The Official BTB Discussion Thread - Page 232 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Debate League, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums
 4Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #2311 of 5316 (permalink) Old 07-24-2011, 09:31 PM
Still Real To Me, Dammit!
 
J-Truth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
   
Re: The Official BTB Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyinStyles View Post
I don't know if it's just a considence but I see a lot of stuff on Sunday nights which makes sense considering it's kinda a relaxing down time before you go back to work/school, whatever.
Hm. That would be a pretty good idea.


Check out my BTB!
Redemption Wrestling Federation
(Feedback will be returned)
J-Truth is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2312 of 5316 (permalink) Old 07-25-2011, 12:02 AM
Meltzer said I'm a good worker
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: The Official BTB Discussion Thread

At this time of the year it doesn't really matter what day of the week you post a show because it's not like during the week it is slow and people have work/school/uni/whatever it's holidays for most of the section.

That Guy is offline  
post #2313 of 5316 (permalink) Old 07-25-2011, 06:25 AM
The human torch was denied a bank loan.
 
Quasi Juice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 7,572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: The Official BTB Discussion Thread

Has anyone ever reverted back to the old way of doing PPV's in regards to the brand extension: RAW PPV - SD PPV - RAW - SD - Together - RAW etc? Even though it probably didn't benefit the buyrates, it did give the writers a chance to push more guys. Now all the big names NEED to be on PPV, then the new ones follow if there's room.

Quasi Juice is offline  
post #2314 of 5316 (permalink) Old 07-25-2011, 06:28 AM
Moron
 
Shock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: England
Posts: 8,811
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: The Official BTB Discussion Thread

It's been done pretty often.
Shock is offline  
post #2315 of 5316 (permalink) Old 07-25-2011, 07:28 AM
Meltzer said I'm a good worker
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: The Official BTB Discussion Thread

Lots of people do it because then it gives some of the smaller card wrestlers a chance to be on the PPV and have a feud.

That Guy is offline  
post #2316 of 5316 (permalink) Old 07-25-2011, 07:52 AM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
X-Power's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 923
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
             
Re: The Official BTB Discussion Thread

I'm not really for the idea of single brand PPVs. They usually don't have a very appealing card top to bottom and it means the other brand has to wait extra long between two PPVs. Of course some mid card guys will be left off the PPVs but in my thread I've adopted an alternative where each brand has a 3 hour supershow the week before a PPV, where minor feuds can have their blow-off matches and other feuds can continue to build towards the PPV.
X-Power is offline  
post #2317 of 5316 (permalink) Old 07-25-2011, 09:58 AM
FORZA AC MILAN
 
JOE COAL'S SHITTY PRESENT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,202
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
                     
Re: The Official BTB Discussion Thread

I've seen people do single brand PPVs quite often. I would have considered doing them in my thread, but I had a specific reason not to.

JOE COAL'S SHITTY PRESENT is offline  
post #2318 of 5316 (permalink) Old 07-25-2011, 10:23 AM
DH
lyfe
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ontario
Posts: 8,846
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: The Official BTB Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Power View Post
I'm not really for the idea of single brand PPVs. They usually don't have a very appealing card top to bottom and it means the other brand has to wait extra long between two PPVs. Of course some mid card guys will be left off the PPVs but in my thread I've adopted an alternative where each brand has a 3 hour supershow the week before a PPV, where minor feuds can have their blow-off matches and other feuds can continue to build towards the PPV.
The card's appealing if you give every match a proper build and don't just throw something together a few days before the event.

And I like the gap between Pay-Per-Views. Gives more opportunities for title matches on your weekly shows imo.
DH is offline  
post #2319 of 5316 (permalink) Old 07-25-2011, 10:42 AM
The human torch was denied a bank loan.
 
Quasi Juice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 7,572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: The Official BTB Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by DH View Post
The card's appealing if you give every match a proper build and don't just throw something together a few days before the event.

And I like the gap between Pay-Per-Views. Gives more opportunities for title matches on your weekly shows imo.
This. However, the WWE would need to either scrap certain PPV's, or accept that every brand gets one "special" PPV. I'm referring to the MITB and the Elimination Chamber PPV's. Do those also include both brands? Or they rotate the PPV's every year, so RAW gets MITB one year and SD gets the Chamber and then vice versa. What I do like about seperating the brands is that it makes the Bragging Rights PPV more significant.

Quasi Juice is offline  
post #2320 of 5316 (permalink) Old 07-25-2011, 01:24 PM
The Knight
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: England
Posts: 1,746
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: The Official BTB Discussion Thread

I had brand-exclusive PPVs in my old thread, it was pretty good. Means you get to have a bigger focus on talented guys lower down the card, you can have guys go over on PPV when normally they would only be getting the same win on a weekly show, etc. The one downside for me is having to build something for the other brand for eight weeks; not a huge issue, but in my planning stages, I was struggling to find a way to extend storylines for long enough between PPVs. My opinion on them is good, though - the benefits of several well-built feuds on EACH brand (instead of the entire company) is really appealing, seeing as WWE doesn't build more than a couple of decent storylines per show irl.
Melvis is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome