Royal Rumble, Jan. 28 – Philadelphia

Elimination Chamber, Feb. 25 – Las Vegas (Raw)

Fastlane, Mar. 11 – Columbus, OH (SmackDown)

WrestleMania, April, 8 – New Orleans

Backlash, May, 6 – Newark (Raw)

Payback, May 27 – Baltimore (SmackDown)

Money in The Bank, June, 17 – Chicago

Battleground, July 15 – Pittsburgh (Raw)

SummerSlam, Aug. 19 – Brooklyn

Extreme Rules, Sept. 16 – San Antonio (Raw)

Hell in a Cell, Sept. 30 – Nashville (SmackDown)

TLC, Oct. 21 – Boston (Raw)

Survivor Series, Nov. 18 – Los Angeles

Clash of Champions, Dec. 16 – San Jose, CA (SmackDown)


I'm a little annoyed that SD is losing MITB, which will now be co-branded. It just means Raw has more solo ppvs than SD.

Me and the hubby are probably getting tickets to WWE Fast lane here in Ohio.

It's easier to book MITB as cobranded that way they have an out if they change their minds. That said... the MITB thing is such a snoozefest to me. Hopefully they at least keep the women's portion this year.

Nov 22, 2017 22:12:03 GMT @ness said:

It's easier to book MITB as cobranded that way they have an out if they change their minds. That said... the MITB thing is such a snoozefest to me. Hopefully they at least keep the women's portion this year.

I have a feeling they co-branded the MITB PPV to get rid of the women's match. I think they fucked themselves big time having Ellsworth win the match (huge blowback on social media for that) and putting the briefcase on Carmella (It's literally all she has going for her and when she loses it she'll be done).

I hope I'm wrong about it though. I wanted the women's match to succeed, they just booked it so, so badly. And now they'll write it off because of their own mistakes. I just can't see 4 MITB matches happening at the PPV.

It's funny how RAW has one extra pay-per-view over Smackdown based on this schedule, which enforces the B-show effect. They should make that the Survivor Series stipulation. THE BRAND WHO REIGNS SUPREME GETS AN EXTRA PAY-PER-VIEW NEXT YEAR~~~!!! And extra PPV paydays for the roster! YAY~!

Nov 23, 2017 5:00:04 GMT Kaye88 said:

It's funny how RAW has one extra pay-per-view over Smackdown based on this schedule, which enforces the B-show effect. They should make that the Survivor Series stipulation. THE BRAND WHO REIGNS SUPREME GETS AN EXTRA PAY-PER-VIEW NEXT YEAR~~~!!! And extra PPV paydays for the roster! YAY~!

Raw will still always reign supreme. Vince doesn't care for SD

Fourteen PPVs a year is ridiculous. Might as well start calling them 4 hour Raws and 4 hour Smackdowns.

Nov 23, 2017 10:10:34 GMT Emperor said:

Fourteen PPVs a year is ridiculous. Might as well start calling them 4 hour Raws and 4 hour Smackdowns.

How so? Only 2 more than monthly ppvs and since they alternate between shows, they still have 4 to 6 weeks to build up for ppvs....minus the big 4

With the network they're less PPV and more Specials/Super House Shows. Do people buy PPVs these days?

Nov 23, 2017 10:53:52 GMT @ness said:

With the network they're less PPV and more Specials/Super House Shows. Do people buy PPVs these days?

I buy ROH and NJPW ppvs....and Bound For Glory

I don't think there is  way to buy WWE ppvs outside of the Network

Nov 23, 2017 10:25:44 GMT Mistress said:

Nov 23, 2017 10:10:34 GMT Emperor said:

Fourteen PPVs a year is ridiculous. Might as well start calling them 4 hour Raws and 4 hour Smackdowns.

How so? Only 2 more than monthly ppvs and since they alternate between shows, they still have 4 to 6 weeks to build up for ppvs....minus the big 4

I think monthly PPVs is far too much. When you have so many big shows in a year, nothing is special, nothing is memorable. Especially when feuds are often drawn out over multiple PPVs. It's also one part of WWE's way-too-much-content-to-keep-up-with problem.

Fair point about the different brands though. If you only watch one brand, that's 7 or 8 PPVs a year if you include the joint ones, and a decent gap in between each. Not so bad.

This discussion always comes up about PPVs and the over-saturation of WWE television, but it's obviously working for them or they wouldn't do it. If they found they were losing money on having this many shows per week/month/year, they'd change it up.

I think it makes a lot of sense for MITB to be a co-brand PPV. I'd argue it's a bigger event than Survivor Series at this point in terms of importance to the product.

Really surprised to see St. Louis shutout of PPVs for the year. Seems like the city has been a staple for events for years now.

Money in the Bank being dual branded could hopefully lead to a women's MITB match with wrestlers from brands included. One of the problems with last year's match for me is that because it was dual-branded, they had limited options. Tamina, one of the worst currently on the roster and one of the most uninteresting women in WWE history, was included..

Tamina is no more boring than Nia

Nov 24, 2017 1:36:31 GMT Mistress said:

Tamina is no more boring than Nia

But at least Nia has time to improve.  Whereas Tamina had over a decade to do so, and still nothing.

Nov 24, 2017 6:39:39 GMT CM Punk'd said:

Nov 24, 2017 1:36:31 GMT Mistress said:

Tamina is no more boring than Nia

But at least Nia has time to improve.  Whereas Tamina had over a decade to do so, and still nothing.

I have serious doubts Now will improve. They should've brought in Jessika Havok.

I'm okay with more PPVs, more wrestling the better imo. I can see how people would get wore out by so much wrestling but me personally I don't mind. My best friend and I have been talking about going to Survivor Series in LA next year since it's not that far of a drive for us, and we would go to TakeOver too. If we are able to do so then I can say that I've attended one of the big four PPVs as well as a TakeOver.

Nov 24, 2017 1:36:31 GMT Mistress said:

Tamina is no more boring than Nia

Nia has more in-ring appeal than Tamina. Look at her fatal four way from No Mercy with Emma, Sasha and Alexa Bliss as an example.

SmackDown going 4 months with no solo PPV is kinda bullshit.