2011 Pro Wrestling Thread

They did two on Raw in '98.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_in_a_Cell#List_of_Hell_in_a_Cell_matches

So there's precedent. Why not do it once a year the week before the PPV, instead of

 

They shouldn't do a Hell in a Cell PPV at all, and they definitely shouldn't use it on free TV. That match should be the final chapter in a blood feud. Once a year, at most, and not just "well, CM Punk needs his rematch and Alberto Del Rio needs his rematch and we've got this HiaC-themed PPV in two weeks, so let's shove everyone in there and call it a day." Make it mean something. The worst Hell in a Cell should equate to "oh shit, it's the biggest of the big guns" to fans. Sort of like the old non-sanctioned lights out matches in the territory days.

 

At this point, WWE should seriously consider reducing its PPVs from 13-14 to 6-8 a year. The interest (and economy) isn't where it was at the peak years, nor is there a WCW-like challenger; TNAs 2-3 best PPVs combined probably couldn't equal WWEs worst buy rates.

Playing Devil's Advocate, I'd go:

January: Royal Rumble
Early April: Wrestlemania
June: Bash/or whatever title they give it
August: Summer Slam
Early October: Hell in the Cell, only make it with meaning
November: Survivor Series, in its original format.

Six PPVs allow feuds to carry on instead of "Damn, we're two weeks away and have no full card, so let's gin up a rivalry" mentality that tends to carry in WWEs mindset. Sure, they would lose revenue with cutting 6-8 events, but the interest in spreading them out evenly would result in bigger buy rates rather than the bleeding they'll sure as hell take on Sunday.

 

Other than replacing Hell in a Cell with Night of Champions and having King of the Ring be the June show, I totally agree. Having three PPVs in five, six weeks like they're doing now is just not sustainable.

TNA should go one step further and punt PPVs entirely, at least for the forseeable future. They get like 10-15,000 buys a show. Maybe Bound for Glory will do a bit better, but not by a lot. They could even take the high road on it and sell it as a move made with the fans' best interests in mind. Hey, unlike that "sports entertainment" organization up north, we've decided to put the fans first and not make them pay 50 bucks to see our best matches. Most of the shows are at the Impact Zone anyway, so it's not like they're losing any huge gate either.

 

That was the funniest line of the night.

 

That's what they should do, only they've decided to go the yearly PPV route. Hopefully they change back at some point.

My idea was to make the Raw before the HITC PPV to be a little more different, rather than the same idea they've done the last five years or whatever.

 

Agree completely, except for a couple of the PPVs they should use.
Money in the Bank should definitely be on the calendar. Much as I like the match at Wrestlemania, it's proven it can stand on its own as a concept and the last two MITB pay per views have been great. It's got some legs. Make that the June/early summer PPV.

I'd also keep the Elimination Chamber PPV. Yeah, it's basically the same as Hell in a Cell, but it's fun and you can easily build a PPV out of two 45-minute matches. And unlike Hell in a Cell, it's not a gimmick match that doesn't feel out of place. You can have qualifying matches, and the 5- or 6-man format means you don't necessarily have to shoehorn feuds into the gimmick. The chamber, like the Royal Rumble, is unique enough to sell a PPV on its own.
It would do better if it wasn't stuck in the post-Rumble, pre-Wrestlemania purgatory it's stuck in now. Maybe they could throw it on the calendar in December, as the big year-end PPV and a prelude to the Rumble.

 

I think having a secondary Hell in a Cell match on Raw takes away from what should be the special occasion factor of the Cell. Of course, maybe in this modern era of safer wrestling, the Cell is an anachronism. You're not going to see any more Foley/HBK falls or other big-time bumps. Sure, it's a trademark match, but so was TLC, and you don't see them doing that anymore.

 

Don't they have a TLC PPV now?
I'm pretty sure they do and it might have either just happened or is coming up soon.
The fact that it exists at all just further illustrates the many excellent points made here about the need to reduce the PPV schedule.
If hardcore wrestling fans can't name all the PPV events, some need to go.

 

That's right, they do. Because they do a TLC match, a T match, an L match and a C match. How you can do a chair match without headshots is anyone's guess. They might as well get rid of the TLC match since there's pretty much no way you'll ever see another Hardyz-Edge/Christian-Dudleyz extravaganza again.

 

I would say put it either in December or that October spot and, for the love of God, change the name back to No Way Out. That was self-explanatory enough.

 

Anyone with a link?