pollino14 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 1 hour ago, Troy Brown said: They've been ruining PPV matches for awhile given that every wins and losses never matter in terms of creative and you'll see every PPV match in some variation 3 times a month Fact, man. There’s very few matches in WWE that excite you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Brown Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 1 minute ago, pollino14 said: Fact, man. There’s very few matches in WWE that excite you. it's probably another reason takeovers are so successful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollino14 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 5 minutes ago, Troy Brown said: it's probably another reason takeovers are so successful That amongst other things. NXT is so well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 22 hours ago, The LBC said: Yes and yes. He was also a heel in TNA multiple times. He's a flat out natural at the cocky, privileged heel - basically he did the JBL gimmick (one he moved on from the APA and being "Bradshaw") better than JBL did. Prior to the Glorious stuff in NXT, he was using the tagline "The IT Factor of Professional Wrestling," which he could easily return to (just sub "WWE" for "professional wrestling"), while still retaining the Glorious moniker - though I'd make the argument if he flips heel he kind of needs to ditch the Glorious stuff (and in particular the theme, great as it is) because it's (particularly the theme) a total babyface entrance. Aside from the entrance being massively over and, like I said, it being a total babyface entrance (which you can get away with as a heel in NXT, but not on the main roster), my feeling was he probably would have been brought up to the main roster as a heel, except for the fact that I believe they were worried it would have hamstrung Baron Corbin even more (and we all know how Vince loves to give as many inside tracks as possible to his "big guys"). Thanks for clearing this up for me LBC. See I didn't even know he was in TNA, I just assumed he was from NXT based on the announcers. Although I don't know exactly what TNA is(I've heard of it, but much like NXT I don't really know it) I agree that if they turn him heel - which they should- they need to get rid of his intro. It's too catchy which makes it too easy for fans to gravitate towards and you can't have that as a heel imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom cody Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 I like Roode and think he should be pushed a bit more and should be a heel as well. Wouldn't mind him in a world title feud this yr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pastor Dillon Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 We need more main title changes. The best program the WWE has done in a while was Charlotte vs Banks where they passed the belt back and forth and had various types of matches. This year of Brock Lesnar defending the title 5 games has ruined the belt, and having Stroman lose title matches 3 times have failed to capitalize on his momentum. It doesnt ruin anything for the title to switch hands. The Rock vs Mankind from Survivor Series to Wrestlemania is a perfect example. Over 4 months the Rock had 3 reigns and Mankind had 2. They had the "I Quit" match, the Empty Arena match, the ladder match. It was a great build for the Rock to get him on the level of heel that could go against Austin at Mania. In the attitude era, depending when you officially say it began, but if you say it starts with Austin winning the belt from HBK in March of 98, no one held the belt for a 120(4 month) period until Kurt Angle did it in the year 2000, and then Stone Cold held it for 175 days in 2001. It would be another 2 years before someone else went on a 4 month or longer reign as champion. WWE's golden period featured a lot of belt changes, sometimes even reigns lasting just weeks, and WWE was dominating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr LBC Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 5 hours ago, Pastor Dillon said: We need more main title changes. The best program the WWE has done in a while was Charlotte vs Banks where they passed the belt back and forth and had various types of matches. This year of Brock Lesnar defending the title 5 games has ruined the belt, and having Stroman lose title matches 3 times have failed to capitalize on his momentum. It doesnt ruin anything for the title to switch hands. The Rock vs Mankind from Survivor Series to Wrestlemania is a perfect example. Over 4 months the Rock had 3 reigns and Mankind had 2. They had the "I Quit" match, the Empty Arena match, the ladder match. It was a great build for the Rock to get him on the level of heel that could go against Austin at Mania. In the attitude era, depending when you officially say it began, but if you say it starts with Austin winning the belt from HBK in March of 98, no one held the belt for a 120(4 month) period until Kurt Angle did it in the year 2000, and then Stone Cold held it for 175 days in 2001. It would be another 2 years before someone else went on a 4 month or longer reign as champion. WWE's golden period featured a lot of belt changes, sometimes even reigns lasting just weeks, and WWE was dominating. Hard pass. I think this is something that's exacerbated in peoples' minds because