What is the point of "sending the crowd home happy"?

[thedamndest]

Back in the Attitude Era when everything in wrestling was so much better than it is now, there was no issue with sending the crowd home happy. If it made sense to end an episode of Raw with the Rock decapitating Austin with a chair, that's what happened and that made for good TV. Having every episode of Raw to end on a high note is very Walker, Texas Ranger, very A-Team. If you look at what else is on TV, nobody tunes into the "episodic" shows like Lost, Sopranos, or whatever else is on TV because the hero beats down the villain with a sledgehammer every single week. FAIL.FAIL/PASS.PASS

[#1-norm-fan]

I personally never hear anyone talk about "sending the crowd home happy" as far as weekly shows go. No one really complains if a Raw ends with the heel having the upper hand. Besides, that's usually what dark main events are for. People paid money to see the show live, it's off the air, give them something to cheer for before they leave.

[thedamndest]

I guess why even send them home happy at all? You don't need to end your show with the faces winning, even a PPV. The WWE isn't goint to spare any fans' feelings by booking Jeff Hardy v. CM Punk in the middle of the card because heel punk is going over and they want to "send everyone home happy with a good old Cena victory at the end. If Punk and Hardy will have the better championship match, that should go last.

[#1-norm-fan]

If the match is guaranteed to be great, then I agree. And I don't think it should be an issue. Especially with so many pay per views in a year. It would be foolish to have them all end with a face win.

WrestleMania being the exception. That, to me, is the one "Payoff". If done correctly, you should be dying to see the happy ending.

[thedamndest]

I don't even think Wrestlemania should stick to the traditional "face wins at Mania in the main event" plan. It's been said here before, but whomever wins the Rumble should main event Mania. If that's a face or a heel, so be it, but there is your big pay-off match if you've booked properly. I don't really see the reason to keep the heel from winning the Mania match just because it's Mania. If the heel has been built up since before the Rumble, has won the Rumble, and is ready to go over at Mania then he should go over. Especially when you have lots of other championships when you can put a face over to make the crowd happy. Maybe they will be upset temporarily, but they will look back at the whole night and say, "Oh yeah, we saw John Cena win, that was great. Sucks that Orton won though." Or something.

Also, it's year long. Mania is the big pay-off, but people will tune in the next night to see what the heel does, and it's not like we won't see the same match next month (three weeks) at Backlash whether the face or heel wins.

[#1-norm-fan]

There are exceptions to everything in wrestling of course. But I see the end of WrestleMania as the end of a movie that's been built up for a year and you wanna have that feel-good ending. Old-timey logic or not.

[#1-norm-fan]

Then again we've really gotten to a point in wrestling where most heels have their fans and faces have their detractors. More than ever. Kinda negates the whole thought of the face going over to end on a high note. I don't even know what would constitute a high note in the current state of wrestling.

[Theo Dious]

Back in the Attitude Era when everything in wrestling was so much better than it is now

I just want to throw down that there was plenty of garbage in the attitude era.

[The Mackem]

Because kids need to have happy endings to their fairytales? Grown ups know that the world sucks. WWE now cater to children.

[thedamndest]

I just want to throw down that there was plenty of garbage in the attitude era.

No there wasn't. Everything was better.

[Xero]

I want a happy ending from Mickie James.

[Pardeep 619]

If you're sending the crowd home not happy they're prob not going to attend shows more often. I'd compare it to being a bit like watching a film at the cinema - if the ending is lame then you're not going to be happy about it.

[Xero]

You can send a crowd home pissed. If you have a good heel get the best of a good face, they'll want to see them get revenge, and they may even pay to see it.

[thedamndest]

The WWE may come through your town once or twice a year and if you are a fan you aren't going to stay home because the last time you went Randy Orton put a hurtin' on John Cena. In theory you shouldn't even be in the same storyline by the time they get back to your town. None of that takes away from the rest of the show either, where Kofi Kingston probably won a match.

[Pardeep 619]

I just want to throw down that there was plenty of garbage in the attitude era.

There was plenty of garbage, but that was still way better than what is on TV now. Last night's Raw was atrocious despite "sending the crowd home happy"

[Pardeep 619]

You can send a crowd home pissed. If you have a good heel get the best of a good face, they'll want to see them get revenge, and they may even pay to see it.

They probably won't do if what happened at The Bash happens on a regular basis (where Randy Orton won in the main event but HHH then hit him with the sledgehammer afterwards).

[Dorkchop]

I'd be more focused on sending the crowd home entertained and excited for next week's show. Non televised events should solely be focused on pure entertainment (as well as televised events, but they need some story progression). People don't want to feel like they wasted money. If you can't get Cena, HHH, Edge, or Undertaker in a house show give them quality wrestling.

[Mr. Nerfect]

It should be more about emotional investment, I think. Stone Cold Steve Austin started to rise to prominence with his 1996 King of the Ring victory. It was almost two years before he then won the WWE Title, but people followed his journey, and when he did win the belt, there was a reward there.

I don't think a good guy should win "because he's good," or a bad guy "because he's bad," but rather what works for the story. Randy Orton winning the WWE Championship at WrestleMania XXV would have been the best idea, in my opinion, because Orton has been built up to take the title, and as a force that was not going to be stopped. You then build up a force to de-rail him.