I might as well start with the obvious statement...there's no such thing as a 'perfect' wrestling PPV. Even before the event happens, the diverse preferences of fans guarantees that one or more matches will be an ideal opportunity for a viewer to take onboard more fluids or get rid of some taken earlier. Also, the best preparation in the world can't save a match from a blown spot or a premature finish due to an injury (what's known as a 'Mark Henry special') so the likelihood of getting from pyro to logo with nothing but five-star quality is virtually nil. Having said that, it is possible to format a supercard on paper, highlighting the match types that should be filled and putting them in an order that creates a sort of journey rather than just a random collection of spots and finishes. This isn't meant to be a template, just some structural ideas.
One of the problems with an opening match is that you are dealing with a cold crowd, no matter how good the warm up matches were before the show. This means that there shouldn't be a huge emotional requirement going into the contest and the pacing should be kept lively throughout. Historically, the tag team division has been used in this position because the frequent tags and combination moves it usually delivers are ideally suited for this environment and most of the tag team wrestlers are over enough that they are popular but not so much that they seem wasted so early in the card. The best example I can think of is The Rockers/Orient Express match from Wrestlemania 7 which had no build up before the show and relied on its speed and athleticism to get the crowd's vocal chords working with nothing before it. Anything longer than fifteen minutes will seem protracted and probably best not to end with an inconclusive ending (it's cheap and been done before...a bit like Torrie Wilson).
One match down and we now need to increase the gravitas but not so much that small children are crying in the aisles. Time for a US/IC title match (either one will suffice). A match involving stars that are over but only from the middle of the card with the onus still on wrestling ability so it doesn't drain the audience in the first hour of the show. Though it might seem extraneous, I'd also like to include a valet or manager in the action simply because it's a useful tool in changing the momentum of the contest quickly without having to sell a huge bump or spill onto the floor. The IC title match from Summerslam 1991 with Bret Hart and Mr Perfect (w/ Coach) springs to mind because they were two of the top wrestlers in the promotion at the time and could rely on good support/heat from the fans. At this point it is advisable to stay away from weaponry or extended brawling because the crowd will become desensitised to hardcore antics if overused. The mid-card should be packed with youthful athletes that are desperate for PPV exposure and have a hunger to please an audience in the hope that management is paying attention backstage (and not pissing about enforcing the dress-code). With plenty of recovery time ahead, fans should be into it enough that the first major heat/pop moment could be unleashed but anything stronger than a belt switch or a beat-down would need resetting afterwards.
I have personally failed to find a conclusion to any gimmick match as satisfactory as a pinfall or a submission (not unless you're a massive fan of hole-filling or cage-climbing) but the response-inducing spots they contain more than offset the anticlimax and make them perfect fodder for the turn of the second hour. As with most things that are pitched at the public, simplicity is the key. There's no need to blind fans with secondary or tertiary ramifications or consecutive rule requirements. The best gimmick matches are sold on the strength of vicarious violence and the winning moment and I see little to suggest it needs updating or confusing. It should also be noted that most items in everyday usage (tables, ladders, chairs) seemingly take on a sinister tone when involved in a gimmick match (though I've yet to discover a hardware store that sells baseball bats wrapped in barbed wire). I'm not a fan of under-selling the effect of bumps just to keep the match exciting so I'd rather see a slower pace after the ten-minute mark and rebuild to the finish at twenty or thirty minutes. Wrestling isn't meant to be non-stop action (why does that sound familiar?). Lastly on this subject, a 'Hell in a cell' match doesn't suck just because no one jumps off the top of the cell. If that's all you're looking for, why not just watch the Undertaker/Mankind match again?
A PPV card isn't a succession of matches listed in order of importance. Just like a rollercoaster, it needs to set people up for a rush and then relax them afterwards. Love them, hate them or use them as a viable substitute for Internet porn, diva contests fulfil a useful role on PPV television. Five minutes of salacious, wrestling-free 'entertainment' that appeals to the basest intellect (or MEN as we're otherwise known) and creates a break from the 'sport'. From an advertising point of view, it's wise to promote something that has the greatest potential for accidental exposure (though preparation and a yard of tit-tape should ensure it never does) and anything ending in an audience 'vote' should be avoided because you will ultimately disappoint some of the people all of the time. If, as is the case at time of writing, a solid match can be derived from the women's division then obviously that should be included instead (albeit in the first hour) but the non-wrestling segment could still be filled. An in-ring interview or an angle involving two wrestlers who were too early in their feud to make it onto this show but could use the segment as a build for next month would be a sound move. Regardless of the subject matter, it should be accorded the same care and attention given to the matches, contain at least one superstar who is over with the fans and can talk for five minutes and have a logical start, middle and an end. And preferably nothing to do with breaking someone's patented, yet deeply dull, hold.