Lesnar isn't on TV every week. The hottest product on the market right now has had the same world/heavyweight champion for since June of 2016. People need to stop trying to recreate the Attitude Era (which legitimately had a massive benefit of having some of the most natural young guns to come into the business and take to it quickly combined with a huge GLUT of veteran workers who could work with all styles and had honed and established their characters and knew how to tweak them when necessary) the same way the current writers (read: Vince) needs to stop trying to recreate another Austin or another Rock and just let the talent they have be themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr LBC Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 8 hours ago, tom cody said: I like Roode and think he should be pushed a bit more and should be a heel as well. Wouldn't mind him in a world title feud this yr. Kind of odd-ball prediction I'm making for the next WWE year (which is measured from the night after Mania until the next Mania): Roode is turned heel and Owens is turned anacro-babyface (similar to the kind of "I'll fight anyone" babyface they made Ambrose into during his World Title run). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PARROTHEAD Posted March 9, 2018 Share Posted March 9, 2018 14 hours ago, Pastor Dillon said: We need more main title changes. The best program the WWE has done in a while was Charlotte vs Banks where they passed the belt back and forth and had various types of matches. This year of Brock Lesnar defending the title 5 games has ruined the belt, and having Stroman lose title matches 3 times have failed to capitalize on his momentum. It doesnt ruin anything for the title to switch hands. The Rock vs Mankind from Survivor Series to Wrestlemania is a perfect example. Over 4 months the Rock had 3 reigns and Mankind had 2. They had the "I Quit" match, the Empty Arena match, the ladder match. It was a great build for the Rock to get him on the level of heel that could go against Austin at Mania. In the attitude era, depending when you officially say it began, but if you say it starts with Austin winning the belt from HBK in March of 98, no one held the belt for a 120(4 month) period until Kurt Angle did it in the year 2000, and then Stone Cold held it for 175 days in 2001. It would be another 2 years before someone else went on a 4 month or longer reign as champion. WWE's golden period featured a lot of belt changes, sometimes even reigns lasting just weeks, and WWE was dominating. WWE ratings have been on a heavy decline ever since they had like 30 guys on the roster with Title holds in the 2005-2010 era. WWE was crushing NWA when NWA was passing the title around, while WWE just had Hogan, Macho and Warrior with it. Beginning of 2017 saw 6-7 title changes in the first few months. SD had one every month until Jinder got it. Its FAR to much, and makes nobody credible. I personally like how Lesnar has handled it. A believable champ, where people have to fight like mad just to fight him. Makes the buildup for when it does happen, all the more exciting. (Unless its Vinces pet). Ratings would only sink further should it be passed around like crazy. Cause they have ZERO credibility with who they push now on Raw except for Lesnar. And passing it around just makes them all look soft as a pillow doing so. Like theyre all easily beatable. NJPW is doing it right. They build names and feuds, build the hottest names in the industry. And their champion still takes them down and looks proven and like a true champion doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pastor Dillon Posted March 9, 2018 Share Posted March 9, 2018 It’s not about recreating the attitude era, it’s about creating a product that has some intrigue. We’ve known all year Lesnar would keep the belt and drop it to Reigns at mania and the rating are in the garbage. The only shocking twist WWE has done is put the belt on mahal and then they kept it on him. Forever. It was shocking but it was also really terrible. They have not been able to adjust to social media and spoilers by giving shocking things. They are so far between it’s unreal. They also don’t do anything on raw worth watching. When raw rating were at thier peak, you would have title matches and all kinds of stuff. Now it’s just “hey lets put the top 3 heels on one team and have them compete against the 3 guys they are facing at the next pay per view” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted March 9, 2018 Share Posted March 9, 2018 On 3/8/2018 at 10:41 AM, Pastor Dillon said: We need more main title changes. The best program the WWE has done in a while was Charlotte vs Banks where they passed the belt back and forth and had various types of matches. This year of Brock Lesnar defending the title 5 games has ruined the belt, and having Stroman lose title matches 3 times have failed to capitalize on his momentum. It doesnt ruin anything for the title to switch hands. The Rock vs Mankind from Survivor Series to Wrestlemania is a perfect example. Over 4 months the Rock had 3 reigns and Mankind had 2. They had the "I Quit" match, the Empty Arena match, the ladder match. It was a great build for the Rock to get him on the level of heel that could go against Austin at Mania. In the attitude era, depending when you officially say it began, but if you say it starts with Austin winning