Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,582 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
NXT is basically ran as a separate promotions from WWE. WWE doesn't market it as a WWE Brand, but as a developmental promotions, same as they did FCW.

However, unlike FCW, NXT has been given a lot of exposure. I believe that WWE would do well to bank on that exposure.

I think they should put on 4 NXT supercards every year, much like WWE has the "big four".

So, there would be 8 "Takeover" shows yearly, and then 4 separate named annual supercards. The way I see it, they could have the shows on the same weekends as WWE's main supercards Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam, and Surivor Series. They could be marketed as part of the events for the weekend. NXT supercard on Saturday, the main show on Sunday, Raw and Smackdown on Monday and Tuesday.

For Wrestlemania weekend, I would say the NXT show would be on Friday, instead of Saturday, since saturday is the HOF ceremony.
 

·
The Final Kid
Joined
·
3,397 Posts
NXT is not a separate promotion and isn't intended to be. As bad as the overall show is, it's just another WWE show which is presented differently from RAW/SmackDown. The TakeOvers are enough.
 

·
Won't shut up about Peyton Royce
Joined
·
17,649 Posts
Nah, one of the advantages NXT has is the time to build feuds between Takeovers, having one a month would take that and it's not like they are drawing all that good these days.
 

·
Stomping Scrawny Vanilla Midgetesses
Joined
·
4,302 Posts
No, because then I'd have to see NXT with white ropes more often and it's already hard to fathom they can even put on the shows they do with the white ropes every TakeOver.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Raw Smackdown

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
NXT is run as a third brand, distinct from SD and RAW but very much as a "superindy" promotion and with very little emphasis on being a development organization - certainly as far as the tv shows go.

the tv shows/takeovers that they have now are enough
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,766 Posts
NXT is basically ran as a separate promotions from WWE. WWE doesn't market it as a WWE Brand, but as a developmental promotions, same as they did FCW.

However, unlike FCW, NXT has been given a lot of exposure. I believe that WWE would do well to bank on that exposure.

I think they should put on 4 NXT supercards every year, much like WWE has the "big four".

So, there would be 8 "Takeover" shows yearly, and then 4 separate named annual supercards. The way I see it, they could have the shows on the same weekends as WWE's main supercards Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam, and Surivor Series. They could be marketed as part of the events for the weekend. NXT supercard on Saturday, the main show on Sunday, Raw and Smackdown on Monday and Tuesday.

For Wrestlemania weekend, I would say the NXT show would be on Friday, instead of Saturday, since saturday is the HOF ceremony.
What’s the difference between a “supercard” and the regular Takeovers?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,582 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
What’s the difference between a “supercard” and the regular Takeovers?
Wrestlemania is an example of a supercard. A normal PPV isn't considered one.

Supercard is reserved for larger flagship events.

The Takeover specials are their supercards. They typically have a killer show from top to bottom.
I wouldn't consider Takeover to be a supercard. A supercard is typically a once a year event distinct from other PPV and special events, and treated like a flagship show.

Takeover held multiple times a year, and none of them are really distinct from the other. A supercard should feel like the biggest event of the year. None of the Takeovers do. They just feel like normal PPV's. Yes, all of them have been amazing, but that is true about many low-level ppvs for several promotions.
Being a good show doesn't necessarily make them supercards. Supcards should feel like they are distinctly better than normal PPV and special events.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,164 Posts
I wouldn't consider Takeover to be a supercard. A supercard is typically a once a year event distinct from other PPV and special events, and treated like a flagship show.

Takeover held multiple times a year, and none of them are really distinct from the other. A supercard should feel like the biggest event of the year. None of the Takeovers do. They just feel like normal PPV's. Yes, all of them have been amazing, but that is true about many low-level ppvs for several promotions.
Being a good show doesn't necessarily make them supercards. Supcards should feel like they are distinctly better than normal PPV and special events.
To be fair it feels like Brooklyn is slowly becoming NXTs version of Wrestlemania. They certainly made a bigger deal about the whole thing last year compared with the other shows. Plus NXT tend to do an hour long ‘super NXT’ episode every once in a while where they have a title match or two and another huge match happening which fills the void for an additional super show.

In any case I think NXT only doing 5 Big shows a year is perfectly fine for them at this stage. It means feuds are actually built over months and months rather than rushing it though 3 matches in 3 months rinse and repeat.

One thing I do believe is that it’s time to increase the length of these Takeovers. Yeah we already have a ton of WWE viewing but 2 and a half hours simply doesn’t feel enough for the amount of talent that roster has. Feel like we need an extra hour to squeeze in another 2/3 matches. That I would oppose too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
I wouldn't consider Takeover to be a supercard. A supercard is typically a once a year event distinct from other PPV and special events, and treated like a flagship show.

