darthsiddus2 Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 by Nick Paglino Sep 09, 2009 source: Wrestlezone Several readers have sent in word that WWE.com is now listing November's Survivor Series PPV as "Tables, Ladders and Chairs" and has Armageddon once again listed as the December PPV. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME *facepalms and shakes head* and there you have it folks the end of World Wrestling Entertainment..... why in gods name would you change your traditional november PPV Survivor series into something non elimination? WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH CREATIVE AND VINCE? do they just not care anymore what they force down our throats? holy god-damn! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Shape Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Nonono, it's a mistake, live events has it correct as do ticket sites w/TLC in December and no Armageddon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FINisher Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Armageddon is now being replaced by TLC PPV. It's a mistake, they can't be cancelling Survivor Series. It's up there with SummerSlam and Wrestlemania. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthsiddus2 Posted September 9, 2009 Author Share Posted September 9, 2009 if it is a mistake styles needs to fix it ASAP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Shape Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Just checked, and it's actually been fixed now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthsiddus2 Posted September 9, 2009 Author Share Posted September 9, 2009 good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FINisher Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 .. Someone of the staff must have been reading GDS board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Final Countdown Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Armageddon is now being replaced by TLC PPV. It's a mistake, they can't be cancelling Survivor Series. It's up there with SummerSlam and Wrestlemania. 1. Wrestlemania 2. Royal Rumble 3. Summerslam 4. Survivor Series (In my opinion, at least.) And am I the only one who thinks these "gimmick" PPVs are a terrible idea? Multiple TLC matches on the same show? Way to pull a TNA, and make your gimmick matches seem arbitrary and pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FINisher Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 1. Wrestlemania 2. Royal Rumble 3. Summerslam 4. Survivor Series (In my opinion, at least.) I think that that's the correct order that everyone can agree with. And am I the only one who thinks these "gimmick" PPVs are a terrible idea? Multiple TLC matches on the same show? Way to pull a TNA, and make your gimmick matches seem arbitrary and pointless. Yes. I really don't mind about TNA's Lockdown because, hey, it's just a cage, but TLC, Hell In A Cell and other extremeties like should NOT be in just one PPV during the year.. With the exception of Elimination Chamber perhaps since it was created for that one PPV long time ago. I'd like to see the occasional TLC or HIAC at Wrestlemania or Summerslam, or any other PPV. It really eats away from the hype and aura of those matchtypes, and it really burns the crowd during that PPV if they are seriously going to have just TLC matches troughout the card, or just in the three main matches (World title matches). And with WWE's PG rating, they won't be as good as we would hope for, altough CM Punk vs. Jeff Hardy TLC was actually quite good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistaken Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 TLC the PPV would have 1) Standard wrestling match to open dq do to use of chair 2) a hard core street fight, but a table a ladder and a chair get used, announcers hype how dangerous these things are, and how burtal tonight is going to be. 3) a ladder match, fairly low key and used simply for retrieval of womens title 4) a tables match (tag champs for this one return of the dudleys) 5) a chair on a pole match six man match for the intercontinental title 6) a TLC match for the world title, first man to do recover the chair from the pole, and smack his opponet, and put him through a table wins (order does not matter 7) other world title in a standard TLC match Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Shape Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Some interesting ideas there...I guess there is more potential for variation on this than meets the eye, but we'll see. It'll likely just be 3 main events, but I really hope one is a tag match. And for the HIAC PPV, my only wish is for another 6 man... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eisen-verse Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I've been a WWF/WWE fan since the early 90's (as I'm sure most of us have) and sadly, this occurence only spells more so that the WWE is continuing it's push away from the WWF. What I mean by that? The WWE isn't about tradition anymore... It isn't about Pro Wrestling really in anyway either. It's 100% about Cross-over Entertainment. Sure, adding this PPV over Survivor Series isn't really a blatant form of showing such... BUT... What it does show is that the WWE doesn't really believe that it's now tradition is important. The WWE, to me, is no longer wrestling. It's a weekly sitcom... A badly written one at that. ha. Before I get blamed as a WWE-hater, I'll also say that TNA is not, in anyway, better. It's really quite sad to see the state of