The end of the next contest will more than likely fall just after the second-hour mark so this could be the time for a grudge match. I'd hold off with the chairs and tables because it can be sold solely on emotion and energy but I would apply some variation on the 'no DQ' format. Something that encourages brawling and repeated exchanges at ringside without garnering those pointless “get it back in the ring” protestations from the official. Plus, seeing as the crowd has hopefully been investing in the feud during the build up, this is the ideal place for submission holds. Not so much because the match needs slowing down at any point but because those moments when an outstretched hand is straining to reach the bottom rope carry so much more life when fans are into the emotion of a storyline and not just the result. As the win or the loss will probably be taken more personally by the crowd than with any other match, the sense of injustice associated with a tainted result works well in grudge matches (even if it has been overused recently on weekly television). Fans want to see...what they want to see (if you see what I mean) but it is vital when building anticipation that fans are predominantly force-fed what they DON'T want to see. It took WWE a while to figure that out with regard to John Cena. His feuds with Jericho and Angle didn't compare to his more recent feuds with Edge and Umaga, mainly because the first two were done just to please his fans. I digress. By their very nature, grudge matches succeed when a crowd buys into the work and modern audiences make that increasingly harder. And that's a shame.
Whether it's the World title or the WWE championship, the top prize should always finish the PPV. Even if the title has been put on someone who is technically superior but lacks charisma or who is very over but not gifted with ability, neither changes the fact that the title is more important than any individual wrestler or an unmissable 'dream match' opportunity. If it is necessary to reduce the time given to a main event to paper over the cracks in a champion's armoury then at least book the match tightly so there are as few periods of confused lethargy as possible and include some memorable spots to shake the crowd out of any potential apathy. I know that run-ins, especially during title matches, are as popular as Snitsky in a Mosque but the only time I would pointedly advise against them being used is if the match is sold on the technical talents of the protagonists otherwise it could spoil the 'purity' of the contest for fans. The standard result of a PPV main event should be a clean win. I've nothing against unsatisfactory finishes because, with a WWE supercard every month thesedays and feuds sometimes lasting up to a year, it is a requirement that audiences are occasionally given the bait as opposed to the payoff. However, care should be taken to give the crowd something other than silence, even if it is just disgruntled annoyance. As the signature match on the show, it should receive the biggest build up in the weeks that precede it but it should never be assumed that the attachment of the belt alone is enough to make it interesting when placed in context with the feud. A six-point feud could run like this...the tease, the first encounter, the revenge match, the rubber match, the gimmick match and then the final meeting. Not exactly cutting edge structuring but the implication that chapters have been reached during the story can make it seem less of a flatline from beginning to end.
Ultimately, if there is a good reason to do something then there is an equally good reason to do the complete opposite, if only because it isn't expected. Even though I can't think of one before or imagine it ever being the case, I would hope that if two wrestlers from the Cruiserweight or the Women's divisions were super-over and could assemble a stellar contest then WWE management might consider putting them in the semi-final position on the card and giving them longer than the usual lower-tier eight PPV minutes. Maybe I shouldn't hold my breath waiting for that one. Variations on a theme only work because they are not the norm and sometimes returning to some original basic concepts can shake up a product as much as any flavour of the month booking style. I'd like to think that creating a three-hour show is more than mere writing by numbers, for no other reason than it would be a major concern if fans paid good money to see the same ideas twelve times a year. There is a reason why Vince appears more and more keen to dilute his creative departments with old school talent and experienced workers (aside from mentoring his young troops) and the decision has been bearing fruit in recent weeks and months. I hope he's finally realising that it doesn't matter if it's a work/shoot or if it looks like a reality show...as long as it's entertaining. This is 'sports-entertainment' after all.
Lee
Copyright © 2005; TheWrestlingVoice.com & Douglas Nunnally.
All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer & Privacy Statement
| What Did You Think About WWE Backlash 2008? |
|
|