Guest DeputyHawk Posted August 26, 2003 Report Posted August 26, 2003 Having WWE as a season-based show like most other sports and TV to avoid viewer fatigue has been suggested before but logistics always make it implausible. Here's a way it could work. The five-month stretch between Mania and SummerSlam, historically, tends to just keep things tiding over without any massive angles taking place. The real excitement and highlights of the year (storyline-wise) are generally in the build from Survivors through the Rumble to Mania. Solution: Have a TV & PPV break after Mania while maintaining house shows, then have the new season start again with a bang at SummerSlam. You can still maintain the brand split (4xjoint PPVs, 4xbrand-only PPVs, 4 months off) and also run the weekend recap shows all year round. In the summer off-season, Velocity & Heat can recap house show happenings & foreign tours as well as interviews & promos building anticipation for the new season. Thoughts? Flames? Alternate suggestions?
Guest Goodear Posted August 26, 2003 Report Posted August 26, 2003 If you really want to take an off season (and I don't know why the WWE would want to since they have pretty much carte blanche to do whatever they want to workers), you have a perfect opportunity with the brand split. Just have Smackdown take a break for a month or so and have RAW take over the time slot. Then switch it back and forth depending on who has the next pay per view (in the case of joint PPVs both brands operate). And there you have it.
cynicalprofit Posted August 26, 2003 Report Posted August 26, 2003 You could also take a total brake and show old shows or maches and give everyone time off to heal. I know I'd rather watch mania 10, even in a clipped version for 2 hours then this weeks Raw.
Guest webmasterofwrestlegame Posted August 26, 2003 Report Posted August 26, 2003 Never gonna happen for revenue reasons.
OldSchoolWrestling Posted August 26, 2003 Report Posted August 26, 2003 People have money year round, you'd hate for them to be spending it elsewhere.
Guest Trivia247 Posted August 26, 2003 Report Posted August 26, 2003 well before you had longer durations of PPVs or big events rather.... which is why championships stretched out to the multi year. all you got was houseshows. But I think house shows are more brutal than TV events, because the wrestlers lose that national exposure makes the all night travel worth it. and this day and age, we have lost the time where wrestlers went out and wrestled just to wrestle cuz their wrestlers.... now everyone HAS to have a reason, everyone got to have a feud... He tombstoned my Mom... They buried us under the american flag.. cuz I wag my tongue and he is next.. because he threw me into a flaming Dumpster...
Tawren Posted August 26, 2003 Report Posted August 26, 2003 That is a stupid idea. They need the TV show to make money, as Spike TV pays them tons for the right to show it. Also, they need it for exposure.
Guest DeputyHawk Posted August 26, 2003 Report Posted August 26, 2003 Eloquently put Tawren, though there is such a thing as contract renegotiation. The argument, obviously, is that anticipation, interest and therefore profit could increase with less exposure than current levels. Out of my group of friends, I'm the only diehard fan still watching, opposed to most of them between 99-01. Having the show run every week of every year has caused viewer fatigue and apathy, at least the format of having 4 hours a week of TV has. It's over-exposed, simple as, and they need to cut back.
Tawren Posted August 26, 2003 Report Posted August 26, 2003 I agree that they are over-exposed (Raw, SD, Heat, Velocity, Confidential, Afterburn, Bottom Line, PPVs) but with the large contracts and building fees they have, they NEED the 5 mil. a week (I don't know what deal they have with UPN).
Corey_Lazarus Posted August 26, 2003 Report Posted August 26, 2003 They could always do something similar to how TNA operates during downtime, and take a week or so off and just record 2 weeks worth of television in one night. Have doors for Raw 2 or 3 hours earlier, have dark matches and then Heat, first Raw...second Heat, and then the taped Raw. Sure, it might burn out the fans, but you know what? It makes sure the WORKERS aren't burnt out.
LooseCannon25 Posted August 27, 2003 Report Posted August 27, 2003 I think that the LIVE! thing every week was praised by all of us, but if you think about it, everyone may be better off if Raw and Smackdown were taped every other week and went live once a month or so.........Also, get rid of the every month PPV structure and have each Brand have like 1 PPV every 3 months. Heres the PPV formual I would use (Call me crazy): Sept. -- Unforgiven (Raw) Oct. -- ----------- Nov. -- Survivor Series (Smackdown) Dec -- ----------- Jan. -- Royal Rumble (Raw) Feb. -- ------------ MAr. -- WrestleMania (Raw & Smackdown) April -- --------------- May. -- Judgment Day (Smackdown) June -- --------------- July -- Vengeance (Raw) Aug. -- SummerSlam (Smackdown)
cbacon Posted August 27, 2003 Report Posted August 27, 2003 Jan. -- Royal Rumble (Raw) Good idea in theory, but you can't have a 30 man rumble with just RAW guys.
Guest The Real Nosferatu Posted August 27, 2003 Report Posted August 27, 2003 but WWE's season never ends DAMN IT!!! They don't take time off!
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now