Hell in a Cell Hell in the Cell 2014 Poster

Discussion in 'PPV's & Specials' started by Roadster, Sep 6, 2014.

  1. #1 Roadster, Sep 6, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2014

    idgaf, but I'm sure some people do.

  2. It doesn't look horrible, they've definitely had worse than that before.. as far as design goes I'd give it like a 6/10; it's almost too simple of a design though.
  3. WWE's cut so much from there budget, they can't get decent graphic designers it seems.
  4. So, not putting wrestlers on the poster is their thing now? Lame, Ambrose would look great on it.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. I don't care what most of the posters look like, honestly. Especially a B-PPV like this one.
  6. He would probably have to be my primary choice for the featured wrestler on the Hell in a Cell poster this year, if they would've used one.
  7. This PPV should be scrapped along with all the gay gimmick PPV names.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Royal Rumble and Elimination Chamber included? .. or is that why you included "GAY" before gimmick PPV names?
  9. I hope we will actually have at least 1 HIAC match. I agree, WWE need to drop gimmick PPV's if they make it so 25 mins of the 3 hours will actually be a hell in a cell.
  10. Just an average poster to me. Not bad, but not good. Nothing else to really say about it honestly.
  11. I was expecting the worst after this debacle

    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. lol, whoever did this must've been like 'hey, look what I can do in Paint in 5 minutes'
  13. What a poster. It's not like you want to put out something awesome and crazy, like having Ambrose on there, to really show how the PPV should be like. Oh wait. They just want a poster to symbolise their shitty B-PPVs.
  14. Yeah, Ambrose would be a perfect choice for HIAC poster.
  15. It's fine. PPV shouldn't even exist.
  16. Yeah, it's been shit for years and lost the gist of it. The PPV's name is HIAC, and usually only 1 match is held in it. WTF? Cancel HIAC and Battleground and even Payback. There's no need to be a PPV every month. I'm pretty sure it'd make the product better.
  17. Yeah. I'm not sure it would make the product better by default (hello TNA) but it's definitely a step in the right direction, but seriously, having a HIAC PPV in particular just sucks. Kills the stipulation.
  18. Sure, I totally agree with your post. And yeah, it doesn't mean that it'd make the product better by default... But, let's be honest, TNA's been kicking WWE's ass for the majority of 2014.

    I, for one, would not have a problem had they cut off PPVs like Payback, HIAC and Battleground.
  19. Problem with TNA is not really quality, it's how PPVs have affected quality. Theoretically they'd have longer builds, but they just build them on the last 4~3 weeks anyway (or in BFG's case don't build it at all), so the PPVs are not much for TNA, it's what I meant (also, until Slammi the product just sucked. Did get better afterwards).