Your WWE Changes

[TheOriginalOrangeGoblin 0]

Medium:

- Have a top 5 list for all the titles

- Mix up the mid-cards of Raw & SD a bit(minor trades)

- No more 6 man tags!

 

Small:

- Before big title matches show both guys training in the locker room and do Tale of the Tape on both brands

[SuperJerk 0]

^A top 5 list is a great idea.^

[Guest Duncan Eternia]

Moderate Changes: New WWE logo, bring back KOTR

 

Tiny Changes: I personally always like the one WCW entrance ramp where it went all the way to the ring apron...I think its seen on Spring Stampede 93 or 94.

[Guest Tjhe CyNick]

My main change would be to go back to the time tested WWE formula of booking around a babyface instead of a heel. I think thats a huge problem, and its not just HHH on RAW, they've been doing the same thing on SD; last year with Brock and now with JBL. I think wrestling is at its best, and most popular when they have one babyface to build the show around. The World title should be on the babyface much more than it currently is. This is also a good formula because it allows the show to end on a positive note more often than not, and people will feel statisfied watching. Nowadays we get far too many shows that end with the heels dominating the flavour of the month babyface.

 

I would start to make the PPVs (assuming they continue to add shows) more unique. Bring back KOTR, thats cool, but make it a SD exclusive show. Then bring back War Games, but use it to headline some RAW PPV (ie Halloween Havoc or whatever). Bring back the Leathal Lottery, Spin the Wheel, anything to make the PPVs seem different. I also like the idea entioned where you have these PPVs be consistant, so people know what is coming month to month (ie Jan = Rumble, Oct = War Games, etc). I like the concept of having the "Big 4" being the only dual brand shows, and Mania the only time where we see Raw vs SD matches.

 

If they were going to make interpromotional matches on all the dual brand shows, I would do a deal similar to the Ryder Cup in golf. You would have the winner of a RAW vs SD elimination macth at SurvSer get points for their brand, then the Rumble would be worth a certain number of points, and finally say the 3 Mania RAW vs SD matches would be worth points. Whichever brand has the most points after the last Mania match wins the "_______ Cup" for the year. That would give them bragging rights and build up the importance for the series the next year.

 

Bak to PPVs, which I feel is becoming a huge problem for the company. Bring back the old WCW PPVs with some history. I dont think this will add many more buys to a show, I mean just because its "Starrcade" and not "Armageddon" doesn't mean it will be any more or less crap. But I think the brand recognition is a good thing, and they can use that to sell people on the 24/7 concept which will feature many of these old PPV names.

 

I would also make the matches on TV much shorter. I think a big problem today compared to even 2 or 3 years ago is that we get so many long matches on free TV that its hard to make the PPVs seem worth paying for (especially at the inflated prices). The best example was probably the No Mercy deal where we got Eddie-Kurt for free in 2/3 Falls and paid to see Show vs Angle and Eddie vs Luther. And similarly when they gave away the HHH vs Benoit Iron Man on TV earlier in the Summer. Go back to more 6 man tags and shorter matches on TV. They'll get more people on TV, and hopefully get more people over. And at the same time, saving the long matches for PPV will make them feel special.

 

Do something to mix up the talents on the brands. I would probably just have guys show up on the other show and say "______'s contract was up and he jumped shows". That would make things less predictable and they could mix up the top guys.

 

Another option would be to have Long and Bischoff come to agreement to trades more often. One example would be Taker for HBk for a certain period of time ( ie 6 months). This benefits both brands because they can promote new matches, RAW gets to promote TAker vs HHH and SD benefits with Angle vs HBK. If neither guy is holding a title of that brand after 6 months, they are shipped back, and once again seem somewhat fresh.

 

This should be done fairly frequently (maybe at every dual brand PPV). Like I said it just makes things seem more fresh.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I'd like to see SD get the WCW-style ramp to the ring. That way, it would give it a more cosmetically different look to Raw, which would help further differentiate between the two. Making the rings look different would be good; maybe they could change the turnbuckle pads to the long kind, like you see in Japan or RoH. How about putting the Smackdown logo in the middle of the ring mat as well ? Lots of cosmetic changes like these would really make the two brands look different, and would really freshen up SD.

