10 Worst WWE Booking Decisions Of The 2000s (Year-By-Year)

By 2009, WWE were struggling to maintain relevance. Interest in the product was lowering, and that was reflected by sagging ratings and dips in PPV buys. To correct the latter problem, starting in 2009, WWE phased out some of their more generic B-show titles (No Mercy, Unforgiven, Armageddon), and begun a host of shows centered around gimmick matches, the key ones being Hell in a Cell and TLC, which run to this day.

While it’s admirable that WWE would want to give their B shows more of an identity, they did it at the expense of their storytelling for years to come. In the past, TLC and Hell in a Cell matches came when the circumstances of individual feuds called for them. Now, the two matches occur annually on one show regardless if any of the feuds call for them or not. It creates the damning side effect to where all major feuds have to be written around whatever gimmick is coming up on the calendar, making everything feel tired and predictable.

Plus, given that WWE were fully PG by this point, having matches such as TLC and Hell in a Cell occur every year only advanced the sentiment among fans that the switch to the lower rating was a mistake. At a time when WWE should have actively distanced themselves from matches with hardcore connotations, instead embracing a more pure athletic edge, they clung desperately to branding and watered the beloved matches down.