there's only weeks between night of champions and hell in a cell PPVs this year...
 

a little ridiculous don't you think?

There's almost always one instance, when two PPV's are about 2-3 weeks apart every year. Try to keep up.

the ones in the summertime always seem to blend together.

show me one instance where two PPVs were only 14 days apart in the past.

Look it up

Google that shit

December to Dismember: December 3, 2006

Armageddon: December 17, 2006


I win.

SOCCER LEGS got SPLASHED

SPEAR SPEAR SPEAR

there are other examples....must better than this one.....this one shouldn't even count

He asked for one, and I only looked those two up because of Tommy Gunn's post.

November 27, 1991: Survivor Series

December 3, 1991: This Tuesday in Texas

Snap.

lol

Well there ya go

Beware of Dog

#1) May 26, 1996 Florence, South Carolina Florence Civic Center
#2) May 28, 1996 North Charleston, South Carolina North Charleston Coliseum

ZING BITCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I call shenanigans on this. This wasn't really two PPVs, but one that was rescheduled.

Plus, I don't want you beating me. :mad:

I feel like there were two in 2009 that were only 3 weeks apart. Maybe TLC and whatever was after that?

There are plenty of examples. The One Night Stands usually came in between the regular monthly PPVs.

Same with Cyber Sundays, and New Years Revolutions.

Didn't seem like a lot of time between the Rumble and Elimination Chamber

Yeah, that was probably like 3 weeks too.

Sometimes PPVs don't need weeks of build anyways. Especially if they're going to feature extensions of existing fueds.

For instance, if Cena and CM Punk are fueding, the chances are a Night of Champions match isn't going to be the blowoff. They'd carry it over to conclude in a hell in a cell. 2 weeks of build for that is fine.

Wasn't Tuesday in Texas only days apart from a PPV?

Meh it's time to drop a PPV off the calender anyways.

I disagree. If they can't build a PPV to make it worth the money they shouldn't be running it. As it is, WWE tends to run PPVs in such a way that we're accustomed to accepting PPVs where little or nothing relevant happens other than some storyline advancement that could easily happen on TV. That's what they have 6 hours of programming a week for.

PPVs should be special, not used only as storyline advancement.

Summerslam 2009 fell victim to horrible booking as it lacked ANY big 4 ppv feel. 3 weeks to build your supposed second largest PPV of the calender year? Yeah they bit off more than they could chew and the buyrate proved that. It would be beneficial to free up a slot and leave at least 4 to 5 weeks to build it similiar to Mania.

Post 24

Post 14

As long as they don't do the stupid ass Triple Threat "Champion of Champions" match again, I really could care less lol.

Yeah, let's get rid of this SummerSlam bullshit. Also we're going to change the name of the Royal Rumble to:

Over The Top

not to be confused with:

http://images.themoviedb.org/posters...OverTheTop.jpg

damn St Jimmy crashed my firefox

it was the sheer awesomeness of stallone. seriously though, 2 weeks? they've built more with less time in the past - stop bitchin'.

I don't even see where the complaint would stem from anyways. If it's too many PPVs, or not a satisfying enough build don't order the thing. Or don't watch it on a free feed.

You know the IWC has lost it's mind when it's complaining about one PPV out of 13 that they're either not watching, or catching on a feed.

This :y:

My post didn't say anything about the PPV not being worth the money, or not being eventful.
I was saying that they can build just as effectively to a PPV in 2 weeks as they can in 4, under the right circumstances.

If anything this supports what you're saying in disagreement. If the 6 hours of programming is used to advance the storyline, the PPV becomes a big deal. Fueds carry over to multiple PPVs, so why does it always have to be the same amount of time between each?

Especially when the PPV in question is the Hell in a Cell. The Hell in a Cell is, and should be a fued ender. If the fued is hot, and is going to the cell, I don't see the need for a longer story advancement. At that point the storyline has been being advanced for a while.

I guess you could argue that the PPV prior to this should be the one that is scrapped. Still, the fued is more than likely going to have history dating back to the PPV before that, so then you get into the territory of far too much time between PPVs.
If it didn't date back to the previous PPV, the fued would have started on televison and be going to hell in a cell in it's first PPV meeting. That's a clusterfuck. If it was opted not to carry over, it would be resolved before the next PPV. This would mean fueds would be ended or changed between PPVs on television. That's hot-shotting.

The WWE probably looks at it from a numbers point of view before they look at it from a booking point of view. They want to maximize the number of PPVs they can offer a year without causing them to lose buys because there are too many. The booking falls into place from there. Whether or not anything happened on a PPV isn't entirely irrelevant because in the long run if you feel you aren't getting your money's worth you may stop purchasing the product, or if you don't like the direction of the product you may not order for the month, but these types of changes don't affect the long-term business model.

At least it's a real PPV. Cyber Sunday was worse when it comes to ongoing storylines and advancement.
It featured "choose your own adventure" matches, so the build was about who a guy would be facing at the PPV, and not focused on a fued.
If a storyline or angle existed, it would have to be put on the backburner for the whole fan's choice gimmick. Whether or not the fans actually had a say is debateable