[JoeDirt 0]

My main change would be to go back to the time tested WWE formula of booking around a babyface instead of a heel. I think thats a huge problem, and its not just HHH on RAW, they've been doing the same thing on SD; last year with Brock and now with JBL. I think wrestling is at its best, and most popular when they have one babyface to build the show around. The World title should be on the babyface much more than it currently is. This is also a good formula because it allows the show to end on a positive note more often than not, and people will feel statisfied watching. Nowadays we get far too many shows that end with the heels dominating the flavour of the month babyface.

 

I would start to make the PPVs (assuming they continue to add shows) more unique. Bring back KOTR, thats cool, but make it a SD exclusive show. Then bring back War Games, but use it to headline some RAW PPV (ie Halloween Havoc or whatever). Bring back the Leathal Lottery, Spin the Wheel, anything to make the PPVs seem different. I also like the idea entioned where you have these PPVs be consistant, so people know what is coming month to month (ie Jan = Rumble, Oct = War Games, etc). I like the concept of having the "Big 4" being the only dual brand shows, and Mania the only time where we see Raw vs SD matches.

 

If they were going to make interpromotional matches on all the dual brand shows, I would do a deal similar to the Ryder Cup in golf. You would have the winner of a RAW vs SD elimination macth at SurvSer get points for their brand, then the Rumble would be worth a certain number of points, and finally say the 3 Mania RAW vs SD matches would be worth points. Whichever brand has the most points after the last Mania match wins the "_______ Cup" for the year. That would give them bragging rights and build up the importance for the series the next year.

 

Bak to PPVs, which I feel is becoming a huge problem for the company. Bring back the old WCW PPVs with some history. I dont think this will add many more buys to a show, I mean just because its "Starrcade" and not "Armageddon" doesn't mean it will be any more or less crap. But I think the brand recognition is a good thing, and they can use that to sell people on the 24/7 concept which will feature many of these old PPV names.

 

I would also make the matches on TV much shorter. I think a big problem today compared to even 2 or 3 years ago is that we get so many long matches on free TV that its hard to make the PPVs seem worth paying for (especially at the inflated prices). The best example was probably the No Mercy deal where we got Eddie-Kurt for free in 2/3 Falls and paid to see Show vs Angle and Eddie vs Luther. And similarly when they gave away the HHH vs Benoit Iron Man on TV earlier in the Summer. Go back to more 6 man tags and shorter matches on TV. They'll get more people on TV, and hopefully get more people over. And at the same time, saving the long matches for PPV will make them feel special.

 

Do something to mix up the talents on the brands. I would probably just have guys show up on the other show and say "______'s contract was up and he jumped shows". That would make things less predictable and they could mix up the top guys.

 

Another option would be to have Long and Bischoff come to agreement to trades more often. One example would be Taker for HBk for a certain period of time ( ie 6 months). This benefits both brands because they can promote new matches, RAW gets to promote TAker vs HHH and SD benefits with Angle vs HBK. If neither guy is holding a title of that brand after 6 months, they are shipped back, and once again seem somewhat fresh.

 

This should be done fairly frequently (maybe at every dual brand PPV). Like I said it just makes things seem more fresh.

I think these are some really good points.

[The Mandarin 0]

Gear it towards intelligent people. The large percentage of the fanbase that is dumb would just have to adapt.

 

Not too hard.

[Guest Rrrsh]

My main change would be to go back to the time tested WWE formula of booking around a babyface instead of a heel. I think thats a huge problem, and its not just HHH on RAW, they've been doing the same thing on SD; last year with Brock and now with JBL. I think wrestling is at its best, and most popular when they have one babyface to build the show around. The World title should be on the babyface much more than it currently is. This is also a good formula because it allows the show to end on a positive note more often than not, and people will feel statisfied watching. Nowadays we get far too many shows that end with the heels dominating the flavour of the month babyface.