the belt from HBK in March of 98, no one held the belt for a 120(4 month) period until Kurt Angle did it in the year 2000, and then Stone Cold held it for 175 days in 2001. It would be another 2 years before someone else went on a 4 month or longer reign as champion. WWE's golden period featured a lot of belt changes, sometimes even reigns lasting just weeks, and WWE was dominating. I'm going to disagree with the general principle here. Take a look at the US title as an example, its leaped back and forth a bunch and thus has lost some of its luster. A title change at the top used to be seen as a big deal, as it should. Playing hot potato with the title really isn't a necessary thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PARROTHEAD Posted March 9, 2018 Share Posted March 9, 2018 3 hours ago, Pastor Dillon said: It’s not about recreating the attitude era, it’s about creating a product that has some intrigue. We’ve known all year Lesnar would keep the belt and drop it to Reigns at mania and the rating are in the garbage. The only shocking twist WWE has done is put the belt on mahal and then they kept it on him. Forever. It was shocking but it was also really terrible. They have not been able to adjust to social media and spoilers by giving shocking things. They are so far between it’s unreal. They also don’t do anything on raw worth watching. When raw rating were at thier peak, you would have title matches and all kinds of stuff. Now it’s just “hey lets put the top 3 heels on one team and have them compete against the 3 guys they are facing at the next pay per view” Now that I agree with. Roman-Brock has been in the works for a year. Everyone down to the most casual watching fans knew it. All those gone for the entire football season, just now returning knew it. Old eras, if someone grew hot. It had the ability to topple those plans and surprise viewers with different matchups. Theres zero of that anymore, theyre going to stick with a plan for years if they have to. And give zero in terms of storytelling quality doing so. Just a few lazy tossed together matches involving everyone before the PPV. Like SD this week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pastor Dillon Posted March 9, 2018 Share Posted March 9, 2018 Post Wrestlemania will be predictable as well. Nakamura and Reigns will get a while to hold onto their titles. I dont see anyway that either guy loses at backlash, Money in the bank or Extreme Rules. Money in the bank will probably not even feature a title match since we probably get 4 Money in the bank matches. Or perhaps they only do 2 and mix and match the field. Summer Slam is where the action will be interesting. I dont know what they are going to do with Reigns though. I suspect Cena gets his 17th title reign at Summer Slam over Nakamura. Stroman has to be in line for a title run at some point, but how many times does Reigns have to beat Stroman before it loses its luster? I am a big fan of elevating the tag titles into the world title picture every now and then. here is what i would love to see. Rollins wins the IC belt, Reigns the Universal belt, have them win the tag belts as well. Then have Ambrose turn heel costing them the tag titles...set up a triple threat match with 2 falls, the 1st for the IC belt and the 2nd for the Universal....that would carry something i dont remember seeing, and even if i did it happened a long time ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr LBC Posted March 9, 2018 Share Posted March 9, 2018 5 hours ago, Pastor Dillon said: It’s not about recreating the attitude era, it’s about creating a product that has some intrigue. We’ve known all year Lesnar would keep the belt and drop it to Reigns at mania and the rating are in the garbage. The only shocking twist WWE has done is put the belt on mahal and then they kept it on him. Forever. It was shocking but it was also really terrible. They have not been able to adjust to social media and spoilers by giving shocking things. They are so far between it’s unreal. They also don’t do anything on raw worth watching. When raw rating were at thier peak, you would have title matches and all kinds of stuff. Now it’s just “hey lets put the top 3 heels on one team and have them compete against the 3 guys they are facing at the next pay per view” There's plenty of stuff they've done that would be "shocking" if people stayed off the damn dirtsheets and podcasts and just watched the shows week to week like the majority of folks during the AE were doing. Maybe if you want to be shocked... don't go on social media or read spoilers online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketchup Posted March 9, 2018 Share Posted March 9, 2018 Kinda off topic, but I was watching a random episode of Raw during the AE, was the episode where Austin and Kane throw Paul Bearer down a sewer, and wow was it a shock. JR made a joke about Teri Runnels being used to going low after giving Val Venus a low blow. King calling the girls ho's. All the stuff between Taker and Austin. Mostly how they treated the women though. Was rather disgusting to listen to to be honest after being used to how the women are presented now. I grow up watching the AE and look back on it as a pillar of my childhood but I wouldn't want that kind of wrestling back at all. As an adult, I much prefer the product today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.