Sound Off Reactions On Dual-Branded WWE PPVs
Yesterday we asked your interest in WWE moving to (potentially longer) dual-branded PPVs. Also yesterday, WWE officially announced the move to combining Raw and SmackDown at PPVs, beginning at Backlash on May 6. While opinions varied quite a bit in regards to combining shows, some of you liked it (bigger stars, bigger show and less of a time gap), others didn't mind the previous format and are nervous about low/midcard talent getting pushed aside.
About the possible additional hour being added that was a resounding "No!" There is already viewer fatigue with the current hours of content WWE is putting out there. Another one isn't needed.
Thanks to everyone who responded, here are some of the top comments:
HoopDreams:
"Brand exclusive PPVs is an interesting idea, but it's never worked out all that well, even dating back to the early 2000s when they did it originally. PPVs or Network shows, whatever you wanna call it, makes more sense to have both brands representing, in my opinion. Stack as much talent as you can on a PPV special."
Mr. Wednesday:
"I'd rather have quality over quantity."
The Big Guy:
"Yes, because it gets rid of the two month gaps in between the PPVs for each brand. Look at SmackDown right now. It just drags on because there's so much time until Fastlane. The only issue is going to be if every title is defended, there's not much room for non title feuds."
Disappointed Sting:
"The number of PPVs or the brand involved isn't to blame. It's the horrible writing and storytelling."
bigpudgey:
"Really no reason to watch Raw or SmackDown anymore. With a 5 hour PPV every month they'll spend half of it recapping the feud that led up to each match."
New subscribers can sign up for the WWE Network by clicking here and get their first month for free, which includes Elimination Chamber on February 25 and Fastlane on March 11.