Jump to content

Have they explained yet how Bad Blood


Recommended Posts

Guest The Hollywood Fashion Plate
Posted

Well, how (if they haven't already)?

Guest RavishingRickRudo
Posted

It's tough, but I'd say just have Linda McMahon come out and bullshit and make it a clean break. "Due to the overwhelming talent and nature of both programs, the board of directors and I along with Stephanie McMahon and Eric Bischoff and Stone Cole Steve Austin, have found it necessary to divide the pay per views amongst the two brands. The purpose is to let each storyline and subsequent match and respective talents the exposure they deserve... he is how it will go *graphic of the distribution of the WWE PPVs*. We will give our most sincerest efforts in giving you, the loyal WWE fan, the greatest value possible for you pay per view experience. "

Guest NoCalMike
Posted

I can imagine the announcement being followed by a chrorus of boos.

Guest Vitamin X
Posted

And I can imagine the boos being followed by the worst buyrate in wwe history. OR one of the worst, anyways.

Guest Lightning Flik
Posted
And I can imagine the boos being followed by the worst buyrate in wwe history. OR one of the worst, anyways.

Don't question the OR. There isn't going to be an OR.

 

It will be the worst.

Posted

They're already doing that "Stone Cold Steve Austin presents..." thing and the website makes it obvious it's Raw only...so I'm just assuming that they'll make it obvious to viewers it's Raw only when a satisfying amount of tickets sell.

Guest RavishingRickRudo
Posted

Who wants to bet that the Smackdown PPV gets CELEBRITY INVOLVEMENT!?

Guest Space_Cowboy
Posted

The WWE will probably just take the lazy route and not mention it at all, except in passing when they reveal the PPV lineup the week before Bad Blood or whatever.

Guest JDMattitudeV1
Posted
Who wants to bet that the Smackdown PPV gets CELEBRITY INVOLVEMENT!?

(Pictures David Arquette beating Brock for the title): Kill Me.

Guest The Grand Pubah of 1620
Posted

Either way they have to at least give some bullshit excuse. To just split them up and not give a reason would be one of the dumbest moves Vince has made since signing Nathan Jones.

Guest ViciousFish
Posted
And I can imagine the boos being followed by the worst buyrate in wwe history. OR one of the worst, anyways.

Speaking of that, what is the worst PPV buyrate ever?

Guest Nevermortal
Posted
And I can imagine the boos being followed by the worst buyrate in wwe history. OR one of the worst, anyways.

Speaking of that, what is the worst PPV buyrate ever?

Its gotta be some bullshit event like a Heroes of Wrestling, I-Generation Wrestling, or WWA. Maybe even the WBF show.

 

For an actual WWF show.... Scott Keith says IYH IV with Diesel v. The Bulldog was the lowest buyrate ever.

Guest AndrewTS
Posted

"Due to the overwhelming talent..."

 

BWAAAHAAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!!!

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Guest RavishingRickRudo
Posted

Hey, I said "bullshit"... and that's what that was... :)

Posted
They're already doing that "Stone Cold Steve Austin presents..." thing and the website makes it obvious it's Raw only...so I'm just assuming that they'll make it obvious to viewers it's Raw only when a satisfying amount of tickets sell.

If the WWE braintrust has a brain in them, they won't ever make any sort of announcement/storyline explaination about giving each brand their own PPV on TV or on their PPVs. If they do so and make it publicly known that they are going on this suicidal course, they will be totally and utterly fucked. If it is something they want to succeed, just never acknowledge the PPV split on TV. Period.

Guest RavishingRickRudo
Posted

Don't acknowledge it? Are you nuts? They have to acknowledge it, it's a major and drastic change in the WWE - to just ignore it would be to ignore your fans... which is probably why the wwe *will* ignore it, but it still doesn't make it right. The best thing to do is be upfront with it, and then reassure people that they will get the same, if not better, quality show because of it.

Guest JDMattitudeV1
Posted
In WWE? Wasn't Armagededdon ?

