[Brye]

So at Mania we always get one of those big 8-12 man tag matches just to get everyone on the card. And sure, everyone is on the card, but they're almost always less than stellar. The time from the match could easily be given to two guys with a beef that can settle it at the grandest stage of them all. Getting your own match on that card is actually a fairly big deal.

So what I'm asking here is, would you rather seen one regular feud get itself a match on the card, ultimately snubbing people to a pre-show battle royal (or something), or continue with the multi man matches just to get everyone on the card?

I'm leaning towards just a singles or tag feud but tbh if Ryder, Ziggler, etc were snubbed from WM earlier this year I'd be pretty disappointed.

How do you guys feel?

 

[Bryan ls A God]

I'd rather the battle royal on the pre-show and have a legitimate feud going into WrestleMania. I hate these multi-man matches like Money in the Bank, 8 Man Tag's ect... I like Money in the Bank ust not at WrestleMania so I'm glad It got it's own PPV now

 

[Brye]

I like MITB being it's own PPV as well. Although that's pretty much the one exception to the big multi-man matches that actually works out.

 

[Coolquip]

It kind of sucks though because a lot these guys work there asses off all year and are upstaged by older guys. 4 of the 6 guys in the WM main events this year didn't work the full calendar year.

 

[Goku]

My WrestleMania setup would be something along this:

World title matches, both singles matches ideally - 2
Non-title main events - 3
Tag Team title - 1
MITB - 1
Undercard/Filler match(es) (Divas would fit in here) - 1/2

That'd be 8 or 9 matches total.

 

[YoungGun_UK]

I'd say so its a better for a singles match but you would be making a lot of guys miss out on a WrestleMania payday so I see why WWE always throw a big match together.

You know what I'd prefer an annual WrestleMania TLC tag team match with 3 or 4 teams.

 

[Punked Up]

My WrestleMania setup would be something along this:

World title matches, both singles matches ideally - 2
Non-title main events - 3
Tag Team title - 1
MITB - 1
Undercard/Filler match(es) (Divas would fit in here) - 1/2

That'd be 8 or 9 matches total.

Main Events: 3/4 (2 World Title Matches, Singles or Triple Threat, Undertaker Streak Match, Legends Match (could be lumped w/ Undertaker Match
Undercard Singles Matches (IC, US, Grudge Matches) - 3
Tag Title - 1
MitB - 1
Diva's/Filler - 1

 

[peowulf]

Ideally, I'd want Money in the Bank back at Wrestlemania. As we saw there is no room or point in having two MITB briefcases anymore. They just threw away one of them on Cena, when he could have easily been the challenger on Raw 1000 without it. Replace the MITB ppv with King of the Ring.

 

[Choke2Death]

I'd rather they put MITB back at WM again and get rid of it's own PPV. Otherwise, to get everyone on the card, they can also do a battle royal for a midcard title. Ultimately, I don't really give a shit about the midcarders, as my focus is entirely on the main events and the real draws.

 

[GetStokedOnIt]

One regular feud, every time. In a perfect world where WWE are good at booking a wrestling company, they'd try to run as many feuds as possible and try to get most, if not all, of the main eventers and upper-midcarders in PPV matches.

Basically in my mind it comes down to this - multi-man tag matches, like the Wrestlemania team match, just aren't very good. They're way too formulaic and are just a thinly veiled excuse to get everyone on the card. Most of the wrestlers in them barely get any time anyway.

With a feud and a match at the end of it, all the wrestlers involved in the feud get a chance to go out there, give it all and hopefully pull off a good, entertaining match. Especially with midcarders, where matches are the main way they get exposure. A singles match between two guys does a lot for them, especially if it's good, where multi-man matches do nothing for anyone.