The filler that you point out is a mixed bag in it's exclusion, as properly developped programs such as The Wyatt's vs Shield Lite would be left out.
Perhaps, but it gives those storylines an extra month to develop before Hell In A Cell the following month. Non-title matches have no place on a Night of Champions card.
I would love to see it, but Father's (this was the autocorrect result when I typed Dagger, and I refuse to fix it) made the solid point
That's funny.
I'd love to see the NJPW title one day defended on WWE TV as an imported special, much like how Paul Heyman imported matches during ECW. NXT defenses would be a hell of a stepping towards that.
That's an interesting idea, but it probably would never happen. It's so rare for WWE to acknowledge other companies existence, let alone feature a title match for a belt they do not own.
No. The Briefcase is indeed a prize, but it's not a championship. Accuse me of indulging in semantics. You might be right in doing so, but I stand by it.
Dolph Ziggler defended his Money In the Bank briefcase against John Cena in a Ladder match at TLC. If they can do that on TLC then they can surely do it at Night of Champions, where such a match would make sense in the first place. Would you rather see Sheamus getting forced to defend his briefcase or see garbage like Mark Henry VS Rusev at Night of Champions?
Well, what's the value in bring back a title for one night? Do you defend it every year with the same champion of last year, all the while taking the gamble that you don't lose your "champ" during the year to injury or just future endeavoring? Do you reinstate the title full time? I feel like bringing an old title for the special opens a can of worms that's not worth dealing with.
It is not for one night as far as the aspect of bringing back titles is concerned. I see constant threads for bringing back the Cruiserweight or European Championship, there were even a couple of threads a while back on bringing back the Women's Championship to make two female titles again. This is everyone's chance to justify bringing back any of these titles full-time. Granted, I personally do not believe any title needs to be brought back, but for purposes of adding more to Night of Champions that is a reason for justifying it.
As for addressing the filler, I'd at least like to see these matches have championship implications. Number One Contendership, etc. I don't believe it requires all that much creative effort to address in a satisfactory fashion.
I wouldn't want to see 3 number one contendership matches all on the same card. I'm against having them be on PPV in the first place, but that's just me. It's better than the non-title filler I suppose though.
What's the point of NXT if they're just going to start putting them on PPV's now. No matter how big NXT got it's still developmental. They're there to develop their skills before they compete on major shows like NOC or any other PPV event. More than half these guys never competed on RAW before and you want to stick them on PPV when at least 70% of the audience has no idea who they are.
I get the point you are making here, but it would not be a full main roster promotion. It would be a chance to showcase their champions on a night that is meant to be about CHAMPIONSHIPS. Yes they are there to develop. However, it just a one night deal. The rest of the year they are still NXT wrestlers and the announcers could remind the viewer that these guys are still training, then hype up NXT to get more people to watch it. Balor VS Joe and Bayley VS Emma, for example, would be excellent additions to this year's card. Or would you rather see The Miz VS Fandango in a match that has NOTHING to do with any of the title belts?
If NXT belts are defended on WWE shows, then there is no longer any reason to have an NXT division, and just put everyone on the main roster.
It would only be one night though, I never said anything about adding NXT title matches to other shows like TLC or Hell In A Cell. They get to be showcased once per year on the main roster due to having titles on a show meant to be about championships. As I stated in my response to Messiah, the announcers could remind the viewer that these wrestlers and divas are in developmental. It can generate more interest in NXT in the process, then on NXT itself they can book how important it is to get to have the spots on the Night of Champions card. This would make the brand more special, and even moreso than it once was.
No, there are already too many titles on the WWE roster. I'd prefer it to be only WWEWHC, US/IC/Midcard Unified title, Tag Titles, Women's Title, and that be that.
I disagree there. The roster is large enough to justify two midcard belts. For most of the year, the title structure is fine. At Night of Champions, however, we run into this problem each year and have since 2010.
On the other hand, I don't want to have to wait until December to get Bailey v. Whomever for the NXT Women's belt.
This is true. Bayley VS Emma for the NXT Women's Championship on Night of Champions would be amazing.
Well, here's the thing, when NOC was first initiated, the title picture was this:
WWE Championship
World Heavyweight Championship
WWE Intercontinental Championship
WWE United States Championship
WWE Tag Team Championship
World Tag Team Championship
WWE Divas Championship
WWE Women's Championship
There were 8 titles in use as part of the brand extension but there are only 5 now.
Exactly. This is why the first 3 Night of Champions shows were such a big deal. Until Money In the Bank became its own PPV brand, Night of Champions felt like the biggest show outside of The Big 4. Heck, even 2010's edition came off like a big deal despite that CM Punk VS Big Show non-title match that had no business being on the card. The following year we saw a non-title match MAIN EVENT the show. It's been downhill ever since.
I'm sorta torn on the idea as I think it has positives and negatives. The positives is that it gives fans who possibly haven't followed NXT a chance to see what some of the buzz is all about by seeing some of NXT's brightest on the same ppv with the main roster. At the same time, I like the notion of the NXT & main roster brands being kept separate as possible as NXT is a viable alternative to the more "mainstream" WWE roster. I like that it has its own feel, its on aura, its own atmosphere. Plus, I'm not confident about Vince's creative decisions regarding an NXT program.
Chances are Vince would still let Trips and his team book the NXT half of the card. It could be a chance for them to compete for a night like the GM's during the Brand Extension.
It might be something to consider for next year, but I don't think it'll happen this time around. Part of the charm of NXT is that there's so much time that's used to build their feuds before delivering big payoffs at the Takeover events. Having 4 months in between these big ppv like specials to build programs is something of an advantage to NXT that the main roster doesn't have. For instance, having access to all WWE ppvs for $10 a month is the bread & butter of the WWE Network, so WWE can't really afford to trimming down ppvs from 12 to maybe 4 a year. As a result, there's not as much time to build things up before delivering a big payoff.
Yeah, it's too late to set it up this year. After how successful NXT Brooklyn was, I could see it happening for next year. It's the best option they have. Other than an NXT showcase, bringing back old titles, or forcing a Money In the Bank briefcase defense upon Sheamus, what else could they have done this year? This show could easily stand alongside Money In the Bank as the two biggest shows of the year outside of The Big 4 if they just change it up a bit to get around the issue of the non-title filler. Either that, or retire the show. It's been a disappointment lately when it used to be so special and such a big deal. I'd be very interested in knowing what you would do instead of the non-title matches since you often post great ideas.
