– An image that is purported to be the WWE PPV schedule following the Brand Split has surfaced online. You can see the image here, which comes from a Reddit user named Wrestling Leaker who has successfully provided spoilers in the past. (This is not, for the record, the same guy who spoiled the likes of Samoa Joe’s NXT debut, Shane McMahon’s return and Zack Ryder’s Intercontinental Title win at WrestleMania.)

The schedule, which it must be said is not confirmed at this point, claims that Night of Champions will become Clash of Champions (which WWE filed a new trademark for recently). You can see th elist below, which has two PPVs in each month that there is not a dual-brand PPV (SummerSlam and Survivor Series).

* WWE SummerSlam – August 21st in Brooklyn, 7pm ET start time, both brands
* WWE Backlash, September 11th in Richmond, 8pm ET start time, SmackDown event, WWE Network exclusive
* WWE Clash of the Champions, September 25th in Indianapolis, 8pm ET start time, RAW event
* WWE No Mercy, October 9th in Sacramento, 8pm ET start time, SmackDown event
* WWE Hell In a Cell, October 30th in Boston, 8pm ET start time, RAW event
* WWE Survivor Series, November 20th in Toronto, 7pm ET start time, both brands
* WWE TLC, December 4th in Dallas, 8pm ET start time, SmackDown event
* WWE Roadblock, December 18th in Pittsburgh, 8pm ET start time, RAW event

2 PPVs a month? Holy shit.

I know a lot of people are complaining about this, but I like it.

You don't have to watch if you don't wanna and, if you've got the Network, it's not like it'll cost you anything extra. Me, personally? I look forward to more PPVs. Considering I hardly ever watch RAW and SmackDown (though that may change after the split), I mostly just watch PPVs now anyway.

I assume that it'll be more like Roadblock style shows and not legitimate pay-per-views. In a way this could be what leads WWE back to a more traditional four-or-five-major-shows-per-year schedule.

Again, during the previous brand split, WWE already did 2 PPVs a month, what's the surprise about it?

Zanon wrote:

Again, during the previous brand split, WWE already did 2 PPVs a month, what's the surprise about it?

They didnt. They alternated PPVs every month (Raw would get one in April, Smackdown would get one in May etc). The only exceptions were New Years Revolution and Cyber Sunday.

Eeyen wrote:

I assume that it'll be more like Roadblock style shows and not legitimate pay-per-views. In a way this could be what leads WWE back to a more traditional four-or-five-major-shows-per-year schedule.

They're legit PPVs.

Dead wrote:

Zanon wrote:

Again, during the previous brand split, WWE already did 2 PPVs a month, what's the surprise about it?

They didnt. They alternated PPVs every month (Raw would get one in April, Smackdown would get one in May etc). The only exceptions were New Years Revolution and Cyber Sunday.

Yes, they did. In fact you can easily check, there were several times when the WWE had 2 ppvs in a month. It's not like WWE's going to have 30 PPVs per year... but anyway, here's it:

2001 Before Brand Split:

2002 Brand Split Began:

2003:

2004:

2005:

2006:

2007 (possibly when Brand Split ended or the PPVs became "WWE-wide" instead of Brand Specific:

2008 (Specific-Brand PPVs were no more since 2007:

2009:

2010: After 2010, WWE reduced the number of PPVs because there was just one roster for the 2 (or 3) shows:

2011:

2012:

2013:

2014: again no PPVs in March.:

2015:

2016 (the ones that are done and the upcoming ones if Applicable):

Number of PPVs | Years
16: 2006
15: 2005|07|
14: 2001|02|04|08|09
13: 2003|10|11|15
12: 2012|13|14|(16)

Other Stuff:

Again: WWE used to have 2 PPVs a month. And most of them (between RAW/SD! PPVs) were 2 weeks apart of eachothers. Sometimes they'd land in the same month, other times, not. Point to the matter is, the WWE currently has 12-13 PPVs, it used to have 16 with the Split Brands. And people are overthinking this, as everything will be essentially as it was. They won't have 24 or 30 PPVs per year.

^ that's not "every month" which is what I was referring to, also some of those in the earlier years were UK exclusive PPVs and don't really count.

Dead wrote:

^ that's not "every month" which is what I was referring to, also some of those in the earlier years were UK exclusive PPVs and don't really count.

They were still PPVs nonetheless.
And if you check the PPV dates WWE revealed, it's not going to be strictly 2 per month either. It's going to be exactly the same way as it was before. A couple of weeks difference between PPVs for each brand. Simple.

Personally I've always felt that one PPV a month was too much. But that's me.

Zanon wrote:

Again, during the previous brand split, WWE already did 2 PPVs a month, what's the surprise about it?

This is what I was thinking.

From around 2005-2007 in particular it was practically exactly the way it's going to be now.

Dead saying "They're legit PPVs" as a reply but provides no evidence

Well, the thingie listed Backlash as a "WWE Network Exclusive", but that's the only one that was listed as such, so that probably means the rest of them are full PPVs.

I hope they're not full fledged PPVs tbh. Just a bigger event than a regular show. It'll make the big 4 feel a lot bigger.