WWE: Bad Economy = Less Pay Per Views?

jason savageCorrespondent INovember 30, 2008

I have thought for a long time the WWE has too many PPV's. One a month at $40 a pop!

Now with the economy in a downturn, I think it would be a great time to cut out some of the "less desirable" ones and go back to the big names!

I'm sure the WWE won't do it, but not only would it help WWE fans in their wallets, it would also help story lines from being so rushed and also make the PPV events seem "BIGGER" and more important, which would lead to more PPV buys and that would help the WWE. Seems beneficial to all.

"Back in the day" the then WWF had 4 big shows a year, and WCW had a few as well including Starrcade, Great American Bash, SuperBrawl, and Halloween Havoc.

It was "must see TV" and each of these events had the importance of an NFL playoff game and a certain buzz about them. Wouldn't it be nice to get that buzz back?

I propose six PPV's a year, something like this...

Jan = Royal Rumble

March = WrestleMania

May = Great American Bash

July = Summer Slam

Sept = Cyber Sunday

Nov = either Survivor Series or the return of Starrcade!

These shows could be huge and perhaps more than just WrestleMania could be held in a stadium!

Imagine The Great American Bash at the Georgia Dome or Summer Slam at the new Yankee Stadium, each in front over over 60,000 fans!

I am sure I am just dreaming, but there is no better time than the present to give this a shot in my opinion.

In the past dropping the number of pay per views in a year may have seemed like some sort of failure by the WWE. Right now however, it just makes good economic sense and I think the result will be a better WWE product!