10 WWE Innovations That Nobody Wanted
1. Stipulation Themed Events
Stipulation-themed pay-per-views like Hell in a Cell and TLC: Tables, Ladders & Chairs, were introduced so fans would get excited about seeing these bouts every year. Ironically, that's what killed off some of their best match types. What a shame...
The forced nature of these stipulations undermined the storytelling. Not every feud needs to end inside Hell in a Cell, but the themed pay-per-views required it. This lead to matches that felt contrived, with stipulations shoehorned in rather than organically developed through the storyline. It also made for some of the worst Hell in a Cell matches in WWE history.
The overuse of certain stipulations lessened their significance. Hell in a Cell matches were once rare and reserved for the most intense rivalries. By making them an annual occurrence, the mystique and specialness of these matches was completely diminished. Fans became desensitised to the brutality (or lack thereof in the PG Era) and spectacle, reducing their overall impact.
This entry has focused on HIAC matches, but the same happened for the Elimination Chamber and TLC matches as well. If a feud was coming to an end in May, you knew it wouldn't have one of those stipulations.
To give credit where it's due: Breaking Point was a good idea, having every match end in a submission. But, for every one of those, there's a PPV called Fatal 4-Way to tip the scales back into terrible.