Bryan v Kane should be the match that headlines Extreme Rules, but firstly we need to examine why the others contenders shouldn't.
Bryan v HHH - The babyface has already got his big win at the landmark PPV. Trips has got his hands full with The Shield and is apparently also working injured. Supposing, Hunter were to win the title, this would result in him wrestling a full-time schedule, which he clearly has no desire for given the much more backstage role he's undertaken in the last few years. Another Bryan win would do him little/no benefit, given how he's already been strongly booked by defeating HHH, Orton, Batista and Cena in the last 9 months. It would just diminish Helmsley's stock, meaning the next wrestler he were to put over wouldn't look as strong.
Bryan v Orton - The traditional view would see the former champion get a title shot at the next PPV. However, the fans have tired of seeing these two compete against one another. Wrestled numerous times against each other at the start of last year, and several times at the end of it. Mostly infamous for the terrible screwy finishes and abhorrent PPV buys. Orton is also currently heavily involved with the reunion of Evolution, so there'd be little need for yet another match with Bryan, as closure has already been reached.
No, wait it's as loud as Anne Frank's annex. Reaction isn't everything, but if you can't get people who paid for tickets to care about your ten-year reunion, can you realistically expect to entice thousands of casual and lapsed fans around the world to purchase a PPV you're headlining?
Secondly, looking at it from a more kayfabe perspective, the PPV's should be built around the biggest star, and part of being a star revolves around booking, as Daniel Bryan defeated all three members of Evolution the previous month and in kayfabe is the number one, surely he's the star who should be headlining the show.
Multi-man tag matches are dying down, in the States at least. Looking at the relative apathy towards Survivor Series from Vince & co suggests that it's not a very profitable venture, given the way the McMahon family seem to chase anything that can gain revenue. Also worth noting is that it's buy rates have been on a huge downward spiral over the last decade, which furthermore highlights the lack of interest from fans in multi-man tag matches.
Now, let's move on to why Bryan v Kane is the correct match to headline Extreme Rules. Kane and Bryan already have a long history, both with Hell No and Kane screwing DB at Elimination Chamber, despite this, it's a match we've only seen on Raw or PPV five times, which is half the amount of times we've seen Orton and Bryan clash in either. Another benefit of them being former tag team partners is that they'll be more familiar with each other's styles, meaning that they'll be more likely to give us a decent match.
Bryan has gone on a long chase and taken the fans on a roller-coaster of emotions along the way, so fans just want a bullshit free title defence, which I believe Kane would be most suited taking the fall for, as he can take a clean loss without a significant loss in credibility, as he's been an upper-midcarder who's always had the fortune of decent booking for close to 20 years.
Overall, Bryan v Kane would be the most logical match to headline the PPV, especially as we are still in the honeymoon period of Bryan's historic title win. Bryan has deserved the title for the past year and it would be a kick in the teeth for him not to headline. Look where the last ROH champion who didn't get to main-event PPV's on a regular basis as champion is..... Oh wait, we don't have a fucking clue as he left due to discontent with the WWE.
Bryan v Kane gets a "YES!" "YES!" "YES!" to headline Extreme Rules from me.
The Andre the Giant Memorial Battle Royal should absolutely become an annual attraction at WrestleMania, and a decision to make it an annual attraction would be a good one. With the movement of the Money In the Bank Ladder Match to its own named Pay-Per-View event in 2011 and the apparent abolishment of King of the Ring since Seamus was the last King of the Ring in 2010, there is prime real estate on the WrestleMania card for such a match that can be used to push an up and coming talent.
Unlike Money In the Bank, which grants the winner a guaranteed title match via the contract in the briefcase, the Memorial Battle Royal does not tie the hands of the show's writers by forcing a character to go in a specific direction. When a superstar wins the Money In the Bank briefcase, it is a nearly foregone conclusion that the winner will go on to capture the WWE World Heavyweight Championship. There have been fourteen Money In the Bank briefcases, out of those twelve the holder went on to win the coveted prize.
Much like King of the Ring, the winner of the Memorial Battle Royal does not win a guaranteed title match. Instead, they are only given a memorial trophy to immortalize their triumph. The winners of King of the Ring are only given the regalia of a king. Within the company, King of the Ring has been a launching pad for rising superstars, a sign that a push is imminent for the crowned superstar. The Memorial Battle Royal can serve this same purpose.
