Gotta give some props to WWE for this - Page 2 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Indy Wrestling, Debate League, Women of Wrestling Forums
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #11 of 32 (permalink) Old 10-20-2012, 08:44 AM
Challenging SCOTT STEINER's authority
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,768
Points: 498
                     
Re: Gotta give some props to WWE for this

Do people not watch Smackdown? Sheamus VS Barret should not be at Wrestlemania.

Anyway,

I can remember reading that Bryan was meant to win the title but HHH wanted the champions to have longer runs. I can't say the first part is true or not, but I like how the champs are keeping the belts.

I would like to see Punk hold the title for a few more months as I don't see it benefitting anyone else at this point than an unrespected heel. Cena doesn't need it, Ryback doesn't deserve it just yet, Kane & D Bryan are busy. I would like to see Punk hold it until about Summerslam next year if that's possible.

TWITTER: @WRITEJOEWRITE
Click HERE & register for Free Stuff from Amazon
Please read my wrestling column "The Pull Before The Push" by clicking HERE,
with my latest piece being "I've (sort of) Never Been To a Wrestling Show"
or click HERE to read RANDOM MUSINGS (Or, Rest Holds) 07-10-2015.
Seeifyoucanclickonthetinydot ----> .


Throw The BOOK At Me
For Wrestling Forum's all things book and reading related discussion group, please click HERE.
(and join our fortnightly Book Club HERE.)

sEE If You Can Click on the TINY DOT ----> .

Issues_Sunshyne is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 32 (permalink) Old 10-20-2012, 08:54 AM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 785
Points: 36
     
Re: Gotta give some props to WWE for this

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eulonzo View Post
You have a point.

Hopefully Sheamus loses that shit before Wrestlemania 29 though.
Why not at Wrestlemania? Besides if he loses now, he will regain it back at mania. Are you up for another long Sheamus reign?
Hazaq is offline  
post #13 of 32 (permalink) Old 10-20-2012, 08:55 AM
Cutting a shoot promo to get over
 
Gandhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Posts: 7,130
Points: 2,094
                     
Re: Gotta give some props to WWE for this

Yeah I get your point although it still doesn't change that Sheamus is a horrible champion.

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/signaturepics/sigpic217556_8.gif


Cast your light upon us, for the night is dark and full of terrors.


Quote:
Originally Posted by thelad1985 View Post
the wenches prefer a fart in the face to a bunch of flowers
Gandhi is online now  
post #14 of 32 (permalink) Old 10-20-2012, 09:51 AM
A real SHOOTER
 
Ham and Egger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Across The Sea
Posts: 15,552
Points: 2,943
                     
Re: Gotta give some props to WWE for this

It's been a nice run but the last 4 months have been a bore so his long title reign is a dud imo.

Ham and Egger is offline  
post #15 of 32 (permalink) Old 10-20-2012, 10:00 AM
Lacing SCOTT STEINER's boots
 
SinJackal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,381
Points: 250
                     
Re: Gotta give some props to WWE for this

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwSmash View Post
Yeah, I get your point. It makes it bigger and more exciting when it changes hands. The Fatal Four Way and his second match against Bryan were both really good.
Yet everything in between is boring and forgettable since it had pretty much no meaning. It's never very memorable when the champ retains.

I don't like the trade off. One possibly big moment (or potentially an annoyed, "about fuckin time" moment instead, like with Diesel), in exchange for 4 solid and potentially big moments too? Doesn't seem worth it to me.

For reference, during the "peak" years of wrestling, 97-02, the title never changed hands less than 4 times in a year. Usually it was 5 or more, only one year actually had just 4 title changes (98).

During the (according to some), lower years in WWF history, 93-96, the title never changed hands more than 3 times in a year. Half that time being just once or twice in the year.

Prior to that (other than 91-92 where 4 title changes happened), the title never changed hands more than twice in a year.


So taking all that into consideration, I'm not seeing what's so special about having long reigns. There weren't super long reigns during the best 7 years of wrestling. Yet there were long reigns during all of the most boring years of it.

Could be just a correlation without causation, but I don't think it's just a coincidence seeing as how WWE's been pretty boring this year too outside of right around Wrestlemania.

