Jump to content

WWE


lharris92
 Share

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

That could be a possible reason, although looking at his time in the WWE I wouldn't discount the possibility that he is just a difficult person to deal with.

AEW will have the same issues every mainstream company has with people unhappy about their pay, creative,looking to move on etc. You always hear people who wrestled in WCW and WWE saying that in the former you never knew who was on charge. I suspect AEW will have the same issues.

Tony Khan is in charge. Of course there will be issues but don't compare it to WCW. guys like Cody, Omega, Bucks don't have the ego of Hall/Nash etc. Watch the BTE show, they constantly put over other talent. If it was all about them they wouldn't give such a platform to other guys. I have faith in these guys as they are all good dudes, not arseholes like the people that ran WCW to the ground. The business has changed. There isn't all the drugs and drink like before, the environment is much better now. I expect Bucks to lose their match, Omega may lose too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, When Jokers Attack said:

Tony Khan is in charge. Of course there will be issues but don't compare it to WCW. guys like Cody, Omega, Bucks don't have the ego of Hall/Nash etc. Watch the BTE show, they constantly put over other talent. If it was all about them they wouldn't give such a platform to other guys. I have faith in these guys as they are all good dudes, not arseholes like the people that ran WCW to the ground. The business has changed. There isn't all the drugs and drink like before, the environment is much better now. I expect Bucks to lose their match, Omega may lose too. 

If you put wrestlers in the role of executive vice president there will always be doubt about who is in control.

How do you define a good dude? People for example look at someone like Hogan as bad for bringing in his mates in WCW, yet others may consider looking after your friends as a good thing. 

In terms of egos if AEW is successful the egos will grow, people will moan about money, people will moan about putting people over etc. I think having another company around is positive, but thinking they won't have the same flaws as any other company is naive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, When Jokers Attack said:

 As i say I don't know full story but AEW surely should have had the discussion with PAC/DG before hand with regards to the booking. 

 

 

That's the nail on the head for me. With WWE's shoddy stop-start pushes, throwing shit on the wall to see if it sticks and 50/50 booking I was in hoping for more long term planning with AEW so it's not encouraging that literally the first announced AEW match gets canned as they didn't consider whom would win it. Of course it's still early days and I'm reading too much into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

If you put wrestlers in the role of executive vice president there will always be doubt about who is in control.

How do you define a good dude? People for example look at someone like Hogan as bad for bringing in his mates in WCW, yet others may consider looking after your friends as a good thing. 

In terms of egos if AEW is successful the egos will grow, people will moan about money, people will moan about putting people over etc. I think having another company around is positive, but thinking they won't have the same flaws as any other company is naive.

Well Hogan, Hall and Nash rarely lost and were always the main part of the show, outside of Goldberg and DDP who else got into the main event slot? All that talent and it was about Hogan, Hall and Nash always as they had creative control in their contract. Why not just wait and see what happens with AEW before criticising them for having egos. I'm not naive, I am just more optimistic as I have followed these guys for years and they aren't dicks. Could that change? Yeah but I would rather give them a chance instead of labelling them something they aren't all because WCW fucked up and you are convinced AEW will be like them because "executive vice president". 

 

6 hours ago, jump said:

That's the nail on the head for me. With WWE's shoddy stop-start pushes, throwing shit on the wall to see if it sticks and 50/50 booking I was in hoping for more long term planning with AEW so it's not encouraging that literally the first announced AEW match gets canned as they didn't consider whom would win it. Of course it's still early days and I'm reading too much into it.

The Pac situation was more or a long term thing The issue isn't him beating Page but if he beats Page it would likely position him against Omega. AEW have  only found out I'm guessing that Pac can never lose as long as he is DG champion so they are thinking long term and can't do the match beacuse a DQ on their shows goes against the wins and loses booking they want to do. Apparently they have a better match planned, my guess is Moxley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, When Jokers Attack said:

Well Hogan, Hall and Nash rarely lost and were always the main part of the show, outside of Goldberg and DDP who else got into the main event slot? All that talent and it was about Hogan, Hall and Nash always as they had creative control in their contract. Why not just wait and see what happens with AEW before criticising them for having egos. I'm not naive, I am just more optimistic as I have followed these guys for years and they aren't dicks. Could that change? Yeah but I would rather give them a chance instead of labelling them something they aren't all because WCW fucked up and you are convinced AEW will be like them because "executive vice president". 

Who is to say playing politics is being a dick? It has always been part of wrestling and probably always will be. I'm not using it as a criticism, there will be politics in AEW like every wrestling company. When WWE we're at it's most successful the likes of Hogan and Austin had huge power, but if the product is good nobody will care.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, jump said:

The lols! You have a concept that allows for the constant tease of a title change so you give the MITB briefcase to the one guy who is not gonna be around to tease it being cashed in.

The company is absolutely fucked creative wise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

I hate the MITB gimmick, wish they would get rid of it completely.

I think it’s great. Some of the most memorable wins for me are from MITB. Mainly Dolph and Ambrose.

However as said above, it makes no sense having it with Brock.

WWE just can’t help themselves can they? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Echo the above, Lesnar winning the case is dumb as fuck, I had the PPV on today but it really struggled to hold my attention. So Becky is no longer 2 belts and Bailey has a new push as champ, but WHY give Charlotte ANOTHER reign inbetween??? That could have gone to anyone else on the roster. So fucking annoying. In the end when they're bragging she's 16x champion, cus we all know that's where they're trying to get her, people can look, or even remember how shitty these reigns were.

