania. Hopefull this means they are not having those silly gimmick match PPV's.

Oh, This is great news. I don't mind if Wargames comes in replacing a minor PPV though. Right move by WWE if they stick with it. WE WANT BACKLASH.