WWE Survivor Series 2012: Is It Time to Retire This PPV or Reinvent It?

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories
WWE Survivor Series 2012: Is It Time to Retire This PPV or Reinvent It?
Photo courtesy of WWE

WWE Survivor Series is billed as one of the "Big 4" pay-per-view events that WWE puts on every year, but is it still one of their tent-pole events?

Survivor Series used to be all about the elimination matches where four to five superstars would team up to take on another team.

As a kid who grew up during the first boom of the PPV business, this became one of the most anticipated events of the year.

Nowadays, we are lucky if we get two elimination matches at the event, but one seems to be the number WWE is settling on for this year.

With this being the only event out of the main four to see a severe downgrade in quality over the years, it makes you wonder if WWE should just do away with this PPV.

Don't get me wrong, I love the traditional Survivor Series matches, and this is one of the only gimmick matches WWE has been able to use consistently over the years, but these days it seems like less of a priority.

WWE has a gigantic roster of men and women who could easily fill out several elimination matches, but the odds of a PPV with very few title matches and lots of team wrestling might not bring in the buys like it used to.

The first event featured only four matches, three of which were five-on-five matches and one being a 20-man tag team battle royal.

What would you rather see happen?

Submit Vote vote to see results

That's right, WWE had 10 teams that year in a single match, not to mention the 10 women who filled out one of the traditional matches. This event also had no title matches at all.

Shocking, isn't it?

An event with no title matches would sell about as bad as lead-based paint these days, but back in 1987, fans just wanted to watch wrestling however they could since there was a lot less TV time to go around.

2009 was the last time we saw more than one of these matches on the card, but one of them was a Divas elimination match that lasted 10 minutes, which is short for a 10-person match.

Basically, WWE is happy having just one of these matches on the card and still calling it Survivor Series to try and keep one of the longer-running traditions in the company going.

Even though this still makes for a decent show every year, it still seems like the elimination match should mean more, which gives me an idea.

WWE needs to make this match mean something more than just another win. They need to make it worth something we would think the wrestler would care about enough to try their best to win.

The Royal Rumble and Money in the Bank matches have defined prizes for the winner. Why not have one for the winners of the yearly Survivor Series match as well?

Title shots for the winners or even cash prizes would make the matches seem more important.

Here is an idea that would make the elimination match have more meaning every year.

Move Elimination Chamber to December and move TLC to February. That way the five-man team that wins the elimination match becomes the five guys who will compete for one of the titles with the champion inside the chamber at the following PPV.

Small changes like this one could end up making things a lot more interesting,

What do you think?

Should WWE do away with Survivor Series, keep it how it is or shake things up a bit by adding a prize for the winning team.

 

Thanks for reading and follow me on Twitter @BR_Doctor.

Load More Stories

Follow B/R on Facebook

WWE

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.