 

I would start to make the PPVs (assuming they continue to add shows) more unique. Bring back KOTR, thats cool, but make it a SD exclusive show. Then bring back War Games, but use it to headline some RAW PPV (ie Halloween Havoc or whatever). Bring back the Leathal Lottery, Spin the Wheel, anything to make the PPVs seem different. I also like the idea entioned where you have these PPVs be consistant, so people know what is coming month to month (ie Jan = Rumble, Oct = War Games, etc). I like the concept of having the "Big 4" being the only dual brand shows, and Mania the only time where we see Raw vs SD matches.

 

If they were going to make interpromotional matches on all the dual brand shows, I would do a deal similar to the Ryder Cup in golf. You would have the winner of a RAW vs SD elimination macth at SurvSer get points for their brand, then the Rumble would be worth a certain number of points, and finally say the 3 Mania RAW vs SD matches would be worth points. Whichever brand has the most points after the last Mania match wins the "_______ Cup" for the year. That would give them bragging rights and build up the importance for the series the next year.

 

Bak to PPVs, which I feel is becoming a huge problem for the company. Bring back the old WCW PPVs with some history. I dont think this will add many more buys to a show, I mean just because its "Starrcade" and not "Armageddon" doesn't mean it will be any more or less crap. But I think the brand recognition is a good thing, and they can use that to sell people on the 24/7 concept which will feature many of these old PPV names.

 

I would also make the matches on TV much shorter. I think a big problem today compared to even 2 or 3 years ago is that we get so many long matches on free TV that its hard to make the PPVs seem worth paying for (especially at the inflated prices). The best example was probably the No Mercy deal where we got Eddie-Kurt for free in 2/3 Falls and paid to see Show vs Angle and Eddie vs Luther. And similarly when they gave away the HHH vs Benoit Iron Man on TV earlier in the Summer. Go back to more 6 man tags and shorter matches on TV. They'll get more people on TV, and hopefully get more people over. And at the same time, saving the long matches for PPV will make them feel special.

 

Do something to mix up the talents on the brands. I would probably just have guys show up on the other show and say "______'s contract was up and he jumped shows". That would make things less predictable and they could mix up the top guys.

 

Another option would be to have Long and Bischoff come to agreement to trades more often. One example would be Taker for HBk for a certain period of time ( ie 6 months). This benefits both brands because they can promote new matches, RAW gets to promote TAker vs HHH and SD benefits with Angle vs HBK. If neither guy is holding a title of that brand after 6 months, they are shipped back, and once again seem somewhat fresh.

 

This should be done fairly frequently (maybe at every dual brand PPV). Like I said it just makes things seem more fresh.

The only point that I STRONGLY Disagree with is the length of matches. I agree that we shouldnt have GIMMICK matches on free TV (Iron Man defiantly). But a good ole fashion 20 minute Mian Event is exactly what the WWE needs to continue.

One of the main reasons WCW failed is that they did too many "WERE OUT OF TIME" Main Events. It had two old guys fighting for Five minuets then a brawl occurs with 20 guys till the shows goes off air.

 

Short TV matches wont get anybody over and wont do any good in pmroving green wrsetlers, which the WWE has many now.

[Guest Tjhe CyNick]

I guess I should clarify. I dont think there should be many, if any matches that go beyond 15 minutes on TV. Perhaps 6 man tags, because that way you have more guys in there and they dont have to rely on rest holds to stretch the matches.

 

But I do think they need to get rid of the number of 20+ minute matches they put on TV, especially when they run over three segments. I just dont think the average fan wants to sit through a 20 minute match.

 

I agree that guys need to learn, but TV isn't the place to do it, thats what house shows are for. With house shows you are working in front of a larger majority of hardcore fans and IMO you can do longer matches, because the fans are really into wrestling. The TV audience is not, and they are just looking to be entertained.

 

Also, when WWE at its high point they rarely had TV matches that went over 15, and when they started doing that, business started to go down. Not saying thats the sole reason, but I firmly believe long matches will never draw consistant TV ratings.

 

Then when you get to PPV, in fornt of the most hardcore audience, you can have all the 20 minute matches you want, and whats better is that they will seem unique. Hence the reason to order the shows.

 

Short Matches can work to get people over, just look at Goldberg. But I think guys get get over their stuff in 12 minutes, just as they can in 18. Like Is aid it worked in the 90s.

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

Some long matches are needed on TV tho.