4-6 title changes a year seems to be the golden number. So long as it's not just always flipping between the same two guys obviously. 3rd or 4th parties need to be involved.


The more a guy retains, the less interesting it becomes imo. The "payoff" at the end might POSSIBLY be decent, or it could just be one of those "about fuckin time" moments. And regardless of how it turns out, the half a dozen PPVs prior to it were all shitty disappointments because nothing happened in them yet again.

And yes, I did hate the long title reigns of Diesel and Bret Hart when I was a kid. Completely did not give a fuck about the world title until HBK chased after it after winning the rumble (best rumble ever too imo).
SinJackal is offline  
post #16 of 32 (permalink) Old 10-20-2012, 10:26 AM
Undisputed King of the World Wrestling Federation
 
Cliffy B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fucking Up Tiny Tim
Favourite(s): AJ Styles, The Rock, Bret Hart, Steve Austin
Posts: 12,189
Points: 3,504
                     
Re: Gotta give some props to WWE for this

somebody doesn't get it.

Edge's first wwe title reign, all two weeks of it, meant more than Sheamus's current reign.

Cliffy B is offline  
post #17 of 32 (permalink) Old 10-20-2012, 10:36 AM Thread Starter
Carrying SCOTT STEINER's bags
 
Shawn Morrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,528
Points: 0
               
Re: Gotta give some props to WWE for this

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffy Byro View Post
somebody doesn't get it.

Edge's first wwe title reign, all two weeks of it, meant more than Sheamus's current reign.
True but at least they are giving reigns more time. Hot potatoes are necessary sometimes, because otherwise it gets too predictable, but they need longer reigns more often, specially for new main eventers, it helps establish them and also make it a big moment when the next person wins it.

Not Removing Until:

John Cena faces Undertaker at Wrestlemania [ ]

Sheamus and Cm Punk are the 2 World Champions [X] -Wrestlemania 28

John Morrison wins World Title [ ]

John Cena losses cleanly [X]- Wrestlemania 28 Rock Beats John Cena


John Cena turns heel [ ]

Shawn Michaels returns for One More Match[ ]

Daniel Bryan beats a Main Eventer cleanly [ ]

BTB:
http://www.wrestlingforum.com/booker...l#post10519764
Shawn Morrison is offline  
post #18 of 32 (permalink) Old 10-20-2012, 12:18 PM
THE ONE.
 
YoungGun_UK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 5,351
Points: 24
                     
Re: Gotta give some props to WWE for this

Nice idea, poor execution, just like everything WWE does. In Sheamus's case the World title doesn't mean 'that much' and the 'Summer' Angle should have been Punk vs Sheamus for a unification, it would have brought more spotlight on Sheamus and Punk being both in a 'big match' environment and could have been played up nicely in Punk's turn.

Punk's 'reign' has been very good also in numbers and the 'WWE title' is the big prize but the lack of 'main event' focus made the first half of the reign feel like background music, they've done a better job since his heel turn but this also co-insides with Cena's involvement.

Cody Rhodes had a great IC title reign, everything about it was brilliant and then?...NO PAY OFF. typical, how about Cody held that title all the way till he met the Monster that is Ryback at Survivor Series 2012? Cody would have cemented himself as having one of the greatest IC title reigns along with a big pay off at the end with Ryback being the one to end his reign.

So yeah, they've started putting belts on guy's longer but you need more than that for it to work.




Last edited by YoungGun_UK; 10-20-2012 at 12:21 PM.
YoungGun_UK is offline  
post #19 of 32 (permalink) Old 10-20-2012, 01:39 PM
Yelled at by SCOTT STEINER
 
volunteer75's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,774
Points: 174
         
Re: Gotta give some props to WWE for this

I agree. Long title reigns are the best. It makes a title change more meaningful.

volunteer75 is offline  
post #20 of 32 (permalink) Old 10-20-2012, 01:46 PM
Wheel Man for SCOTT STEINER
 
VladMan2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 3,375
Points: 114
                     
Re: Gotta give some props to WWE for this

I see where you're coming from with this, you do have a point here. Longer reigns blow hot-potato reigns right out of the water, it makes the title change (and reign) actually have a meaning to it.

VladMan2012 is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome