5 Reasons Why The Build To Survivor Series Has Been Terrible

One of the most important things you need to get an audience invested, not just in wrestling, but storytelling in general, is stakes. What's on the line? What are the consequences of winning and losing? How much does the situation mean to the participants?

This tension is noticeably absent from all four major matches on this years Survivor Series card. Who cares about Goldberg vs Lesnar if neither of them will be there the next night on Raw? Why are any of the Survivor Series match participants fighting if there's nothing to gain? With no World Title, Tag Title, U.S. Title, or Women's Title matches on the card, WWE have created nothing to really care about.

Setting aside the Lesnar/Goldberg match, the main issue is with the match of the event's namesake. Two years ago, WWE showed a meaningful match was possible with the Team Cena vs Team Authority match, in which the stakes were drastic for all involved. In 2004, a Raw-exclusive Survivor Series Match saw each member of the winning team run WWE's flagship show for a week. Even with terrible booking, the WWE vs Alliance match in 2001 still felt like something major was on the line, whether or not the outcome was obvious. WWE has shown that Survivor Series matches can mean something. Often times, however, they lose sight of this

There was a rumor on the dirt sheets that the winning brand of the men's match would be able to select three stars from the other brand to jump ship, but I have yet to see or hear of that on WWE programming. That would make the men's match much more interesting, but what of the women's and tag team matches? Do they not garner enough importance to have something to fight for?

WWE is showing a bad habit as of late of having gimmick matches for the sake of gimmick matches, without anything to truly invest in but a label on the card. Survivor Series 2016 continues that slide.