Thank you Mr. D-Man, lets bring it onnnnnn!
Now when it comes to the question of
Should the WWE maintain their specialist Pay Per Views? the first matter is that naturally there are more than the our Pay Per Views (PPVs) named which are specialist and I will go into more detail about them during this debate as to support why the WWE should maintain their specialist PPVs.
While I won't repeat the main details of the history of the PPVs as D-Man kindly did that for me, but will bring some parts further, he has rightly pointed out that PPVs are magic and unique, which is why we tend to remember the events of them a lot better than an episode of Raw, Smackdown or ECW. So naturally PPVs have to be special in order for them to stand out.
Proven Success
Now to elaborate on D-Man's history, while Wrestlemania 2 followed the success of the first Wrestlemania, the third one sparked everything off for Vince McMahon and the WWE that they were rolling in the big bucks, enough for him to decide in 1987 that a new PPV was needed, this PPV was none other than the Survivor Series, a PPV with the specialist theme of elimination tag team match, a tradition that is still even carried out at the most recent one we just had two nights ago in Washington, DC. Now instantly, this example of the Survivor Series being a unique and specialist themed PPV automatically shows a success in the format that a PPV with a special theme can be successful enough to have a 23rd edition this year. While no doubt the format has been altered with the audiences, it still holds the theme of Survival and keeps the specialist tag matches featured, or even a match related with the Elimination Chamber being introduced in the 2002 edition of the PPV.
What came next on 24th January 1988? My personal favourite PPV, The Royal Rumble, an event which is focused around a modified version of a Battle Royale which is made to last an hour long, which every year comes with unpredictability as well as excitement. Now again this is a PPV that has lasted for nearly 22 years and tends to be the most exciting and most anticipated PPV on the calendar (after Wrestlemania) as this begins the Road to Wrestlemania and provides one half of our Main Event, as Jerry Lawler rightly states "It only happens once a year and it feels like Christmas!" Now we see the standard Battle Royales occur very often (one happened on Raw last night), yet there's no complaints about the Rumble being stale as it's the same match type and provides a winner which gets a title shot (92 made a champion from it), yet it's the most hyped up PPV that starts our year! So if a specialist themed PPV is going to remain, then you need to look at the Survivor Series and the Rumble to start with, two specialist themed PPVs out of the "Big Four" that have been proven successes that people always anticipate each year.
Changing Times
Naturally what this year has seen in particular has been a general overhaul of PPVs and their names and speciality, now I'll share no secret that I personally hated the changing of No Way Out to its new name, but then if we broke down the name changes and removals, lets see what occurred:
No Way Out -> Elimination Chamber: Naturally as I said, I hated this name change, but both are straight to the point, the latter even promises what will occur at this event, I will go further into that one. But given the EC has appeared for 3 years now there, the change of the name is just being more appropriate.
Unforgiven -> Breaking Point: Currently until 2008, Unforgiven didn't have much for it except being the PPV that followed Summerslam, they introduced the Scramble Match in 2008 which I thought was going to be a regular feature at this PPV until the name change. When it became Breaking Point, its point was clear, a Submission Based PPV, as D-Man rightly pointed out, it failed, why? Because a. 75% (roughly) of the roster don't have a submission move b. The booking was poor:
Chris Jericho and The Big Show vs MVP and Mark Henry
Kofi Kingston vs The Miz (Made last minute)
The Legacy vs D-Generation X (Submissions Count Anywhere)
Kane vs The Great Khali (Singapore Cane)
Christian vs William Regal
John Cena vs Randy Orton (I Quit)
CM Punk vs The Undertaker (Submission aka Montreal II)
As a fan, none of that card appeals to me, the only thing I would personally tune in to watch would be Undertaker's return that night, most of the matches are the same as Summerslam, only that now the opponent has to submit instead of being pinned, and didn't Christian/Regal's first encounter end in 10 seconds?! That's purely why Breaking Point failed, while it is a themed PPV, the theme was a poor choice but also the booking was rubbish as well.
No Mercy -> Hell in a Cell: Now No Mercy was a very iffy PPV, while there has been unique moments, it just seems to be a bridge PPV until we get to the Survivor Series. Hell in a Cell gave it more of an appeal to be watched as No Mercy doesn't seem to draw the figures as much until the card is booked and announced. While the side effect is 3 matches of the same type, it did work, all three were effective in their own way, again I will break this down further.
Cyber Sunday -> Bragging Rights: A PPV concept that was losing appeal and buys made interesting again. While the Brand Extension is a joke, it gave a nice twist of giving some true warfare between Raw and Smackdown. Despite a small card (to compensate for the Iron Man Match), the first time this was tried out was pretty successful, no doubt the momentum can build this PPV to be a success as long the brand extension remains.
Armageddon -> TLC: Personally, this is another change I'm not a fan of as Armageddon was the PPV I most associate with Hell in a Cell, but the positive side is that some matches we don't see (ie Table) gets put on the card, what is can promise is a reduction to the amount of Ladder Matches we see each year, I think there's been at least 4 this year until TLC was announced.
