1. Welcome to the Wrestlingsmarks Forum!

    I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register

    Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board


    Dismiss Notice

The reason WWF/E dropped the Surviorseries elimination concept...

Discussion in 'General Wrestling' started by Keith, Oct 19, 2017.

  1. Keith

    Keith Well-Known Member

    Some have said that its because the format is just dated and wouldn't get over now. I think the real reason is because WWE don't have enough over stars to merit a whole PPV made up of it. If you look at the show's glory years from the late 80s-early 90s there were tones of big names, and fresh feuds, and pretty much everyone had a conflict. There was very little filler.

    Also does anyone agree with Bruce Pritchard that the 90 main event with the surviving faces VS. surviving heels should have been a battle royal with one man surviving overall. Think it would have been much better than what they did.
     
    Smarkslayer likes this.
  2. Deezy

    Deezy Well-Known Member

    brethart2
    newjack
    ddp
    therock
    nwo
    wolfpac
    They dropped the concept during the attitude era when everyone was over. It's simply who wants to watch a wrestling show where the matches are all the same? Kind of redundant and breeds viewer apathy.

    But the battle royal made up of surviving team members would actually make the old Mean Gene line of "Who will survive?" fit better.
     
    Smarkslayer likes this.
  3. Cwalker

    Cwalker Praying for a Peyton Royce leak

    randyorton
    romanreigns
    robertroode
    antoniocesaro
    ajstyles
    jaylethal
    The battle royal idea adds interesting aspects of story telling. Like do you save your partner in order to have a better chance to win the match or let him get eliminated in order to have a better chance to win the battle royal
     
    Keith and Smarkslayer like this.
  4. Admin Post
    Smarkslayer

    Smarkslayer Tomb Raider

    That battle royal finish sounds interesting. Reminds me of BattleBowl with a cooler twist.

    I agree @Cwalker. There would be all kinds of stories they could tell with that and really play on the Survivor name.
     
  5. Keith

    Keith Well-Known Member

    Everyone was over for a very brief spell during the Attitude Era [not quite everyone]. Which was its problem. It was such a flesh in the pan. You don't drop a whole concept that was proven money because of that.

    Great point. Part of Bruce's point too was that the way they did it was just a predictable way to have the predictable babyface celebration with Hogan and Warrior. It was odd booking having so many heels oppose the faces too.
     
  6. Deezy

    Deezy Well-Known Member

    brethart2
    newjack
    ddp
    therock
    nwo
    wolfpac
    I think you're looking at the Hogan era with rose colored glasses. Just like the attitude era, only a hand select few kept themselves relevant after it.

    It still doesn't mean the same gimmick match should be every match for an entire ppv. It's redundant.
     
    Smarkslayer likes this.
  7. Admin Post
    Smarkslayer

    Smarkslayer Tomb Raider

    People complain about two Hell in a Cells and yet some of these same people want 6-8 elimination tags?

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page