 

For example Benoit/HBK showcase in the desert. and big time matches like those.

[Guest Rrrsh]

That is EXACTLY what WCW thinking was man. Short matches get over guys like Goldberg, sure. But he was a monster, and a face monster is pretty much the only type of guy that can get over with short matches.

 

I think you give TV audeinces not enough credit. People will watch 20 minute matches on TV if they care, and they will for importnat ME RAW matches like Benoit-HBK. And back in 98, Raw Main Events were 20 minutes when they mattered and the business was awesome.

[haws bah gawd 0]

My change is one that has probably been beaten into the ground, but I feel needs to be stated again. If I were head of creative, the wrestler's "spots" would be determined by in-ring ability. No more holding back the cruiserweights and talented technical wrestlers because "they make the Undertaker look bad". If you want to be in the main event, go out to the ring, and prove to me with your in-ring ability that you deserve the spot.

 

Of course there would be a place for those who are good on the mic (Rock, Cena, Orton, etc.) But only if you can put on a good match, would you be in consideration for a title reign.

 

Thats just my 2 cents. More emphasis needs to be made on the WRESTLING than mic work.

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

But only if you can put on a good match, would you be in consideration for a title reign.

That's complete bullshit.

 

Being over with the crowd matters more then how good of a wrestler you are.

 

Goldberg is a horrible wrestler, and can only be good when he is carried. And your saying he shouldn't have gotten a title reign, despite being one of wrestlings biggest names?

[haws bah gawd 0]

Goldberg is already over like mad with any given crowd. What good would putting the title on him do? He was unbeaten when WCW put the title on him. Even though it blew the roof off the Georgia dome (and my house), and led to WCW's final defeat of RAW in the ratings, you knew that because he had the belt, he would eventually be beaten, thus taking away (at least to me) what made him unique. To sum it all up, my point is Goldberg didnt need to World title for the crowds to buy him as "the man".

 

My opinion on the matter is if a wrestler is over with the crowd, then they dont need a belt to establish them further because the crowds already buy into them.

[Guest Tjhe CyNick]

That is EXACTLY what WCW thinking was man. Short matches get over guys like Goldberg, sure. But he was a monster, and a face monster is pretty much the only type of guy that can get over with short matches.

 

I think you give TV audeinces not enough credit. People will watch 20 minute matches on TV if they care, and they will for importnat ME RAW matches like Benoit-HBK. And back in 98, Raw Main Events were 20 minutes when they mattered and the business was awesome.

When WWE was doing their best TV numbers they almost never had a match run past a commercial break. So it wasn't just WCW, in fact when WCW was at their best they were doing longer matches than WWE. They only started to go to the shorter matches when WWE got over by doing it. The longest match on the average RAW show would generally be a tag match at the end with Austin and/or Rock in there and it would go about 10-12 minutes, with some massive schmoze at the end. That formula worked for a long time.

 

Like I said, I think you can go to an occasional 20 minute match that runs past a commerical break, but talk to casual fans of wrestling, and most of them care very little for a long match. They just want to see the stars do their thing and move on.

 

I dont want to see 2 minute main events, but I do think there's a huge difference between 10-15 minutes and 20-25, and I dont think you add any more fans when you have 20+ minute matches week in and week out. On top of that you hurt the PPV business because we wind up getting the same quality matches for free that we have to pay $35 to see.

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

Goldberg is already over like mad with any given crowd. What good would putting the title on him do? He was unbeaten when WCW put the title on him. Even though it blew the roof off the Georgia dome (and my house), and led to WCW's final defeat of RAW in the ratings, you knew that because he had the belt, he would eventually be beaten, thus taking away (at least to me) what made him unique. To sum it all up, my point is Goldberg didnt need to World title for the crowds to buy him as "the man".

 

My opinion on the matter is if a wrestler is over with the crowd, then they dont need a belt to establish them further because the crowds already buy into them.

PLEASE...

 

If Goldberg didn't get the world title, their would be public outcry, and massives off these "Smark Marks" would be bitching about politics.

