Gimmick PPVs: For or Against?

[Dod Draper]

A couple of years back, WWE introduced a whole new PPV lineup. They spent the best part of 2009 changing existing PPVs, such as Backlash, Judgement Day, etc, to gimmick-themed ones, such as TLC, Hell in a Cell and Fatal 4 Way.

But which way do you prefer it?

Did you enjoy seeing TLC matches, for example, at different times throughout the year on any given PPV? Or do you prefer seeing different variations of TLC matches in one night?

Or do you just not care either way?

Thoughts?

 

[Deezy]

I hate them with a passion, gimmick matches should only be used sparingly and only to further a feud or end one. If it's being used too much, than it would water the damn matches down so much that they lose all meaning and just become a standard match. Hardcore fell to the wayside because it got watered down, and people weren't popping for it anymore. Overuse of gimmicks make them not special anymore. You would think a lifetime wrestling promoter like Vince McMahon would know and care about that.

 

[The_RB_Brand]

This is just a fact showing you that wwe creative is running out of ideas & taking gimmick matches & pushing them to their limits of over usage. I remember when the Elimination Chamber first came out. To me that was like better than Hell In A Cell match. It was new, different etc etc. Even after it being out for a couple years every time it did end up being used I just had to order that PPV event..Today how ever it's different. I could care less about an annul gimmick match ppv. It's ok to have a ppv like that once in a while..just not every year.