As we approach the first pay-per-view of 2013, WWE may need to reconsider how to produce the best schedule for their monthly events.
In 2012, we witnessed a mere three weeks between pay-per-views and six weeks between others. In an ideal schedule, the time between events would be evenly distributed.
In an ideal WWE pay-per-view schedule, there would not be any forcing matches into specific stipulations. If the stipulation makes sense, then use it. If it does not make sense, don’t use it. It’s as simple as that.
With that said, here is my ideal 2013 calendar for WWE pay-per-views with an even five weeks between each event.
The first of the “Big 4” pay-per-views of the year, Royal Rumble is a must to stay on the calendar.
Traditionally, the Royal Rumble match consists of 30 WWE superstars in an over-the-top-rope challenge for the opportunity to challenge for a World Title at WrestleMania.
While this used to be a prize every superstar would strive for, there are better options now.
With the addition of the Money in the Bank briefcase, which would you rather have? A guaranteed shot at a World Title at WrestleMania or a guaranteed shot at a specific World Title at any time?
WWE should make winning the Royal Rumble more beneficial and enticing in 2013. For example, allow the winner to use their World Title opportunity at any pay-per-view of their choice in that calendar year.
Also, based on this ideal 2013 calendar, the Rumble winner wouldn’t have to wait as long to headline WrestleMania.
Exactly five weeks after Royal Rumble should be the grandest pay-per-view in all of WWE, WrestleMania.
Although this year it will be in April, it would make much more sense to have the show earlier.
Why would the Rumble winner want to wait over two months to get their chance at WrestleMania?
What would they even do in between that time?
In addition to the Royal Rumble winner facing whichever World Champion they choose, there should only be one Money in the Bank ladder match. I have never been a fan of two MITB matches.
The issue with MITB is that WWE has essentially guaranteed a new World Champion this way. Only one superstar has been unsuccessful in cashing in. By having two MITB winners each year, WWE is restricting the ability for World Champions to have a long reign.
Only one Money in the Bank ladder match began at WrestleMania and that is exactly how it should be.
From 1999-2009, WWE produced the Backlash pay-per-view, which allowed feuds from WrestleMania to come to a complete end.
This idea should be brought back on the day that WWE will be providing us with WrestleMania 29.
Although feuds lasting multiple pay-per-views is not the most creative idea, sometimes feuds in WWE end abruptly.
This is not a suggestion for another Sheamus-Alberto Del Rio style feud. It is more of a matter of storytelling.
This is how Backlash was used during the Attitude Era and it is how it should be used in the current era.
Cyber Sunday would benefit both WWE fans and management by taking RawActive matches and turning it into an entire pay-per-view.
For WWE fans, it is the opportunity to share their voice and opinion on who they want to see in a match or the type of match on pay-per-view. This event only lasted from 2004-2008, which is surprising given the fact that we see RawActive matches fairly often nowadays.
For WWE management, it is the opportunity to ignore the fans’ votes and rig the polls so they can put together the matches they wanted to book anyway.
Cyber Sunday would be the perfect comeback of any pay-per-view for the even more technology-based society we live in.
Another pay-per-view that would be most welcomed to return is the King of the Ring to its old spot in June.
From 1993 until 2002, the tournament to crown the King of WWE was held on pay-per-view. Years later, the tournament occurred on WWE TV.
Regardless, it was a tournament that, like the Royal Rumble and Money in the Bank, pushed a mid-card or up-and-coming superstar to the main event.
That is why the King of the Ring tournament and pay-per-view should add the stipulation that the winner also earns a World Title shot.
Different parameters should be given than the Royal Rumble and Money in the Bank, though. Perhaps the King of the Ring winner would get a World Title shot at the following pay-per-view, Bash at the Beach.
July is considered the summer and therefore, deserves a summer-themed pay-per-view, Bash at the Beach.
WWE would be silly to have the pay-per-view on the beach, but then again, it would certainly be interesting.
Could you imagine the ring surrounded by sand?
Fans sitting on the “floor” could sit on beach chairs, while the others in attendance would sit on bleachers.
As stated earlier, the winner of the King of the Ring tournament from one month (or five weeks) before would cash in their right to face whichever World Champion he chooses.
A falls-count-anywhere match would also be interesting and entertaining to watch on the beach.
Traditionally, WWE cannot get rid of the annual SummerSlam in August 2013. SummerSlam is the third pay-per-view of the “Big 4” in WWE, which means it must remain on the calendar.
While the beach idea was given to July’s pay-per-view, WWE always does a great job of setting the stage each year at SummerSlam.
There is no need to change or even tweak this annual event, WWE tends to put more focus on their “Big 4.”
Although Extreme Rules has been the pay-per-view that followed WrestleMania, with the addition of Backlash, this event had to be rescheduled.
While the hardcore style of the Attitude Era is much more rare in the current era of WWE, once a month would be just fine.
You will not find Tables, Ladders and Chairs on this ideal 2013 WWE PPV calendar, but you will at Extreme Rules. There is no point in giving TLC its own month when it fits the gimmick of Extreme Rules.
Every match would be contested under extreme rules, also known as no-disqualification match. However, this pay-per-view would be the perfect opportunity for tables, ladders and TLC matches.
Chairs matches are the least interesting type of wrestling match, so there is no need to make it a specialty.
The final of the “Big 4” is once again another pay-per-view that must stay for the ideal 2013 calendar. Although Survivor Series used to occur on the Wednesday night before Thanksgiving, it has evolved to the traditional Sunday night.
The Wednesday night before Thanksgiving would be more ideal considering no one would have work or school the next day.
However, the theory of having a pay-per-view evenly distributed every five weeks causes the event to occur at the beginning of November.
The only requirement for Survivor Series should be to have at least two, if not more, traditional five-on-five elimination matches.
This past year, we witnessed one announced traditional Survivor Series match and one unannounced match. WWE has the roster to have more five-on-five elimination matches, and they should take advantage of that.
The final pay-per-view of 2013 should be No Way Out, but not the same one you saw last year in New Jersey. This version of No Way Out would have multiple matches that fit the gimmick.
What types of matches challenge superstars to find a way out?
How about Elimination Chamber, Hell in a Cell, steel cage, inferno and casket matches?
Elimination Chamber and Hell in a Cell do not need to have their own month devoted to them. Elimination Chamber only has two matches that are contested in the structure, while there was literally only one match inside a Hell in a Cell at the 2012 event.
Give the Undertaker credit for a number of these types of matches, but No Way Out has the potential to be a high-quality event.
While you may think that some pay-per-views were either not included in the correct way or at all, this calendar fits the needs of WWE and their fans.
All of the events are evenly distributed throughout the calendar year. Now there will not be any excuse about there not being enough time to build to the next pay-per-view or there is too much time until the next PPV.
Also, any gimmick matches are during the appropriately named pay-per-view, such as Hell in a Cell matches occurring during the No Way Out pay-per-view.
While WWE has 11 or 12 pay-per-views each year, this ideal 2013 schedule only has 10. Will WWE lose money as a result of one or two fewer pay-per-views? Not if the remaining events’ buyrates increase due to booking and scheduling in a way that makes sense.
With that said, what would your ideal 2013 WWE pay-per-view calendar look like? What are your thoughts on this one? Please leave your comments and suggestions in the section below.
Seth M. Guttenplan is a WWE Featured Columnist for Bleacher Report, writer for CamelClutchBlog.com and host of OH YOU DIDN’T KNOW!? PWPRadio’s weekly radio show covering all wrestling news and rumors. To read more from Seth, follow him on Twitter (@sethgutt) and check out guttwrenchpowerblog.com.