Two Monthly PPVs Too Much? - Wrestle Newz twitter google

Two Monthly PPVs Too Much?

WWE Network
This wouldn’t be the first time WWE has schedule more than one major event or pay-per-view (PPV) for the month, however, the drastic difference is in September (and for the months to come), it will be a regular thing, thanks to the brand extension. More than one monthly PPV will not add pressure to the WWE’s talent or roster; they have two now. But as the two rosters have just rolled out, I find myself having to repeat to myself: Backlash is on September 11th and is for SmackDown, Clash of Champions is September 25th and is for RAW).

It could be the newness of it all. I’m not sure if the WWE has even advertised these two events enough during programming the past few weeks, or if the storylines have been just too good for me to even pay attention. There is also the challenge of having one program to promote one respective PPV; unlike the feeling of the WWE shoving promotion of a PPV down our throats via two shows, plus the WWE Network. But as I looked at my calendar this week to see what was on the go, I was a little shocked to realize that we are heading into the first brand extension PPV of the year (Backlash), with Clash of Champions not too far behind.

Are two PPVs in one month overkill? In a lot of ways, it makes sense (with the exception of four times a year, when the Big Four will involve both rosters, that being Wrestlemania, SummerSlam, Royal Rumble, and Survivor Series – which seems the route they are going when you look ahead to the WWE PPV schedule for 2016). The WWE has two full rosters, and each roster should be represented monthly with a high-level event. Storylines are built around PPVs, and as such, how are characters supposed to develop, how are chapters supposed to be written, without something to build up to?

While the talent themselves (not to mention stage crew, etc.) will not be affected by two PPVs (which is a good thing for pressure and rest in general) surely two PPVs will ultimately add an expense factor to overall costs for the WWE; so, here’s hoping the brand extension gamble turns out to be a profitable one.

There’s also something to be said about wearing out the fans as well. Post-brand extension, (I’ll actually go as far to say as post-Wrestlemania season), has been great. With the exception of a couple of RAWs, I can honestly say I’ve been entertained during WWE programming, and I totally look forward to the beginning of the week. It feels like such a great time to be a WWE fan, and wrestling fan in general. Still, the new rosters, storylines, and new dynamics are still quite novel to audiences. What happens when things start lagging (if they ever do)? Two shows, back-to-back, with two PPVs, may fatigue fans. Relevance is key; compelling content needs to revolve; and there is no room for mistakes when it comes to creative.

Regardless, we are on the cusp of the first two brand extension PPVs, and while it may seem a bit surreal, the truth is with it all being so new, I’m going to cut the WWE some slack here, and acknowledge the fact that so much has been going on, figuring out the promotion of the separate PPVs may also be a new thing; and rather than two shows promoting one monthly PPV, the WWE has the obstacle of now promoting two PPVs, on each respect show – and the WWE Network for that matter. It’s a learning curve, one they may overcome, as the months go by.

Are two monthly PPVs too much? It’s hard to say right now … we may need a few more under our belt before we can really judge. Still, as long as the storylines are strong; and the talent shines, two won’t be too much, in the long run.

Share This on Facebook

Follow Wrestle Newz