Sagging ratings have plagued WWE as of late and there are rumors that the company’s network partners are none too happy. Last week, Vince McMahon instituted a Wild Card Rule to freshen things up, but it seems rushed and poorly thought out. Here’s how it could be made better.
When Vince McMahon announced the new “Wild Card Rule” on the May 6 episode of WWE Raw, it came across like many recent announcements from the company. Rather than a fun way to see superstars jump between Raw and SmackDown, the first week of the endeavor seemed to be improvised and tweaked as the shows went on.
The sad thing about this? At face value, the Wild Card Rule is actually a pretty good idea. No matter how many superstars are shaken up in a given year, there are always potentially interesting matches left on the table because of the brand split. But allowing superstars to cross over for “one night only” means there’s endless possibilities of ways to fill a card to entertain the WWE Universe.
But the nature of the rule as it currently stands makes it hard to take seriously as anything other than a gimmick that hasn’t fully been thought out. We went from three superstars allowed to cross over on a night to four, then a “limited number,” all in the first 24 hours the Wild Card Rule was even a thing. I guess locking literally one of the most important parts of the new rules down wasn’t a high priority?
So I got to thinking — and honestly, it wasn’t really a whole lot of thinking — about how to make some sense of this Wild Card Rule. Can a few tweaks ground the concept in logic and add some consistency? I think so — even if some of the changes would open up a whole new can of worms.
Without further ado, here’s three ways WWE can 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:
If You Want It, Prove It
The way things are right now, jumping from one brand to another seems to be based on “firsties,” which is inherently unfair. Should Kevin Owens be allowed to appear on Raw just because his rental car had a bigger gas tank than Andrade’s and El Idolo had to make one extra stop on the road? Please.
Instead of letting a Wild West mentality take over the Wild Card Rule, WWE should institute a policy that superstars need to earn the chance to jump from brand to brand. The whole thing started because Roman Reigns, Kofi Kingston, and Daniel Bryan decided to bail on their live events to go to Raw, but not a single one did anything outside of their normal duties to warrant the trip.
More from Daily DDT
- It’s time for Adam Cole and MJF to drop the ROH tag team titles
- Tom Lawlor talks MLW return, AEW opportunity, CM Punk’s WWE return and more
- Eddie Kingston stands to gain the most from the AEW Continental Classic
- Trish Stratus on WWE NXT would help elevate that women’s division
- Randy Orton signs with SmackDown to go after The Bloodline
There’s a limited number of spots available for the Wild Card Rule, right? Make them almost as valuable as a championship, and let the interested parties fight it out. Maybe there’s someone unhappy with their lot on Raw, and they want to make a splash on SmackDown Live ahead of a possible Superstar Shake-up. Okay, you can go — if you win your next match.
Knowing ahead of time who is jumping sides for a night may rob WWE of their “surprises” they are so fond of, but being able to promote a superstar appearance would do more for boosting ratings than hoping people tune in to see who shows up — at least, I think so. If I’m a big fan of, say, AJ Styles, and I know for a fact he’ll be on SmackDown Live, I’d be more likely to tune in on Tuesday than if I was just hoping he did.
This works a heck of a lot better if there’s a finite number of Wild Card Weeks, and it isn’t an every week thing. It’s also a great way to get those superstars not scheduled for the upcoming pay per view to be booked in a meaningful match. Sure, it would require planning ahead and forward thinking — two things not usually associated with WWE’s creative department — but it could work.
Ideally, you’d also need some kind of authority figure for both Raw and SmackDown to both manage the crossovers and set up the opportunity to earn the chance to do so. Outside of NXT, WWE hasn’t done a great job with authority figures. But even absent a benevolent, neutral head honcho like William Regal, requiring superstars to earn the ability to go to another show could add some legitimacy to the Wild Card concept.
Like Spider-Man Says, Everybody Gets One
I’m sure I seem like a fun guy when every idea I have involves limiting some aspect of the Wild Card Rule. Don’t do it every week! Don’t let people just show up, they need to earn it! Well, I’m happy to report that this last proposed rule change ensures that the entire roster gets to get involved! Woooooo!
Of course, it requires another limitation, because that’s how this monkey paw works.
In an effort to ensure that everyone from Seth Rollins to Sin Cara has the chance to head to the other side for one night, a rule needs to prohibit the same superstars crossing brands multiple times in a row. If the same six or seven superstars are the only ones taking advantage of the rule, then it’s less like we have a brand split and more like we have a half dozen free agents.
Assuming all of the changes I’ve proposed here happen, this is possibly the easiest of the ones to make. Now we’d be down to one Wild Card Week per month, with superstars needing to earn the right to take part in it. Once they make the jump, they can’t participate in the next one, opening the door for other superstars to get in on the action. Easy, right?
Now, I freely admit that as far as ratings go, this is probably counterintuitive to WWE’s goal. Obviously, the goal is to get the best of the best all on the same show to encourage people to watch. So the most likely candidates to cross would be Roman Reigns, AJ Styles, Charlotte Flair, and the like.
But let’s say those particular superstars can’t jump because of this rule. Now we can see mid-card talent like Chad Gable, Ricochet and Ali move around. Women’s division superstars who seem to be forgotten about at times like Sonya Deville, Ember Moon, and Ruby Riott can cross over, as well. And who knows? Maybe someone outside the box who has a match on the opposite brand turns some heads, and now they earn a bit of a push.
Of course, these aren’t the only ways to make sense of the Wild Card Rule — should some superstars be totally exempt from crossing over, and truly exclusive? Even these proposed here would require some other tweaks that I’m not super confident in WWE’s ability to deliver. But step one is to try and make sure there’s some consistency with the rule, so fans see it as more than a ratings grab, or a band-aid to bigger problems.