 

Goldberg was the biggest star, hence they gave him the title. And what they did after winning the title, ruined the company for years to come. It should of never been Kevin Nash breaking the streak, they should of had someone who would benefit from it, and become an establish star. Chris Jericho would of been the perfect choice. But the WCW had way to many big egos, and didn't really care about the company, but themselves.

 

Kevin Nash can go to hell.

[Papacita 0]

If Goldberg didn't get the world title, their would be public outcry, massives off these "Smark Marks" would be bitching about politics.

 

 

That was funny.

[Guest GreatOne]

You HAD to appreciate that one.

 

Next on THE INTERNET INSIDERS, is HHH holding down Batista?

[Jobber of the Week 0]

a face monster is pretty much the only type of guy that can get over with short matches.

Bullshit. Big Show could have gotten over if he had shorter matches.

 

And to that other guy, Jericho and Goldberg had backstage heat. WWE could just get the two to cooperate for one PPV, WCW let the inmates run the asylum and Goldberg is a political monster in both companies. No way would Goldberg job the title to Jericho. Ever.

 

Goldberg's problem was that they decided to sacrifice every guy in the company (which was just about everyone with credibility in North American wrestling except for The Undertaker and Shawn and a couple others) on his way to greatness, so that everyone else looked like a weak moron. There was nobody who could credibly take the title from Goldberg, because they chopped the heads off everyone else to make Goldberg look big & bad.

 

That's why that kind of push will never be anything but destructive.

[Spaceman Spiff 0]

Goldberg is already over like mad with any given crowd. What good would putting the title on him do? He was unbeaten when WCW put the title on him. Even though it blew the roof off the Georgia dome (and my house), and led to WCW's final defeat of RAW in the ratings, you knew that because he had the belt, he would eventually be beaten, thus taking away (at least to me) what made him unique. To sum it all up, my point is Goldberg didnt need to World title for the crowds to buy him as "the man".

 

My opinion on the matter is if a wrestler is over with the crowd, then they dont need a belt to establish them further because the crowds already buy into them.

So, people like Austin, Rock, Hogan, Flair, etc. (basically any super-over #1 guy who held the belt) should have never been champ?

[Promoter 0]

I see some stating that in 1998 the wwf were doing short matches, but I think some are also forgetting that the wwf had a much smaller roster and giving away big matches would have really hurt the ppv shows. They could not have done Austin/Dude Love on free tv because that meant ruining the ppv match build for the two consecutive ppv cards. Hell, I remember Bret Hart doing a post Mania promo that went almost 30 minutes for crying out loud. They did that because of the lack of depth in the roster. Once they got more talented wrestlers in the company to add to the depth by 1999 and 2000 the wwf could afford to display more matches and quality. WCW in 1998 also had 3 HOURS on monday to do shows and had a hell of a deeper roster. They usually were the reverse of the wwf with having a strong undercard and a weak main event scene in terms of match quality. They got away with it though because they had massive draws at the top. There are a lot of elements from 1998 that are being overlooked and the wwe of today can't duplicate some of their past success because the environment is different today.

 

First of all, they do not got the talent to pull of the skits they use to do which took up the time on television without giving away the big matches. Guys like Foley, Rock, and Austin could pull off the entertainment stunts and get them over with the audience(notice all babyfaces as well). Then in the midcard there was talent like Benoit and Jericho to add to the match quality of the show. The Ryder's Cup idea should be given to the wwe's creative feedback section pronto along with the cosmetic changes. That would spice up this raw/smackdown separation. I have to agree with those who say Goldberg had to get the title. I mean when even Hulk Hogan realized Goldberg should go over him you know the man had "it". Yes, his workrate was terrible(he was massively over along with an aura that makes champions special) and even last night Regal talked about the incident he had with Goldberg where Berg admitted to freezing up when asked to work instead of going into a match planned ahead of time, but people wanted the title on him. I agree sometimes the wrestler should be able to put on good matches as champ, but sometimes you just got to give in to what the fans demand and when I mean demand I'm talking in the vien of Austin levels or at the very least Ultimate Warrior 1989(who understood the energy he brought to the game). Someone with just a solid following with poor workrate is a different story.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

What I notice is that some people are actually confusing when the WWF was at its peak financially. It was in 2000, not 1998 or 1999, that they were the biggest in terms of popularity. Buyrates and live attendance in 2000 blow those of 1998 out of the water.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Ratings were the highest in 1999 with a yearly RAW average rating of 6.1 vs. the 5.9 of 2000. (4.4 in 1998). Also, May of 1999 had a 7.0 avg rating. That would probably be the best guage of popularity. Though things like buyrates, house show attendance, and merch sales gives you a better look at how much people liked what they were watching.