There are benefits to having such a match at WrestleMania that extend beyond the eventual winner and their career trajectory. Having a Battle Royal on the card allows the company to showcase the talent and and ability of characters that may not normally have a place at the Showcase of the Immortals. At WrestleMania XXX, the Andre the Giant Memorial Battle Royal's match time was thirteen minutes and twenty-five seconds. This is more airtime than many of the men in such a match would have at WrestleMania.
This year's match was billed as thirty participants and ended up being thirty-one. Not including talent that did not actively participate in a match (such as Luke Harper and Erick Rowan) and not including the pre-show, there were 28 superstars involved in WrestleMania matches that were not the Memorial Battle Royal. This one match can more than double the amount of talent on the show. Characters that normally do not have story progression or that are not used on television on a weekly basis can use this as a vehicle to introduce themselves or get over with the audience, a chance they would not have if the match was not on the card.
In addition the benefits for the participants during WrestleMania, there are benefits to be found for them leading up to the show as well. Like the Royal Rumble, which routinely showcases superstars giving promos about their desire to enter and win the Rumble, the same happened this year leading to the Memorial Battle Royal at WrestleMania. This is one way that the WWE can use often unused talent and a chance to give those without a direct storyline microphone time. As well, matches can be booked to send the winner into the Battle Royal and the loser home packing. These matches can be used to build feuds outside of the Battle Royal itself.
There are many uses and benefits for this type of match being an annual attraction at wrestling's grandest stage. Whether it is building a feud between talent, priming a superstar for an upcoming push (without saddling them and the writers with an almost foregone conclusion to the story), showcasing more talent on the card or that talent having time they ordinarily wouldn't have.
Fucking finals week. I'll have to try to make a good argument at some point tomorrow in the morning.
There is no PG Era. There never was a PG Era. Just sayin.
Originally Posted by KO Bossy
What's Jay Hyatt doing in the Impact Zone?! And here comes Duke Sharper and Derek Lowan! The Hyatt Clan has arrived!
Originally Posted by SP103
Oh A Swagger push? Give it 3 hours and he'll be behind bars again. This time around it will be for driving while firing a rocket launcher from atop a tank into an orphanage full of down syndrome kids waiting for Cena for their make-a-wish.
I think that it would not be a bad idea if the nba let a little more go in the games. Nowadays it’s more of a wing players game with a drastic increase in threes and the diminishing role of centers. you can’t really make any contact to a three point shooter nowadays, when back in the day you used to be able to grab and do all kinds of physicality. Now if you grabbed and hand checked you’d never be on the court because of foul trouble. Teams like the Bad Boy Pistons would never be allowed into todays game.
Here is Kobe Bryant on the newer rules
“It’s more of a finesse game. It’s more small ball. Which, personally, I don’t really care much for,” Bryant said. Like so many from the old-school – even at 35, Bryant qualifies – he is befuddled at the soft stuff now that passes for physical play. “Makes me nauseous,” he said. “You can’t touch a guy….
“Nowadays, anybody can get out there and get to the basket – you can’t touch ‘em,” he said. “Back then, if you have guys putting their hands on you, you have to have the skills to be able to go both ways, change directions, post up and have that mid-range game, because you didn’t want to go all the way to the basket because you’d get knocked [down].”
there’s probably is no one who knows more about the old vs new rules out on the perimeter. People like Jordon and Gary Payton would have had a hard time playing in this league due to the rules. Payton was called “the glove” because of how great his defense was. Also maybe it’s just nostalgia kicking in for these people, but everytime i hear someone old enough to have watched and understood the game at the time says the 80’s was the best era in the leagues history. A time when it was really physical.
My biggest issue is when they hand out flagrant fouls for stuff that doesn’t even appear to be that bad and nothing more than a common foul is called a flagrant because it looked like a hard foul. Like in last nights game between the Rockets and Trailblazers, a hard foul was looked at to make sure it wasn’t a flagrant. one of the announcers was like “...really?” it seems like if a foul is a little hard, it gets reviewed.
I’ll show you a couple examples to prove my point
Now the only thing that made that made that anywhere close to a flagrant is the hard fall and Tony Allen’s masterful flop. There was nothing excessive or unnecessary about Ginobili fouling him, Unless the refs wanted to say he should have let him lay the ball up.
I can understand it in cases like this
There’s a big difference between the two. One was foul that was trying to prevent a layup that would have made it a one score game. Manu made a play on the ball and Tony Allen just happened to fall really hard. Andrew Bynum was just being a extremely sore loser, with his team down by 30. He was never making a play on the ball and only wanted to possibly hurt JJ Barea.