What do the changes provide?
Promises. It means that if a ticket buyer is going to pay to see a PPV outside of the Big Four, it gives them a promise of something to occur. As a fan based in the UK, I just purchased tickets for the next tour and I currently do not have a clue what's going to happen when it happens (come April), as far as I know, half the roster could be injured and I see a lacklustre show with Hornswoggle as Champion by then, not exactly an advertising appeal tbh. Now if I purchase a ticket to see Extreme Rules, it promises me hardcore gimmick matches, No DQs, Weapon use, Special Matches, it guarantees that I'm going to see something worth watching. It's already early advertising because the name gives me a promise that I'm going to see a special match, if I compare the names of the old PPVs and to the new ones, what anticipation do I get?
(Italic means former, Bold means new, Underlined means it remains)
Royal Rumble - Royal Rumble Match, Wrestlemania coming soon, definitely will watch
No Way Out - PPV before Wrestlemania, a title change possibly..., exciting times
Elimination Chamber - PPV before Wrestlemania, some excitement there, an Elimination Chamber will be there!
Wrestlemania - Says it all
Backlash - PPV after Wrestlemania, definitely want to watch to see where feuds go
Judgment Day - A PPV with a spelling error, nothing promising...
Extreme Rules - Sweet, special rules in place!
Night of Champions - Every title on the line! Don't see this often!
Great American Bash - Bit patriotic there?
The Bash - Not an improvement really
Summerslam - Gotta watch, it's Summerslam
Unforgiven - Cool name, anything special going to come out of it?
Breaking Point - Submission Themed PPV, so-so
No Mercy - What comes of the feuds? Anything that will finish now or wait until Survivor Series?
Hell in a Cell - I love this match! Definitely will watch
Cyber Sunday - So WWE more money off of me so I can vote where my vote may not count down to rigging?! Great!
Bragging Rights - Smackdown vs. Raw, see some matches that we don't get to see often, I'll watch
Survivor Series - It's SS, so much watch
Armageddon - End of the year, something big will happen
TLC - Promises of extreme spots, are the Dudleys returning?
Now out of the changes (some of which I wasn't too appealed by), you can see by the names that responses people get from seeing the PPV name promises something will happen outside of the unpredictability of expecting a PPV on a roster subject to change and the moment matches are finally announced, I could be considering that I need to sell my ticket. While the promise that a Hell in a Cell match will happen means I can buy my ticket knowing it's going to happen. It's why you go to a gig to see your favourite band, you know the songs, you know what they should sing, you're promised a great time, the name and specialist change does that. While PPV buyers will have a chance to choose a few weeks before, ticket buyers don't get that choice until now as they have to buy and hope they get something good, now they have a promise of what they will see means they will have something to look forward to.
Look at these two PPV promos (No Mercy in 2000 and HIAC this year, see the difference in advertising and promises there?)
[YOUTUBE]/v/_3sLwG1ZSBA&hl=en_GB&fs=1&[/YOUTUBE]
[YOUTUBE]/v/2Y-j2ceQxSM&hl=en_GB&fs=1&[/YOUTUBE]
PG Friendly?
The other situation is that WWE has chosen to go PG and what they are also doing is noting that the PPV will feature a certain match type. While no doubt it's all PG Friendly (or supposed to be), WWE is showing parents that their child wants to watch a PPV that is going to feature certain content beyond standard wrestling that the parents may not agree with, it's what PG stands for and WWE are simply trying to keep within the boundaries so they don't get accused of false advertising that a PPV may be safe to watch. I know it's meant to be all PG friendly, but there can be times where PG may not be family friendly enough, Roger Rabbit is one but it's epic and has Jessica Rabbit so we won't complain there now.
It stops gimmick matches from being overused
Now while the side effect is possibly seeing 3 matches of the same type in one night, it stops a special type of match being overused. We've complained that Last Man Standing and Cage Matches get overused on a regular basis, what having specialist PPVs (not which are all) dedicated to certain matches, it means that you aren't going to have it being overused throughout the year. We had a TLC and Ladder match main event Extreme Rules and Summerslam, literally two months between each other, with Jeff Hardy featuring in both, already you see the same match type (tables and chairs not being exclusive to TLC with no DQ involved in both) Main Event two PPVs close to each other isn't really creative and can be seen as lazy booking, you just seen it once, why will people pay for it again?
As you can see so far that specialist PPVs have existed since 1988 and still remain today with two of the most anticipated PPVs of the year in the Royal Rumble and Survivor Series. But while the specialist PPV changes how feuds will end it creates promises that ticket buyers can go to a PPV knowing something special is going to happen. It limits down certain matches being overused to a point where the IWC get annoyed beyond belief and it also keeps in line with the PG changes so adults can know what to expect if they buy the PPVs for their children to watch. While WWE are watching their backs, they're giving a better advertising approach to appeal better to audiences rather than hoping the last minute card on the spot will draw people in.
D-Man, you may resume.