WWE: 3 possible ways to improve the new Wild Card Rule

Less is More

If you’re a longtime fan like me (or, to put it bluntly, old like me), you’ll vividly remember a time when there was just a handful of WWE pay-per-view events per year. Weekly TV was used as a way to build up to those big shows by allowing the Superstars involved in feuds to defeat lower card talent; maybe have some talking segments here or there as well.

Then came the television network specials — Saturday Night’s Main Event, most notably — and a more episodic form of weekly TV. Eventually, pay-per-views aired every month and it seemed like there was always some type of WWE programming airing on some platform.

Debating whether or not this possible over-saturation is good or bad is a story for another day. But as far as the new Wild Card Rule, it may be best to resist the temptation to overdo it. Instead of relying on the concept as a weekly thing, I propose the Wild Card Rule only be used once in between monthly pay per view events.

While it’s clear that the ratings woes plaguing WWE right now are at least somewhat the reason for a Wild Card Rule, limiting the number of times the brands mix ultimately strengthens the idea of having two separate brands. If, say, Roman Reigns jumps back to Raw every week, why go through the charade of claiming he’s a member of the SmackDown Live roster?

As far as I can tell, simple supply and demand rules would apply to this cap of “Wild Card Weeks.” If WWE offers one up every week, it becomes overplayed and dull. But if it’s a once-in-a-while type of thing, it carries more weight in the long term. And, it makes it possible to book some relatively important matches within each brand in the interim, which brings me to my next point: