Do you consider 3 scramble matches on one pay per view lazy booking? Or creative genius?

Question

Do you consider 3 scramble matches on one pay per view lazy booking? Or creative genius?

Answer 1

lazy bookings, i wonder how there gonna stretch the 3 scramble matches into 3 hours because each is 20 minutes plus 10 minutes for promos and entrances for all, even though there probably going to add about 2-3 extra matches

Answer 2

I dont think it was a good idea.

Cmon three consecutive matches with the exactly the same stipulations..cmon WWE.  I was hoping for one of those match, maybe the Smackdown one and then Raw and ECW to have different types.  Like a ladder match for one and a h**l in the cell for the other.  Now that would be fun to see.

I wonder what the fans would be feeling after watching 2 of the scrambles and then 1 more left and then the end of the show.

Answer 3

Lazy booking! Yes, it's creative in a way but having 3 on 1 night is just too much and it's filling up nearly 90 minutes of the PPV!

Answer 4

Lazy booking, they just made that in one nite without planning, and hey- there we go Cena gets injured- they just throw mysterio  in there, thats great huh?

They should have been creative  made different matches, and only ONE scramble.

Eh Chico thats my Opinion Tho

Answer 5

In a way it's being lazy, but it's also a great idea, this is the first PPV I've really been looking forward to in a while. So a little bit of both.

Answer 6

Choice A.

Answer 7

A little bit of both. While the scramble matches are clever, the fact that there are not many matches on the pay per view is lazy booking.

Answer 8

I think its a good idea because they have never done this before. the only time they have done a match like this was the Hardcore Battle Royal at WrestleMania 2000

Answer 9

A little bit of both to kill time until the Survivor Series I guess. I think I'll enjoy the TNA and ROH Pay Per Views a lot more than WWE Unforgiven this month.