'%20x='0'%20y='0'%20height='100%25'%20width='100%25'%20%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20xlink%3Ahref=''%3E%3C/image%3E%3C/svg%3E)
#1 Refreshes the roster
More than anything, WWE's consideration should skew towards its stars.
WWE honestly does care for its roster in ways, often going against the grain of its competitors to watch their health and prevent any irreversible damage as best as they can.
Yet there is a sense that overworking (especially with the global expansion of the company and the rapidly increasing amounts of programming inside and outside of the ring) is a cause of concern.
If that is the case which it is, then maybe an off-season isn't the worst idea. WWE's talent is what makes the company flow, and if it were to consistently lose the best of the best to injury and health concerns, then maybe that's not the best for longevity. Sure we can marvel at the 50-something part-timers making their way to the ring twice a year at this point in time, but after a while, the well runs dry.
An off-season could bring with it a swell of rain to fill that well with hearty, healthy, and beloved superstars.
A WWE Hall of Famer called out AEW fans HERE
