Latest
  • Welcome!

    We're a UK based community of cult entertainment fans - so whether you're into WWE, Marvel, DC, Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Star Wars, Doctor Who, Star Trek and more - join us!

    It's free to register, so why not sign up and discuss whatever you're into...

Brand-exclusive pay-per-views are no more

TPIB

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,454
Ratings
63 1
Points
48
WWE has confirmed that, starting with Backlash in May, they are doing away with brand-exclusive pay-per-views as every pay-per-view will feature both RAW and SmackDown LIVE. In addition, WWE will only be doing one pay-per-view a month and, as a result, they have dropped both Payback and Battleground from the schedule. Fastlane will be the final brand-exclusive pay-per-view.

From: WWE.com
After WrestleMania, you’ll get the best of both brands – Raw and SmackDown LIVE – every month, on every pay-per-view. Catch every event streaming live on the award-winning WWE Network.

WrestleMania 34 - April 8, 2018

WWE Backlash - May 6, 2018

WWE Money in the Bank - June 17, 2018

WWE Extreme Rules - July 15, 2018

SummerSlam - Aug. 19, 2018

WWE Hell in a Cell - Sept. 16, 2018

WWE TLC: Tables, Ladders & Chairs - Oct. 21, 2018

Survivor Series - Nov. 18, 2018

WWE Clash of Champions - Dec. 16, 2018
I'm not sure how I feel about WWE doing this. Trying to fit matches from both brands onto one pay-per-view means that there are going to be a lot of talent who won't get a match on pay-per-view. That is, unless, WWE makes every pay-per-view longer which I'm also against. Plus it's going to always make one of the two World Titles look less important than the other since they both can't have the main event spot.
 

TPIB

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,454
Ratings
63 1
Points
48
Pretty much kills the midcard.
Yeah. Pretty much. It more or less guarantees that the Intercontinental and U.S. Title matches (or at least matches featuring those champions) will be on the Kickoff more often than they already are. I can't imagine it will do much for the Cruiserweight division either (assuming they're going to bother having 205 Live represented on pay-per-view going forward considering that they're very rarely featured on RAW anymore).

I also wouldn't be surprised to see either the RAW Women's Champion or the SmackDown Women's Champion left off of pay-per-views entirely or, at the very least, put on the Kickoff.
 

The Icon

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,146
Ratings
151
Points
63
Considering they are making every PPV 4 hours, maybe 5 for WM, I highly doubt the midcard will suffer that much. A little maybe. Midcard champs won't suffer.
 
Messages
393
Ratings
25 1 1
Points
18
Will probably be seeing more mulit-person matches for the mid card titles under this format, and Roman Reigns will main event everyone of these dual branded ppv, and no Charlotte title match will appear on the pre-show
 

TPIB

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,454
Ratings
63 1
Points
48
Will probably be seeing more mulit-person matches for the mid card titles under this format, and Roman Reigns will main event everyone of these dual branded ppv, and no Charlotte title match will appear on the pre-show
At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if they made Roman Reigns a "free agent" like John Cena and have him appear on both weekly shows and every pay-per-view.

It's difficult to get a mid-card title match on pay-per-view as it is. As far as the Intercontinental Title goes, they've taken to having it defended on RAW while having the champion be a part of other matches on pay-per-view. With the U.S. Title, they seem unsure of exactly what they want to do with it but they definitely do not seem committed to doing anything worthwhile.

When I just typed that sentence about the Intercontinental Title, it made me think about the last time it was defended on pay-per-view so I looked it up and the IC Title has not been defended on pay-per-view since No Mercy in September. Plus, we already know he will be in the Elimination Chamber Match next Sunday so that makes it roughly six months since the IC Title was last defended on pay-per-view. The RAW Women's Title is in roughly the same situation as it hasn't been defended at all since TLC in October. It's very unusual that the Universal Title is defended more frequently than the IC or the RAW Women's Title when the champions who hold those titles are actually full-time competitors.

Given WWE's current roster, they could probably scrap a couple of championships and make some of the titles dual-branded. Namely the tag team titles. It's become apparent that WWE doesn't have enough main roster tag teams to justify having tag team titles for each brand.
 
Top