A Question of Importance: The Summerslam Debate

[Daria 2.0]

The 25th annual Summerslam PPV has come to a close and some fans have mixed thoughts on the overall presentation of the show.

This column is not about the in-ring quality or whether or not the fans in the arena or at home were truly invested in the action. This is a matter of where Summerslam ranks on the totem pole when it comes to major PPV events during the calendar year.

WWE and TNA each have three to four major PPVs that they consider to be the crown jewels of their companies. TNA has Lockdown, Slammiversary, and Bound for Glory. An argument can be made for Destination X being a major show going forward since the reigning X Division champion can relinquish his title and go after the TNA Championship. If TNA actually remembers this stipulation one year from now, this PPV could become one of the "Big Four" for the promotion.

WWE's "Big Four" consists of the Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam, and Survivor Series. Survivor Series was on the future endeavors list a couple of year ago when the PPV buyrate came in at lower than expected numbers. Vince McMahon thought that Survivor Series was past its prime and that it should be replaced with another show. It's still around because it continues to carry name value despite not making a significant difference financially.

Wrestlemania is by far the biggest show of the year from an economical standpoint. Royal Rumble is second in terms of PPV buys. However, some fans consider Summerslam to be the number two show of the year because of the hype and promotion that comes with it. Is this ideology justified or does WWE make it a bigger event than it actually is?

Over the past four years, Summerslam has taken place in Los Angeles, California. It is the perfect place for WWE to make connections in Hollywood and get mainstream press. The company requires all of the wrestlers to fly to LA for the entire week to participate in activities related to the PPV even if they are not scheduled to be on the card. This "all hands on deck" mentality is very similar to Wrestlemania week in the host city.

Also, they have added WWE Fan Axxess to the Summerslam festivities in recent years to give the show a Wrestlemania touch. The company also does community outreach initiatives and red carpet events that borrow from the 'Mania formula to make Summerslam feel like a special show that should not be missed.

If WWE makes Summerslam feel like a big show, should it be treated as such in the eyes of the fans? The answer is yes. When a PPV is presented as a larger than life event, those expectations must be met because they have created an atmosphere of excitement that is rarely felt outside of Wrestlemania season. If they have done a good job promoting and hyping a show, then fans have every right to expect that they are paying for a good PPV.

The hype for this year's show was underwhelming. The major selling point was the Brock Lesnar and Triple H match. WWE bombarded fans with endless video packages hyping the feud, but something always felt missing when it came to the core purpose of the match. Triple H not selling his broken arm didn't help matters. Inserting Stephanie McMahon, Paul Heyman, and Shawn Michaels helped enhance the match in some ways, but something still didn't feel special for some reason.

Brock Lesnar and John Cena's epic match at Extreme Rules had a defined purpose. Lesnar's intention was to bring legitimacy to WWE. Cena's job was to counter that notion and prove why he is the top draw in the company today. It was an all out fight that was bloody, violent, and physical. Lesnar lost the match which might have caused him to lose a bit of his luster when it came to his mystic of being an ass kicking machine.

This loss could have damaged the allure of seeing Lesnar facing Triple H because nothing was truly at stake. An argument could have been made that both men needed to prove to themselves that they still had it when they both lost important matches at Wrestlemania and Extreme Rules. A large logic hole that has not been addressed was the lawsuits WWE were facing at the hands of both Lesnar and Heyman. At one point, Heyman proclaimed that if he and his client won their respective cases, they could end up running WWE. That could have been an excellent stipulation to add to the match that truly needed a fire lit under its ass. The winner gets to run the day-to-day operations of WWE. Having Heyman in an authority figure position would have worked perfectly because he is one of the best heels and talkers in the business. The options with Heyman in charge would have been endless.

Summerslam would have been the perfect venue to showcase a match with a defined purpose for taking place and exemplified the hype given for this show. WWE treats the annual summer event as if it is in the same league as Wrestlemania. In terms of hype, that is true. But when it comes to delivering a card living up to those expectations, they dropped the ball this year.