 

Of course, I think it's ridiculous to compare the audience of today to the audience in 1999. 5 years have passed, are you saying your tastes haven't changed in 5 years? What worked in 1999 won't necessarily work now. Whether they have long or short matches is irrelevant IMO, because it's the fans' interest that matters and whether or not what you are putting in 3 or 30 minutes is good and worthwhile.

[Guest Rrrsh]

a face monster is pretty much the only type of guy that can get over with short matches.

Bullshit. Big Show could have gotten over if he had shorter matches.

Big Show is over because he is 7 feet tall. And is WAY more over as a Face BECAUSE of thsoe short matches.

[Guest Loss]

You HAD to appreciate that one.

 

Next on THE INTERNET INSIDERS, is HHH holding down Batista?

Great One, you have been warned and warned and warned some more to stop trolling in this folder, but that's all you do in any of your posts. The next good point you make will be the first. You're outta here.

[Promoter 0]

I still think 1998 was the peak regardless of the numbers. 1998 was the year they made the comeback. You have to remember how ratings actually work. The numbers in 1999 and 2000 were more of a reflection of the return to mainstream in 1998. You know the story how this week's rating was really a reflection of last week's show?

 

I went over before how 1999's ratings were misleading because of quick title changes(that were never done in previous years on television) and the wwe being in the media with stuff like Owen Hart's death which pushed ratings up. 1999 and 2000 imo were more like the years casual fans jumped on the bandwagon of Austin and Rock's rise to the top in 1998. It was a trickling effect. 1999 the wwe would sell out shows without even advertising the card simply because of the pop culture appeal of The Rock and Austin. The Rock came into supreme popularity in 1999 competing with Austin and in 2000 Rock took over when Austin left. This is going off financial numbers and the reasons I believe they were making those stats.

 

Once Austin and Rock's appeal started to fade, so did the company's financials. The Rock got the title back in 2000 around KOR and after that the fans had seen what they wanted. Austin returned, but his star power of 1998 was gone. The Rock's popularity started to fade as well. Things started to dip in 2001 when Rock left for the movies and Austin turned heel. The wwe's popularity and financial situation has not recovered from the loss of "hip" popularity of Austin and Rock since. They have tried with guys like Triple H and Brock Lesnar and it hasn't got them the mainstream appeal those guys left. Ironically, the nWo and Hulk Hogan's return did for a brief moment. That is the major thing killing the wwe right now. Goldberg failed because he simply came in too late and after the wwf gave fans reasons to have disbelieve in something meaningful coming out of Goldberg being in the wwe. That is why 1998-2000 did so well in terms of financials because Austin's peak was in 1998 and 1999 and Rock's peak was 1999 and 2000.

[Guest curry_man2002]

More gimmick matches there simply isnt enough anymore

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

More gimmick matches there simply isnt enough anymore

You do realise that it was overdoing gimmick matches that killed them in the first place ? Not to forget that the last PPV had a gimmick with every match. Gimmick matches are meant to draw extra money, but they won't do that if they're done all the time. It'd be nice to have a few PPV's with no gimmick matches for a while.

[Guest curry_man2002]

Gimmick matches are meant to draw extra money, but they won't do that if they're done all the time.

 

Are you kidding since the hardcore title was binned there has been hardly any stop signs, kitchen sink, trash can, kendo stick action in the wwe and thats what made me a fan in the first place. Thats also what most the casual fans love not 15 minute rest holds.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Gimmick matches are meant to draw extra money, but they won't do that if they're done all the time.

 

Are you kidding since the hardcore title was binned there has been hardly any stop signs, kitchen sink, trash can, kendo stick action in the wwe and thats what made me a fan in the first place. Thats also what most the casual fans love not 15 minute rest holds.

And you wondered why you got banned from here for a week ?