Takeover held multiple times a year, and none of them are really distinct from the other. A supercard should feel like the biggest event of the year.
Ok I am slightly confused. In your OP you said that you would do 4x *Supercard* event? now you are saying once a year event? Which one would it be?

On one side it would be great if they had one main show to run alongside Wrestlemania weekend. Where most feuds end and where they can debut big angles or wrestlers. It could be the pinnacle of the NXT year. They could even introduce a tournament or battle royal with the winner automatically being drafted to the main roster. Surely that is the goal of every wrestler in NXT anyway?

On the other side, if you start adding these "Supercards" you then take away from takeovers. You also start treating NXT as a self sufficient brand which they are not. Every year their best talents are moved to the main roster. I don't think you could really build 4 Supercards that are any different from a Takeover show.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,582 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Ok I am slightly confused. In your OP you said that you would do 4x *Supercard* event? now you are saying once a year event? Which one would it be?

On one side it would be great if they had one main show to run alongside Wrestlemania weekend. Where most feuds end and where they can debut big angles or wrestlers. It could be the pinnacle of the NXT year. They could even introduce a tournament or battle royal with the winner automatically being drafted to the main roster. Surely that is the goal of every wrestler in NXT anyway?

On the other side, if you start adding these "Supercards" you then take away from takeovers. You also start treating NXT as a self sufficient brand which they are not. Every year their best talents are moved to the main roster. I don't think you could really build 4 Supercards that are any different from a Takeover show.
Yes, four seperate supercerds, just like WWE has Wrestlemania, Summerslam, Survivor Series,and Royal Rumble. All four are supercards, and are treated as more important than other months shows.

Takeover shows are closer to WWE's lower rated PPV's than any of the big four,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,587 Posts
Yes, four seperate supercerds, just like WWE has Wrestlemania, Summerslam, Survivor Series,and Royal Rumble. All four are supercards, and are treated as more important than other months shows.

Takeover shows are closer to WWE's lower rated PPV's than any of the big four,
You compare Takeovers to PPVs like No Mercy, Backlash, Battleground etc? Personally, I view the Takeovers that occur on the same weekend as WWE's Big 4 as near equal to WWE's events. They change the presentation, they're feuds built up over many months, and they often show legends/alumni attending these events. And that's all before the matches come and the quality typically blows the WWE show out of the water.

The only slight difference is that NXT's Wrestlemania weekend card doesn't feel like their Wrestlemania. It swaps places with Summerslam. The Takeover Brooklyn card is definitely NXT's Wrestlemania IMO, and every year it's put Summerslam over its knee and spanked it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,159 Posts
Yes, four seperate supercerds, just like WWE has Wrestlemania, Summerslam, Survivor Series,and Royal Rumble. All four are supercards, and are treated as more important than other months shows.

Takeover shows are closer to WWE's lower rated PPV's than any of the big four,
This is your opinion, though. I think takeovers are presented as a huge deal. I admit some might not come off as good, but their intention each takeover is to culminate the current stories.


I don't fully understand your suggestion. There are already 4 ppvs a year. I like only 4; I dislike a monthly, sometimes 2, ppv format. If you just feel the takeovers aren't a big enough deal, that's fair. I think renaming each one something different would be a start, throwing in one gimmick match unique to each show too. I do not want then to add more ppvs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: december_blue

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,482 Posts
Part of what I love about NXT is that it isn't oversaturated.
We don't see the same guys wrestling everyweek and storylines get time to breathe as well. That applies to the Takeover events also. They aren't every month or twice a month. They are once every few months so feuds get a chance to develop and reach boiling point before the blow off match.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,848 Posts
I thought about this earlier, and then I realised the one thing NXT has going for it is not having the pressure of having to make certain "PPVs" more special. Because of the supercards on the main roster, it often feels like WWE hold back on the smaller ones.

One a year would be cool, but I can bet that the others will suffer as a result of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,831 Posts
The Takeover events are their supercards. Just look at the upcoming event. Considering the current talent at their disposal, that’s as “super” or big of a card as they could have.

A very lengthy build for the grudge feud with Ciampa/Gargano. A pretty big NXT championship match with two guys that have been pretty protected.

A new title being unveiled in a ladder match with two debuting wrestlers. A tag title match match that coincides with the finals of the Dusty Rhodes classic.

That’s as big as you’re going to get for NXT without Alumni coming back.
 

·
My Balls Are Hard As Steele
Joined
·
9,852 Posts
With Money In The Bank becoming a new major PPV, you're having Takeover: Chicago the Saturday before. So, that will give you 5 Takeovers which is fine enough for the product.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top