CAREBEAR LUVVA Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 From F4W: Â The WWE announced at the show tonight in San Antonio that they would be coming back on October 23 for a PPV called Uprising. The late October PPV had been called Bragging Rights with the theme of a Raw vs. Smackdown main event. The concept had been weak the year before, but dropped off 32% the second time because it came the day after the Brock Lesnar vs. Cain Velasquez fight. Â I always quite enjoyed the idea of Bragging Rights but they never really seemed to use it as well as they could have done. Be interesting to see if the new PPV has got a theme - with a name like Uprising it'd be good if they used it to do something with the lower/mid-card folks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstar69 Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 From F4W:Â The WWE announced at the show tonight in San Antonio that they would be coming back on October 23 for a PPV called Uprising. The late October PPV had been called Bragging Rights with the theme of a Raw vs. Smackdown main event. The concept had been weak the year before, but dropped off 32% the second time because it came the day after the Brock Lesnar vs. Cain Velasquez fight. Â I always quite enjoyed the idea of Bragging Rights but they never really seemed to use it as well as they could have done. Be interesting to see if the new PPV has got a theme - with a name like Uprising it'd be good if they used it to do something with the lower/mid-card folks... so does this mean Raw will never be able to get braggin rights back since they lost two times on the trot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baz Windham Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 It always amazes me that they assume a concept is weak and that's the reason it did poorly, rather than that they do a half-arsed job of building up what it is a good idea. The late October PPV gets 2/3 weeks build, which is bad enough, but then they do nothing with the "Bragging Rights" afterwards. So yeah the way they have presented it it's a shit concept that means nothing but it could have been a lot more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ Impact Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 They should have/do a 'bragging rights' match at Survivor Series have 5 vs 5 with World & WWE champs as captains but build it up not just throw it together, not sure what they could win though?? Â With having the match at Series it gives the title scene a wee break and could plant a few seeds for inter brand matches at Mania. Â WWE Uprising is a cool name though (could of been a name for a Nexus takeover PPV nWo style) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ColinBollocks Posted May 17, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted May 17, 2011 It always amazes me that they assume a concept is weak and that's the reason it did poorly, rather than that they do a half-arsed job of building up what it is a good idea. The late October PPV gets 2/3 weeks build, which is bad enough, but then they do nothing with the "Bragging Rights" afterwards. So yeah the way they have presented it it's a shit concept that means nothing but it could have been a lot more. The concept doesn't work though. Not with the way WWE treats the brand split. It's clear they have no desire to protect and honour the brand split it, so it's pointless keeping a PPV that always has a plastic (even by WWE standards) build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reznor Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Bragging Rights is a terrible name, uprising is a lot better. Â Would've been better still if they'd just went with No Mercy though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 It always amazes me that they assume a concept is weak and that's the reason it did poorly, rather than that they do a half-arsed job of building up what it is a good idea. The late October PPV gets 2/3 weeks build, which is bad enough, but then they do nothing with the "Bragging Rights" afterwards. So yeah the way they have presented it it's a shit concept that means nothing but it could have been a lot more. The concept doesn't work though. Not with the way WWE treats the brand split. It's clear they have no desire to protect and honour the brand split it, so it's pointless keeping a PPV that always has a plastic (even by WWE standards) build. It would still be a stupid concept, regardless of how well the brand split was "treated," because of the personal nature of wrestling feuds. "You raped my wife in August and we've been trying to kill each other for months, but it's the end of October now. We have to unite against the wrestlers from our company who work on another day of the week!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Four Horsemen Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Hopefully this may allow the addition of the War Games PPV option that was on the WWE questionnaire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Atkins Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 A War Games PPV would be a disaster. The "themed" PPVs are a terrible idea, they need to get rid of them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reznor Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 A War Games PPV would be a disaster. The "themed" PPVs are a terrible idea, they need to get rid of them! Royal Rumble? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffbag Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Bragging Rights is a terrible name, uprising is a lot better. Â Why is it? - the concept of a brand v brand PPV was something different from all the other ones. The name actually lent something to the PPV. While its true that something more should be done with the concpet after for the winners. Â What does uprising signify? rising of midcarders? doubtful. Bet you 10 bob Randy Orton or John Cena will be in the main event for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Hopefully this may allow the addition of the War Games PPV option that was on the WWE questionnaire. Awful idea, because of the pay-per-view that follows. "Welcome to Survivor Series, where the teams that fought in big exciting cage matches three weeks ago at War Games, now compete in the bog-standard elimination tag matches you've not found exciting for twenty years!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euanconway Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 It would be better if they just got rid of the late October PPV altogether to give proper build up to Survivor Series which is after all ment to be one of the big 4 (although its been treated worse than some regular PPVs recently). They can easily matches that actually mean something when we get to the PPV 6 wks later. We all know thats not going to happen though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merzbow Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Hopefully this may allow the addition of the War Games PPV option that was on the WWE questionnaire. Â Apparently the Elimination Chamber was going to be War Games or something like Trips asked Vince about it but as usual Vince wanted his own idea and not something from WCW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted May 17, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted May 17, 2011 A War Games PPV would be a disaster. The "themed" PPVs are a terrible idea, they need to get rid of them! This is true. War games (like HIAC) works as a blow off match. It's a waste of the gimmick to shoe-horn something into it once a year. Â Hopefully this may allow the addition of the War Games PPV option that was on the WWE questionnaire. Awful idea, because of the pay-per-view that follows. "Welcome to Survivor Series, where the teams that fought in big exciting cage matches three weeks ago at War Games, now compete in the bog-standard elimination tag matches you've not found exciting for twenty years!" Very good. Â Hopefully this may allow the addition of the War Games PPV option that was on the WWE questionnaire. Â Apparently the Elimination Chamber was going to be War Games or something like Trips asked Vince about it but as usual Vince wanted his own idea and not something from WCW. They aren't really the same thing. Besides, EC was a pretty great creation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.