I’m not saying they should let it all go and have it look like Ghetto Ball, where everything goes. But I think it would be nice if they would allow some more contact around the 3 point arc and treating hard fouls as just that, a hard foul. instead of having to waste 5 minutes to decide whether or not it was a flagrant because the contact was a little hard and the player fell to the ground.
Wrestlemania is frequently referred to as the “Grandest Stage of them All” and the “Showcase of Immortals”.The performers who bust their ass during the wrestling season that culminates at Mania give their all to have that “Wrestlemania moment” coming in the form of an event or in ring masterpiece. Not only wrestlers put exponential investment into their mania performance, but fans have heavy investment as well. A pastime of fans is debating, and when the subject of best Wrestlemanias comes up, Wrestlemania 17 and 19 are frequently cited as the very best. These two shows both feature good ring products spearheaded by a gem (Michaels/Jericho at 19 and TLC match at 17), a headlining match that delivers (Angle/Lesnar and Rock/Austin) and name value. The ultimate question remains of which event is better? While the margin is close and both are great ppvs, X-7 is superior.
VKM’s vision of “sports entertainment” is an all encompassing variety show of entertainment striving to reach as many demographics of the audience as possible. Wrestlemania X-7 certainly provided versatility
Purists received the great Benoit/Angle contest centered around who is legitimately the superior wrestler. Jericho vs Regal provided a purist pleasing battle presenting the classic contrast of a clear heel vs clear face as well as a stylistic contrast of high octane, energetic wrestler vs methodical technician. Those who just want to watch “rasslin”, uninterested in storytelling and psychology certainly got their desire .Taker/HHH’s respectable showing diverged into a match that threw the rulebook out, winding up in a big brawl that spilled far out of the ring until the finish. Rock/Austin dissolved into a brawl numerous times. Those watching wrestling for the one of a kind entertainment aspects got their wish with the zany hardcore title match featuring brutes riding golf carts also provides comedy. The Mcmahons street fight and especially TLC covered these same entertainment valuers as well as thrill seekers and those waiting for “holy shit” moments that TLC more than provided. Nostalgic fans got the gimmick battle royal featuring some prominent wrestlers and personalities of the past. Rock/Austin II included a mix of everything in the battle of two greats in their prime.
While Lesnar/Angle blended styles nicely and Jericho/Michaels provided a terrific seesaw battle, WM 19 failed to provide a feelgood underdog story in Booker since the feud and match fell flat. WM 19 tried a hardcore match, but featuring combatants combined over a century years old was subpar.
A mark of a good ppv is a dynamic ending to set up the future. Wrestlemania being the culmination of a long wrestling season, Wrestlemania’s ending when done correctly provides seismic ramifications for the landscape of wrestling. Austin turning heel doing the unthinkable and joining hated rival Mr. Mcmahon after building an undying vicarious connection with fans for being the blue collar, anti-establishment asskicker provided the framework for great change in the product in 2001. One might diminish by saying this event is tainted by a poor heel run by Austin business wise, to which I reply that when strictly talking one event and not aftermath, WM 17 isn’t to be judged for what occurs after WM 17 happened.
Wrestlemania 19 provided no landscape changing moment. Taker’s match was forgettable.Jericho’s win didn’t further him in canon. Lesnar’s botched moonsault was an exhilarating visual, but had zero impact on the landscape of WWE. HHH retained his title belt,’Vince/ Hogan was nothing more than a blowoff fight between two infrequent combatants. Austin/Rock 3 represents great historical significance, but outside of setting up the short lived Rock/Goldberg, the match itself beared no contender ramifications. Austin was done either way.
Presentation is important as well. WM 19 was held in an outdoor stadium. Due to outdoor venue, one might argue the event was more appealing visually than 17, but consequently,the crowd noise was flatter, as the noise carried out of the stadium. A good crowd can really enhance the atmosphere or detract moments or sometimes whole events. Calling the action of 17 was reserved moralist Jim Ross alongside controversial “extreme” loudmouth Paul Heyman. These polar opposite roles provided unique, fresh chemistry never reprised at Mania again. JR’s passion and Heyman’s vocal inflections added thrill to matches while giving a proper presentation; both men put over heel and face talent as plausible victors. WM 19 featured King/JR again; a combination that had already played out over years and worsened with King beginning metamorphosis from a witty smart ass to a stale kiss ass.
If one still doesn’t believe that WM is the superior event for the more versatile ring product, bigger ramifications and production value, consider that the company itself named Wrestlemania 17 their best ppv of all time.