Should WWE have an off-season?

Written by: Martyn Nolan


As a new writer I suppose I should introduce myself to you all before I begin.

I’m a Manchester lad from the rainy shores of England. I have been a wrestling fan since 1997 when I watched WWE Survivor Series 1997 for the first time. As a 13-year-old, this new world of wrestling fascinated me and ever since that point I’ve been hooked. There hasn’t been a show that I haven’t watched and I made sure I got hold of as much historic knowledge and videos as humanly possible.

Some of you may know that I also write for Wrestlezone.com where I write my weekly column, A British Point of View. This column has been going for over two years now and I give my opinions on things that have happened that week in the world of WWE or wrestling in general.

I do watch TNA, iMPACT Wrestling or whatever else they are calling themselves these days but in recent years they seem to have struggled to gain a foothold in the world of professional wrestling. Ring of Honor are keeping with the pure wrestling format which works for them and they are providing something different than most.

My main passion is still WWE though and in this article I wanted to look at the problem WWE has when dealing with injuries.

Over the last couple of years it has seemed like more WWE stars than ever have battled injury, and it begs the question, should WWE consider an off season?

Stars can take one bad bump and then they’re sidelined for months, and when others force themselves to come back too soon, it can take even longer to fully get over their injuries while trying to work a full schedule.

Just look at the CM Punk situation. One of the many theories as to why he has left WWE is because of ongoing injuries that he simply hasn’t had time to properly rehab and recover from, and those issues led to a decline in his performance that he was not happy with.

Would an off season have helped in this kind of situation? Would Punk still be active now if he’d been able to take a decent break? Many fans are talking about wrestling and comparing it to mainstream sports. All sports have a break at some point.

However, this isn’t sport. It’s Sports Entertainment. WWE could easily put in a break between October to December and have all their stars return for the Road to WrestleMania but does this really negate the chance that Superstars have of becoming injured? As we have seen time and time again, one wrong move and you’re out. This could happen at any time. Yes, the break would allow superstars to heal up and possibly break up underlying long-term injuries, but the risk is still there.

WWE superstar Wade Barrett is injured

Wade Barrett contemplates a life with an occasional day off

The world of professional wrestling has survived this long without an off season so I cannot see why it still can’t. The real issue here is about booking events smartly. Does WWE really need to put on a house show every night? Do they need to have such huge distances between shows which create ridiculous travel schedules? Can WWE not intelligently book their superstars so that they only have to compete a couple of times a week maximum? These are all questions which I feel should be answered.

If WWE did their two TV tapings of Raw and Smackdown in one week and only put on one or two other house shows on then surely that would be better suited to the talent? If the house shows were booked so that the talent didn’t have to wrestle two nights on the trot it would mean there were fewer chances for them to get injured.

WWE have more than enough talent on their current roster and in the developmental system to produce shows which grab your interest. Everybody goes to a wrestling house show not really knowing what’s going to be happening. Fans are also aware of the waiver which states that the line up can change, so would it really be a big deal if you went to a house show and John Cena or Randy Orton weren’t there? If they had a good card with talent being developing properly then fans should always leave the building happy.

If you need to keep big talent on the show then surely you can have them in roles which mean less chance of injury such as cutting promos.

WWE can do more to protect their talent, but this subject only gets raised when a number of injuries occur. Injuries are going to happen no matter what but the way they book their events can keep wrestlers healthy for longer and won’t burn them out with hectic schedules and travelling arrangements.

Do you agree? Is this something WWE should look at, or do you think that the current system works and shouldn’t be altered?




Author: Martyn Nolan

Martyn is a Manchester-born lad who enjoys all kinds of sports, gaming and cinema. Martyn's main passion is professional wrestling. If he isn't watching it then he's writing about it! Either on The Void or WrestleZone.com he is always expressing his opinions on what is going on in the crazy world of WWE. Martyn is a Manchester United supporter and loves watching F1 among other sports. You can get in touch with Martyn via Twitter at @BeansOnToastUK.

Read more posts by


Responses to Should WWE have an off-season?

  1. No I dont think so. This is how the show has been for a long time now. Its the one of the few things I do enjoy on a weekly based knowing that it won’t be on break anytime soon, or ever for that matter.

    It would help, and create a better story if the WWE was only on 8-10 months of the year but I doubt Vince would let that one fly. Maybe in the future depending on how it grows or dies, it could very much happen.

    Now onto injuries and vacations. Injuiries happen in every sport. Some are accident, and others are for fatigue. That being said, I’m sure if someone is very tired, and feeling fatigue, perhaps a vacation would be given. Then again I hear Vince is a tough man and as soon as you sign his contract, then he is yours.


Leave a comment