Pro Wrestling right now... I don't wish for the 90's, like I use too, however, I do miss tradition... And REAL competition. Boo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I loved the WWF during the Attitude Era. LOVED it. Even when wrestlers couldn't wrestle, they gave it their all anyway, and were still entertaining. As for Traditionalism, I'm not big either for or against. My problem is WWE is trying to move away from WRESTLING. It might be "sports entertainment", but it's still has wrestling involved. If McMahon were to completely remove wrestling, even what's left, he would lose his fanbase, and he knows that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 1. Wrestlemania 2. Royal Rumble 3. Summerslam 4. Survivor Series I think that one and two is right because the Rumble sets up Wrestlemania. But to me Survivor Series is either on par with Summerslam or a notch better just because it was the second big event that Vince did. I remember when I heard about the first Survior Series I was excited, to me it is so cool and different. Remember when they used to do the five vs five tag team matches? That was awsome! Out of the four Summerslam is my least favorite (I think a lot to do with it was, as a kid it meant that school was right around the corner and I hated going back to school). However, that is just my opinion and it is neither right nor wrong. Well I do not miss the 1990's WWF at all! I miss the mid 1980's WWF, and I really miss the late 80's early 1990's WCW. I would love to see Steamboat vs Flair again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpion Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Its too bad they can't do a traditional survivor series anymore. It would be something different from the same old, same old. The first survivor series' were something special. Andre beating Hogan, all the tag teams together, the women's match. I could watch those over and over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoisonedSuperman Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Yeah but the survivor series isn't even the survivor series any more. I don't know when they changed it but back when it was 4 vs. 4 all the time it was an awesome pay perview. I wish since they bought WCW that they would steal the battle bowl concept. The people who survived the matches would go on to a battle royal at the end of the night and win some kind of prize. They could even steal teh whole idea of battle bowl and randomly select 4 vs 4 teams... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I wish since they bought WCW that they would steal the battle bowl concept. The people who survived the matches would go on to a battle royal at the end of the night and win some kind of prize. Yeah I would not mind seeing that either, the only reason why I do not think that we will see that is becasue it is a lot like the Royal Rumble. I personally would love to see War Games brought back. That was always a personal favorite of mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sebsy Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I don't think WWE will ever mess with the big four (Wrestlemania, Royal Rumble, Survivor Series & Summerslam) because they would be extremely stupid to do so. I'm not a fan of the way they seem to be replacing all the other ppv's with new things. I don't mind that No Way Out now has the double Elimination Chambers and Vengeance has become night of champions, but they seem to be changing the name of all the other ppvs and making them specific stipulation based, even if it is mainly for just the main event matches of the ppv. You've now got Breaking Point which is submision based, followed by Hell In A Cell which needs no explaining. After that comes Bragging rights which as far as I'm aware will be vote based begging me to ask why they didn't just leave it as Cyber Sunday, and now I find out they are renaming Armageddon to TLC: Tables, Ladders and Chairs, which I can only assume will see at least the two main world titles being contested in..... TLC matches. 2 HIAC matches in the same night seems odd. It's one of the big ones and whichever world title goes on second is not going to seem like such a big deal. The same goes for TLC too. All very odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Final Countdown Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I think that one and two is right because the Rumble sets up Wrestlemania. But to me Survivor Series is either on par with Summerslam or a notch better just because it was the second big event that Vince did. I remember when I heard about the first Survior Series I was excited, to me it is so cool and different. Remember when they used to do the five vs five tag team matches? That was awsome! Out of the four Summerslam is my least favorite (I think a lot to do with it was, as a kid it meant that school was right around the corner and I hated going back to school). However, that is just my opinion and it is neither right nor wrong. Well I do not miss the 1990's WWF at all! I miss the mid 1980's WWF, and I really miss the late 80's early 1990's WCW. I would love to see Steamboat vs Flair again... I definitely would have ranked Survivor Series ahead of Summerslam if it was still a team-based event. I loved that concept; it was something different and distinctive, which is what they're trying to replicate with all these gimmick PPVs. Except the old-school Survivor Series didn't feel tacked on and gimmicky, like TLC and HIAC-based events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.