|
I think its premature to say the WWE is thinking of adding a third brand.
In theory I think this would be a good idea, in theroy. But in theory communism was a good idea.
There are a lot of problems with adding a third brand.
First, where and when do you tape the shows? If its done prior to a RAW or SD it ruins the illusion of it being separate. If you do separate tapings in smaller arenas, then you add another day of tapings for an already overworked TV staff. On top of that there are increased expenses, and what are the odds guys like Lance Storm could headline a show and draw people?
Then there is a problem with PPVs. I think part fo the reason they might be considering this is because they want to increase the # of PPVs they run to 14 or 16. Now, if you do say 4 "ECW" PPVs a year, when do you run them? Do you run them the same month as the "Big 4 PPVs", or do you run them during brand specific months? And what will be the impact of running two PPVs a month? And, who is going to order a PPV headlined by Lance Storm that only gets promoted late Saturday nights?
Another problem is that calling it "ECW" is likely going to backfire on them. Yeah, you can run the shows in small arenas, forcus on smaller guys, and you can even have Paul Heyman book the thing, but its still going to be a WWE show. A large part of the appeal of ECW was that they were a renegade promotion fighting against all the odds. This version of "ECW" would be a profit centre for a public company. Its hardly the same thing.
|