tag team matches

[KillerWolf]

Originally Posted by Mr Sunday Night The idea behind wrestling feuds is that they build them up during TV, and culminate with a big pay per view match that brings in the dough. Let's say Benoit was defending against Triple H at Backlash. If they gave us Triple H vs. Benoit on RAW, then it would lower the excitement for their match at the pay per view, because they'd already fought once. However, by having a match like Benoit and HBK vs. Triple H and Orton, they're letting the two men fight each other on TV without giving away what it's going to be like in the one-on-one situation. It's just how pro wrestling works.

ohhhhhhhh, wellll, ok professor...
i still say they would make more money from ppvs if they made wrestling more exciting on a daily basis rather than showing the same predictable garbage every week. back in '98, '99, & 2000 i used to watch the ppvs. now, with the sorry state of regular tv programming the ppvs just dont seem worth it. and most people i know who USED to watch ppvs feel the same way. if what youre used to seeing isnt interesting why pay 40 bucks, especially when feuds and what-not are rarely settled at a ppv.

[Moongoose Mcqueen]

The tag team division is definitely in shambles, on both shows. I actually don't think the two shows combined even have a decent tag division. On Raw Batista and Flair will probably just hold those belts since they have no competititon, other than Hurricane and Rosey.
And on Smackdown they've split up every team they had except for rikishi and scotty, which is a boring attempt at too cool.
Its too bad they couldn't just sign jeff hardy and road dogg and reform two of the better tag teams we've seen, because they're not doing much with Matt Hardy on raw anymore, and even less with Billy Gunn on Smackdown.
Its sad to look at the division lately compared to say 2000, when it was at its most stacked.

[Fox]

Originally Posted by shock&awe ohhhhhhhh, wellll, ok professor... i still say they would make more money from ppvs if they made wrestling more exciting on a daily basis rather than showing the same predictable garbage every week. back in '98, '99, & 2000 i used to watch the ppvs. now, with the sorry state of regular tv programming the ppvs just dont seem worth it. and most people i know who USED to watch ppvs feel the same way. if what youre used to seeing isnt interesting why pay 40 bucks, especially when feuds and what-not are rarely settled at a ppv.

If by calling me "professor" you were trying to insult me, then at you, because it didn't work.

And how exactly would you make WWE TV less predictable? Instead of just bitching about it, why don't you actually make some suggestions, that way you don't sound like a whiny little asshole.

[The CyNick]

Someone could also argue that in the 80s when PPV was new, they had way worse TV than you see now (each show was basically 5 squash matches + 1 mid card competitive match) and that built to PPVs. The PPVs drew just fine back then.

The key to building up a PPV is to make people feel they have to spend money to see a certain match (or multiple matches). When you give them away for free every week why would anyone bother spending money for a PPV when they can see the same stuff for free?

WCW gave away plenty of PPV matches on free TV, and they are no longer in business. Now, that wasn't the reason they went out of business, but it didn't help either.

In terms of title changes, thats a booking philosophy that doesn't really have a right answer. But if you look at the WWE's best year financially (from Mania 16-17) they had 6 world title changes and all of them were on PPV, none on TV. During that time ratings were high, and profits were through the roof.

This past year there was a world title change on Smackdown for the first time in a long time, and it really didn't do all that much for TV ratings, as the numbers stayed flat. So I dont see where having a whole bunch of title changes on TV will do anything for business.

As far as the tag team issue goes, I like them. I think its a great way to get the stars on TV for free in matches without having to give away potential money making PPV matches.

[KillerWolf]

Originally Posted by The CyNick Someone could also argue that in the 80s when PPV was new, they had way worse TV than you see now (each show was basically 5 squash matches + 1 mid card competitive match) and that built to PPVs. The PPVs drew just fine back then. The key to building up a PPV is to make people feel they have to spend money to see a certain match (or multiple matches). When you give them away for free every week why would anyone bother spending money for a PPV when they can see the same stuff for free? WCW gave away plenty of PPV matches on free TV, and they are no longer in business. Now, that wasn't the reason they went out of business, but it didn't help either. In terms of title changes, thats a booking philosophy that doesn't really have a right answer. But if you look at the WWE's best year financially (from Mania 16-17) they had 6 world title changes and all of them were on PPV, none on TV. During that time ratings were high, and profits were through the roof. This past year there was a world title change on Smackdown for the first time in a long time, and it really didn't do all that much for TV ratings, as the numbers stayed flat. So I dont see where having a whole bunch of title changes on TV will do anything for business. As far as the tag team issue goes, I like them. I think its a great way to get the stars on TV for free in matches without having to give away potential money making PPV matches.

i DO see your point. but i just remember a time when monday night raw was not the same f ing show every week. and it was basically during the monday night wars, when their was competion. when wrestling was really hot (96-2000) it was hot because the tv programs were good. and i bet they had better ppv ratings as well-because people were interested.
so, i still stand by my theory that if the tv shows are hot, people will be more interested in the ppvs.

[Moongoose Mcqueen]

Originally Posted by shock&awe so, i still stand by my theory that if the tv shows are hot, people will be more interested in the ppvs.

I agree, better tv = more interest = better buyrates. I also agree that there needs to be something unique to make a PPV worth buying too. WWE during the really hot monday night war era was able to find the perfect balance by providing eventful, and unpredictable entertaining shows, while building for the big ppvs.

[KillerWolf]

Originally Posted by Mr Sunday Night If by calling me "professor" you were trying to insult me, then at you, because it didn't work. And how exactly would you make WWE TV less predictable? Instead of just bitching about it, why don't you actually make some suggestions, that way you don't sound like a whiny little asshole.

ok tough guy. here's a suggestion. what if they stopped having pointless, throw-away, meaningless tag matches for main events.

wanna see predictable. i predict that the main event for the raw after next will be some sort of tag match involving some form of evolution.