That was the lowest WWE/F buyrate in 5 years. Bulldog/Diesel is the lowest WWE/F PPV of all time.

Guest Choken One
Posted

What was the card for that Show? Because Nash/Bulldog had a good storyline if I recall...

Posted
In WWE? Wasn't Armagededdon ?

That was the lowest WWE/F buyrate in 5 years. Bulldog/Diesel is the lowest WWE/F PPV of all time.

That would be IYH #4 (0.4) but IYH #5 (0.3), IYH: International Incident (0.37), and IYH: It's Time! (0.35) all drew lower buyrates.

Guest Choken One
Posted

mmm...And WHOM headlined all those PPVs?

 

Yep. YOUR NEXT WORLD CHAMPION!

Posted (edited)
mmm...And WHOM headlined all those PPVs?

 

Yep. YOUR NEXT WORLD CHAMPION!

Um actually no. As much as I'd like to badmouth Nash but he didn't headline any of three lowest WWE/WWF PPV buyrates and was already in WCW for two of them.

Edited by Bored
Guest Choken One
Posted

SHH! Does it Matter?

 

 

Let's just Blame it on Nash anyways...

Posted

I'm Bored so here's a fun fact: The lowest buyrate for a non-IYH PPV is a tie between King of the Ring '97 and Armageddon '02, both at a 0.5 buyrate.

 

Oh and on topic here is the answer (well pretty much) as to whether they will actually make an explanation for having a Raw only PPV:

 

At the recent PPV convention in New Orleans, WWE had a strong presense. Instead of promoting the upcoming brand specific PPVs, WWE was said to really be pushing for the Road to Wrestlemania XX, in early 2004.

 

Apparently WWE is not making a big deal out of the brand split PPVs, as to not draw attention to the fact that only half the stars will be on these upcoming shows.

 

credit: Pro Wrestling Torch Newsletter

 

 

So there ya go...they'll just try to see if the marks don't notice I guess.

Posted
It's tough, but I'd say just have Linda McMahon come out and bullshit and make it a clean break. "Due to the overwhelming talent and nature of both programs, the board of directors and I along with Stephanie McMahon and Eric Bischoff and Stone Cole Steve Austin, have found it necessary to divide the pay per views amongst the two brands. The purpose is to let each storyline and subsequent match and respective talents the exposure they deserve... he is how it will go *graphic of the distribution of the WWE PPVs*. We will give our most sincerest efforts in giving you, the loyal WWE fan, the greatest value possible for you pay per view experience. "

Rudo, you're so good at this, its scary.

Guest Nevermortal
Posted
I'm Bored so here's a fun fact: The lowest buyrate for a non-IYH PPV is a tie between King of the Ring '97 and Armageddon '02, both at a 0.5 buyrate.

 

Oh and on topic here is the answer (well pretty much) as to whether they will actually make an explanation for having a Raw only PPV:

 

At the recent PPV convention in New Orleans, WWE had a strong presense. Instead of promoting the upcoming brand specific PPVs, WWE was said to really be pushing for the Road to Wrestlemania XX, in early 2004.

 

Apparently WWE is not making a big deal out of the brand split PPVs, as to not draw attention to the fact that only half the stars will be on these upcoming shows.

 

credit: Pro Wrestling Torch Newsletter

 

 

So there ya go...they'll just try to see if the marks don't notice I guess.

Stupid. Fucks.

 

'Well, hopefully the fans will be stupid enough to not realize Lesnar isn't on the program...'

Guest cabbageboy
Posted

I wouldn't tell anyone either if I was WWE. I'd let the viewers figure it out, some are probably dumb enough not to notice.

 

Let's take a look at what is rumored to be on this Raw PPV:

 

HHH/Nash HIAC

Christian/Booker IC title

Jericho/Goldberg

Michaels/Flair

 

Toss in RVD and Kane doing something, maybe Test/Steiner and that show sounds better than the last PPV with the full roster.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...