The Royal Rumble is still considered an important show in terms of interest and PPV buys because fans are guaranteed to see a Rumble match with a winner that receives a golden ticket straight to Wrestlemania. The prestige of winning the Royal Rumble has decreased over the past several years because wrestlers still have a chance to be in the WWE and World title picture at Elimination Chamber the following month. Also, the Rumble winner is not in the main event at Wrestlemania. Over the past two years, the winner has opened the show and the last four Rumble winners lost outright before Sheamus broke the losing streak at Wrestlemania 28.

Despite these facts, the Royal Rumble still matters to a lot of fans despite the lack of fanfare and hype that goes along with it. There is no clear indication of how long this trend will continue, but sometimes a definitive purpose for a match taking place outweighs the glitz and glamour WWE tries to bestow on Summerslam because it has not proven its merit from a business or in-ring standpoint in recent years. Granted, Summerslam has provided a number of great moments and matches over the past quarter century. However, it was never pushed as a major event prior to WWE taking its talents to Hollywood to promote their company under the brightest of lights.

Summerslam could replace the Royal Rumble as the second biggest show of the year in the future. However, WWE has to start treating “the biggest party of the summer” as not only a way to promote their brand, but create compelling feuds that can reasonably justify the hype they created in the first place.

[LAVAJava]

Good post my friend.

Summerslam WAS the second biggest event of the year for many years, I think it's only in the last few years- since 2008- that it has dropped off the pace and fell behind Royal Rumble. The Royal Rumble Match is the single greatest match concept that WWE has ever produced, bar none, and the allure of that match alone sells the Rumble to 500,000 odd buys every year, the under card is irrelevant (that said, expect a minor increase this year thanks to The Rock's presence).

The problem with Summerslam the last few years is in the booking of the actual show, not as much the promotion or hype prior to the event. I can understand why they do it in LA every year for now as it's a haven for celebrities and publicity that they can easily attach to the event but I do think the repetitive nature of the LA Summerslams has led to a stagnation of the actual card. Look at the last 4 Summerslams and think of the WWE Title matches (Orton v Cena, Sheamus v Orton, Punk v Cena and Punk v Cena v Big Show): only 1 of those matches (Punk v Cena) was either, a) the main event or b) any good. Orton v Cena and Sheamus v Orton were both BS DQ finishes and the triple threat was also a dusty restart and a disappointment and that is incarnate of the Summerslam cards on a whole.

Summerslam doesn't have the luxury of Royal Rumble, Elimination Chamber or even Survivor Series in having a particular match or theme that you only see at that event every year. To make up for it, the Summerslams of old either made use of Wrestlemania level star power main events (e.g. 2005, 2008) or a full card stacked with big feuds and matches (2002, 2004). They used the former this year and whether Lesnar v HHH alone was enough to sell the event to 450,000+ buys or not we'll see but unlike 2005 or 2008 when the top matches were supplemented by a strong under-card, this year we didn't have that.

I believe WWE has taken to the idea that Summerslam sells itself now, similar to 'Mania and thus, we often see bigger matches or big moments, like title changes, postponed until the following PPVs to try and boost their buyrates. A decent business strategy but it hurts Summerslam- this year, like 2010 and 2009 to a lesser degree suffered from an under-card where next to nothing happened- in a year's time what are we going to remember about Summerslam 2012? It took me a moment to have to think about it to recall anything other than the Nexus angle from 2010. Last year, what else was worthy of being remembered other than the two world title matches?

Summerslam needs a good card top-to-bottom to make up for the lack of a specialty match- look at the best Summerslams in history- 2002, 2000, 2003- 1998 to a lesser extent- all of them had strong cards top to bottom with memorable moments. The LA Summerslams have not had these and until they do, the event will remain firmly planted in my mind behind Royal Rumble as the #3 event of the year.