Wrestlemania 37 - April 10th & 11th

[Supremo]

Bayley having nothing to do is suspicious. Makes me wonder if she’ll host a Wrestlemania talk show segment where Becky Lynch returns. 

[CL Punk]

9 hours ago, Supremo said:

Bayley having nothing to do is suspicious. Makes me wonder if she’ll host a Wrestlemania talk show segment where Becky Lynch returns. 

They might put her in the multi women tag match with Carmella as they haven't said how many teams are in the Number One Contenders match or even what kind of a match it is.

[Yakashi]

11 hours ago, Supremo said:

Bayley having nothing to do is suspicious. Makes me wonder if she’ll host a Wrestlemania talk show segment where Becky Lynch returns. 

I don’t think it’s suspicious really. Each night was a woman’s title match that she doesn’t belong in. How often do they have random non title women’s matches on shows? If “deserves” is a word to use when talking about mania, then she had a great year last year and does deserve spot. But the way the company works with the women on PPV, I can’t see any space for her.

[Perry]

If Becky was going to return they wouldn't stick her in a match for the women's tag titles.  If anything they should have Bayley go out to the ring complaining about not having an opponent at WrestleMania so she challenges anyone in the locker room to a match and it's Becky who accepts.

As Supremo said, it's strange why they've kept Bayley off the card.

[DavidB6937]

I would've settled for Bayley vs Michael Cole.

[Perry]

4 minutes ago, Yakashi said:

I don’t think it’s suspicious really. Each night was a woman’s title match that she doesn’t belong in. How often do they have random non title women’s matches on shows? If “deserves” is a word to use when talking about mania, then she had a great year last year and does deserve spot. But the way the company works with the women on PPV, I can’t see any space for her.

The women's tag title match is rumoured for Night 2, so considering that there's only 6 matches on Night 1, I'd say there was plenty of space.

[Yakashi]

1 hour ago, Perry said:

The women's tag title match is rumoured for Night 2, so considering that there's only 6 matches on Night 1, I'd say there was plenty of space.

Then you haven’t seen how this company operates.

[Perry]

Yeah because they've never shoehorned in any matches for the hell of it before have they?  But then again, according to you it's only the 60 yr olds that would be bothered anyway.

[DavidB6937]

3 minutes ago, Perry said:

Yeah because they've never shoehorned in any matches for the hell of it before have they?  But then again, according to you it's only the 60 yr olds that would be bothered anyway.

60 year olds in India I believe.

[poetofthedeed]

Michael Cole is winning the 24/7 title on night 1 and bayley is taking it on night 2.

[Yakashi]

1 hour ago, Perry said:

Yeah because they've never shoehorned in any matches for the hell of it before have they?  But then again, according to you it's only the 60 yr olds that would be bothered anyway.

Of the last 20 WWE PPVs (not including multi women gimmick PPV matches obviously like rumbles or survivors) how many shows have had women’s matches that didn’t include a title? Also, glad to see there’s more than one deluded wwe fan here. Thought Repo was by himself.

Edited April 4, 2021 by Yakashi

[Perry]

I like how you've narrowed it down to just the last 2 yrs to make your point valid. We'll just forget about all of the random non title women's matches before 2019 then?

[Yakashi]

Fail.

Edited April 4, 2021 by Yakashi

[Perry]

So the rules about having non title women's matches on a PPV have changed within the last 5 yrs then?  Anyone know any indian pensioners that we could ask?

[Yakashi]

46 minutes ago, Perry said:

So the rules about having non title women's matches on a PPV have changed within the last 5 yrs then?  Anyone know any indian pensioners that we could ask?

Not quite sure what you mean. But you must realise that most shows only have women’s title matches on? I’ll concede that the 5 years thing is wrong because they used to run single brand PPVs for a short while before they shit the bed with that as usual because they couldn’t create stars or stories, and those shows were filled with all kinds of meaningless shit that was thrown together at the last minute for no reason. But once the brands came together, they stopped using women outside of title matches in the vast majority of shows. I’m not saying it’s right. But that’s what they do. Go look at the match cards.

Edit. I’ve had a look and since the brand split PPV shows ended 3 years ago I could find 2 (3 if you include the Saudi one I suppose but that was a PR exercise) matches that featured women that wasn’t for a title on a ppv. And one of those was a match where the winner got added to a title match if she won. Amd were looking at 40 to 50 shows here. 

Bayley should get a match on the show as she was amazing in 2020, but she has no story reason to have one. Who would it be with so it wouldn’t just be a meaningless thrown together match?

And if you’re upset that wwes average audience is late 50s and India is their number one market for YouTube views as they themselves reported, then I don’t know what to say. WWE fans are weird I guess.

 

 

Edited April 4, 2021 by Yakashi