Best part of that PPV, the transition from Rollins stomp into AJ's styles clash, DAMN that was fucking sweet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, luckysalt said:

 So Becky is no longer 2 belts and Bailey has a new push as champ, but WHY give Charlotte ANOTHER reign inbetween??? That could have gone to anyone else on the roster. 

 

A face cashing in the MITB on another weakened face is kinda awkward tho, especially with Bayley being the squeakiest of squeaky clean babyfaces. I suppose you could but another Smackdown heel in there but they would be a first time champ (unless Mickie James is heel I can't remember, also where is she) it would be waste of a first title reign. 

Apart from Brock winning and the cage match I really enjoyed the PPV, my personal highlight were Naomi's spot in the MITB match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DareToDibble said:

I think it’s great. Some of the most memorable wins for me are from MITB. Mainly Dolph and Ambrose.

However as said above, it makes no sense having it with Brock.

WWE just can’t help themselves can they? 

To me it devalues the title and all you get is ba cheap pop. I think it worked great for Edge as it fitted his gimmick, but overall I don't like it. I think creatively they have done all they can with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuck me, that 24/7 Title is beyond ugly. It is hideous. The idea is decent but I have zero faith in WWE to make it interesting. It wasn’t even explained properly. Is it male only? Why was emphasis put on the third hour of RAW changing due to the title when it is 24/7 rules? 

Also, what’s with the different lighting and graphics during the third hour now? 

Apparently the RAW script wasn’t finished until after the show started last night. 

They're fucked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bailey winning the MITB and cashing in I can understand and makes some sense. But Brock ?? A big WTF moment, now i'm assuming he regain the title at the Saudi Show show and RAW will be without a universal champion again!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Andre91 said:

Fuck me, that 24/7 Title is beyond ugly. It is hideous. The idea is decent but I have zero faith in WWE to make it interesting. It wasn’t even explained properly. Is it male only? Why was emphasis put on the third hour of RAW changing due to the title when it is 24/7 rules? 

Also, what’s with the different lighting and graphics during the third hour now? 

Apparently the RAW script wasn’t finished until after the show started last night. 

They're fucked. 

The amount of money they make suggests they are not fucked! I can understand the 24/7 belt as it has been successful in getting over some lower card talent in the past, not sure how successful it will be without the hardcore element.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

The amount of money they make suggests they are not fucked! 

Actually WWE lost millions money in the first qtr this year, a $28m downfall from the previous year. That was the same qrt where the Royal Rumble was moved into a stadium rather than an arena, their net work subscriptions and house shows are way down. Luckily the blood money from the Saudis are coming in a few weeks so that will put a smile on Vince's face.

 

3 hours ago, Andre91 said:

Fuck me, that 24/7 Title is beyond ugly. It is hideous.

Yeah, plus the name is fucking awful too.

Edited by jump
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why add another belt? All the current belts right now already mean nothing without adding more.

The lighting etc change is probably because Vince think it's the look of the show that is causing a ratings decline, an out of touch old man who shouldn't be running a wrestling company anymore. The report that came out last week of unhappiness with everyone says it all. They have more money than ever yes but what happens if the SD ratings don't do well once on FOX? that is where the problems can begin. No one is watching anymore but the excuses keep coming. Last one was people are going to bed before the third hour of Raw, yeah sure so why is everything else up in ratings.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, jump said:

Actually WWE lost millions money in the first qtr this year, a $28m downfall from the previous year. That was the same qrt where the Royal Rumble was moved into a stadium rather than an arena, their net work subscriptions and house shows are way down. Luckily the blood money from the Saudis are coming in a few weeks so that will put a smile on Vince's face.

 

I imagine the TV deal will also hope. My point was not that they are doing great, but they are far from being fucked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, When Jokers Attack said:

Why add another belt? All the current belts right now already mean nothing without adding more.

 

I can see the reasoning behind another belt. At present the upper/mid card is stacked and you often have ex world champions holding the secondary titles and clogging up these divisions.

When done right that third title can be good (WCW tv title/early wwf hardcore) when done poorly its another belt. I don't watch Raw, but willing to give the idea a chance, even if I doubt the execution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

I can see the reasoning behind another belt. At present the upper/mid card is stacked and you often have ex world champions holding the secondary titles and clogging up these divisions.

When done right that third title can be good (WCW tv title/early wwf hardcore) when done poorly its another belt. I don't watch Raw, but willing to give the idea a chance, even if I doubt the execution.

Eh? the secondary titles are mess. More to When Jokers Attack fundamental point is the wrestler makes the belt rather than the belt making the wrestler in WWE. R-Truth/Shinsuke/Rusev didn't become relevant when they won the US title as these guys weren't taken seriously by the company but when someone like Cena is holding it gets on PPVs and treated like it actually matter. Adding more belts don't matter until they fix a lot more shit first.

Edited by jump
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jump said:

Eh? the secondary titles are mess. More to When Jokers Attack fundamental point is the wrestler makes the belt rather than the belt making the wrestler

I didn't say the secondary titles were booked well, more that I could see a role for a tertiary title to give lower card guys something to fight for.

I think a title can make the wrestler, I would say the hardcore title made Crash Holly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...