⚡️ Get the free App now
Favorites Edit

Opinion: A WWE Off-Season would be best for business

Published 22 Mar 2019, 06:55 IST
22 Mar 2019, 06:55 IST

Several benefits would come from WWE instituting a version of an off-season.
Several benefits would come from WWE instituting a version of an off-season.

One unfortunate truth about life as a WWE superstars is that some of the superstars in the company are on the road almost over 300 days a year.

How many times have we heard of superstars saying that they missed weddings, parties or funerals because they were on the road with WWE in one form or fashion?

Kofi Kingston is the latest example of someone mentioning this, as he pleaded with Mr. McMahon that he has missed trick-or-treating with his kids due to his loyalty to the industry he loves.

And how often do we hear about rumors of 'Superstar A is wrestling with injuries' or 'Superstar B is sick but still plugging away in the ring'?

Rumors recently suggested that Drew McIntyre was indeed sick but still wrestling over the last few weekends.

With so many unforeseen problems that arise due to arrests, injuries or 'personal issues' why not install some sort of rotational off-season in the company?

Even the Big Dog himself, Roman Reigns, stated recently that he'd be in favor of having an off-season for WWE.

From a business standpoint, I don't know exact logistics about how it could be done, but aside from top superstars like Seth Rollins, Daniel Bryan, Becky Lynch or Charlotte Flair or the current champions, certain superstars have been routinely left off of TV.

When's the last time Sanity was on SmackDown? The Good Brothers? Nikki Cross or EC3? Cross did show up backstage to cheer on Kingston but that's been about it for the last few months.


Installing an off-season would accomplish many things. Firstly, any injured superstars could either be switched in or out of an allotted off-season if something freakish came up (think Finn Balor's injury or Rollins' knee injury).

Having a set amount of superstars that appeared on Raw or SmackDown and in ongoing storylines would at least keep the focus on some wrestlers who might not get it.

If something like three months off and six months on for superstars could be established, then the final three months could either be on again if the storyline is major or off if they need some time away for whatever reason.

Another thing this would accomplish is that it would keep superstars fresh. If they were able to heal properly, then they might be more inclined to stave off any other injuries they might sustain due to wrestling hurt.

And speaking of keeping wrestlers 'fresh', sometimes constantly shoving particular wrestlers down our throats only makes us sick of them, like the constant pushes of Roman Reigns over the last five years.

Even disgruntled superstars would at least get some TV time. Personally, I don't consider any other main-roster show other than Raw, SmackDown or 205 Live as getting TV time, so wrestling on Main Event or Superstars doesn't count.

NXT is a separate entity so I'm not including them. But think of how some superstars could get some exposure instead of showing up randomly one month and then disappearing for two months.

'Creative has nothing for you' is often a big reason why some superstars get disillusioned with their spots in the company.

If you're at least committing some TV time to them at some point during the year, then you can at least say that 'hey, you're getting on TV at least' and 'everyone cannot be booked like the top guy'.

Simply put, most other professional sports do exactly this and it sets the year up in a logical way where athletes know what to expect and when to expect it.

If WWE were to ascribe to some type of a rotational off-season for its superstars who weren't featured in major title programs, then they might keep more employees happy rather than be forced to make sometimes hollow promises.

Modified 20 Dec 2019, 22:13 IST
Fetching more content...