WWE Needs An Offseason

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Neptune, Mar 1, 2016.

  1. I thought this was interesting and in long run could help them refresh the product and also give their wrestlers a break which will allow for healing time and further prevent injuries from being over worked. Share your thoughts.

    How can they at least lessen the odds of injuries forcing them into another mad scramble in the future?
    Create a WWE offseason.

    The ideal, from an injuries standpoint, would be to give the entire company three months off to rest and recuperate after WrestleMania, which these days serves as the professional wrestling equivalent to a season finale. This would follow the lead of both “real” sports and TV shows, which all take breaks in between seasons. Unfortunately, regardless of the broken bones and concussions and missing stars on the cards, it's difficult to imagine a scenario where WWE would ever consider this because there is simply too much money in a year-long schedule. Especially as WWE turns their sights on expanding further into new territories (Japan, India, the Middle East, and eventually China). Additionally, WrestleMania usually builds momentum for a few new stars every year, and stopping work completely for three months might derail that. So that’s out.

    So let's consider an offseason that gives all of the main event-level talent three months off, allowing midcard stalwarts (the Dolph Ziggler/Neville/Rusev tier of the world) a quarter of the year to run the show. This would be a good time to highlight the secondary titles, as well; have the Intercontinental Championship function as your de facto world title for three months, and elevate some new talent so that if an injury does happen, you have a deeper roster to compensate.

    The downside? A lot of WWE's business is heavily driven by top-level talents, especially at the house show circuit. Even losing John Cena by himself sends WWE into panic mode; now add Roman Reigns, Dean Ambrose, Seth Rollins, et al to that list and it again seems unlikely Vince McMahon and company would leave WWE's fortune up to the mid-range wrestlers. So, with all that we know—what's the long-term solution?

    Rotate the wrestlers.

    Let’s break it down: If WWE gave every wrestler a mandated three-month vacation every 18 months or so, but staggered them just right so that it’s never missing an entire chunk of the top-tier talent, they would be well on their way to finally addressing the injury issue. The benefits become clear immediately: less work on wrestlers allows them to heal up and rest so that they not only can perform for longer, but they can perform at a higher intensity. Think of it as getting a tune-up for a sports cars. Additionally, time off keeps superstars fresh (looking your way, Roman) and builds fan anticipation for their return—you’d be getting return pops from the crowd on the regular when a fan favorite returns.

    A vacation would also allow wrestlers to tweak their characters, which would help those floundering between pointless back-and-forth heel and face turns ("welllll it’s the Big Show"). Finally, it would allow WWE to use the deep roster that they have accumulated by pushing everyone up one peg when a main event talent is resting; as an example, if Roman Reigns were to take a break, you move Dean Ambrose into his slot, Kalisto into Dean Ambrose’s, Neville into Kalisto’s, etc. It would allow fans to connect with some hidden gems on the roster while bubbling the fringe talent to rise into the next tier of stardom. Win-win for everyone.

    Of course, there are other solutions: lessen the house show workload, lower the duration of Raw back to two hours, perhaps cut out a third of the PPVs (this would actually help Creative a lot too, but that’s a story for another day). None of these seem very likely, though, as they clearly would hurt WWE’s bottom line. Instead, by rotating talent, WWE could kill any number of birds with one stone. Not only would the injuries slow down, but the talent on the roster top to bottom would get more of a spotlight. Who knows? You could find the next Daniel Bryan or CM Punk if you give young wrestlers time and quality creative instead of five-minute matches on SmackDown.

    And if you don't find that next star? Well, with some fresher bodies, at least you don’t have to rely on 46-year-old non-wrestlers to draw an audience for your biggest show of the year.


    SOURCE
     
  2. It might be difficult for them to explain that to the audience since they've never had one before. WWE has a lot of problems right now but making money is not one of them, that's all they seem to care about and not putting on the best product they can.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. Seems like they Walmarted us. They got so big and consumed all other competition now we, "the consumers", don't matter. They know most of the people who complain will be back simply because there is not much else out there to enjoy. It sucks. I have no problem walking away if I have to. I spent many years not watching. I will try again to watch Raw after WM but I wont be until then.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. WWE will never stop going full time because they are the top organization in the world and they are always going to have people willing to wrestle multiple times a week, every week,
     
  5. An offseason would be sweet, but it's likely never going to happen.

    Although, easing up on the house shows a little bit could benefit the guys and gals, as the injuries wouldn't happen as frequently (or at least I'd like to think so) as they have in 2015.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. They should have a 5 year off season.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Creative Creative x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. I don't see this ever happening under Vince's watch (HHH might experiment with it, though.) I'm also skeptical of how effective it would be. While it would certainly benefit the talent a great deal to give them some extended time off to rest their bodies and prevent everyone from becoming so physically and mentally burned out all the time, you could just as well argue that lessening the number of house shows they do could accomplish the very same thing, albeit in a more sporadic way. People claim that taking even just a few months off could cause a noticeable upswing in ratings, buy rates, merchandise sales, etc. when everything resumes, but that is only an assumption, by no means is it a guarantee.
     
  8. The only off season in pro wrestling history was when TNA left Spike, right?

    Granted it's apples to oranges but they never recovered from that. (Timing didn't help)