Wrestling Forum banner

21 - 40 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,695 Posts
i think any negative of showing the top 5 is outweighed by the positives i pointed out

and they also only show the top 5 / so anybody with a bad record is not buried as a result

we’ll see how it plays out this year, but so far for me ‘positive >> negative’ because of my reasons
They show literally everybody's record when they come out to have a match. Your positives don't really make much sense as only 4 people have a lot wins and few losses so they look like a star (Jericho, Mox, Omega, and Riho).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,333 Posts
They show literally everybody's record when they come out to have a match. Your positives don't really make much sense as only 4 people have a lot wins and few losses so they look like a star (Jericho, Mox, Omega, and Riho).
if the positives make no sense, then the negatives make even less

Just the fact that anybody is arguing about rankings > negatives
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
it is also great discussion feul online - everybody argues about it, so it makes AEW‘s SEO better and their trends better - while turning zero people away. no downside from where i’m sitting
Prior to AEW launching, "a real sports feel with Wins and Losses mattering" was part of their marketing.

How do you know that none of the 600,000 people who tuned into the premier and aren't watching now weren't turned away by the ridiculousness and randomness of those rankings? AEW isn't growing, and if AEW fans aren't buying into this, AEW "casuals" aren't going to either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
280 Posts
The rankings system is too flawed and restrictive, I feel like that is the reason feuds get cut off too quickly sometimes.

All they have to do to create sensible booking is build up a wrestler and give them some momentum for a number of weeks if they intend to give them a push into the title scene. It cant be hard to be able to avoid wwe's dodgy booking style of having some guy losing all the time for a number of months and allow them to stay in the main event picture or deciding they will give a guy a title push out of nowhere with no built up momentum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,435 Posts
Except that's not really true either we've seen Darby get a title shot over PAC because he beat Cima, despite PAC having wins over Omega and Page at the time. Nyla Rose shoot up the rankings the week she beat Leva Bates. Even if you consider win quality how is Omega ranked on win quality when he hasn't had a singles match this year.
That was different time though. When tv just started and Pac just returned to the company. There wasn't even ranking system set up yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,879 Posts
So far their ranking system has been a bit hit/miss for me.

Like this Tag Team Battle Royal they have next week. Now I have no problem with the match. But the fact that a team like Angelico and Jack Evans, who haven't won anything in forever, could end up as #1 Contenders for Revolution doesn't make it feel like wins and losses are a huge deal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,580 Posts
I think that AEW uses the rankings to give the appearance of a "real sport". The difference is mainly visual and they're still gonna do whatever they want when it comes to booking.

One positive is that they prompt the commentators to talk about matches that happened a while ago, whereas other companies would expect you to forget about those.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,695 Posts
if the positives make no sense, then the negatives make even less

Just the fact that anybody is arguing about rankings > negatives
People argued about The Nightmare Collective doesn't mean it should've continued
That was different time though. When tv just started and Pac just returned to the company. There wasn't even ranking system set up yet.
The Nia example happened in December
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,333 Posts
People argued about The Nightmare Collective doesn't mean it should've continued
that’s different and you know it :D

you’re just a smart lad who wants the last word ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
637 Posts
Being ranked #1 is not = to being #1 Contender. The matches decide that. The rankings also decide who are in the #1 Contender matches.

It's quite simple to figure out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,580 Posts
Being ranked #1 is not = to being #1 Contender. The matches decide that. The rankings also decide who are in the #1 Contender matches.

It's quite simple to figure out.
But sometimes the commentators refer to the wrestler ranked #1 as the #1 contender, so it is a little confusing IMO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
637 Posts
But sometimes the commentators refer to the wrestler ranked #1 as the #1 contender, so it is a little confusing IMO
That I agree with. I think the commentators do say that when they probably shouldn't be and that does confuse the people watching. However, once they had their first #1 Contender matches people should have figured out what was going on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,486 Posts
As others have said, it’s based off of wins and quality of wins, like in college sports. They just don’t lean into it as much as they should.

What it probably needs are ranking divisions; something like gold division (top 5 – main eventers), silver division (next 5 – upper midcard), bronze division (next 5 - midcard), and then the rest of the roster. Wrestling has always been hierarchical, and in the absent of a couple midcard belts (although Cody admits they’re working on having a midcard belt), something like ranking divisions would probably help to illustrate to the viewers who rising through the card, who’s not, and what their general status is at the moment. There’s would be no real conflict if the three championship divisions have a couple of title matches on a Dynamite show in terms of match placement on a card either. It would just mean that it’s a really big deal that an episode as a couple of championship matches and the viewer should watch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
I've suggested before that they should do an end of the year tournament that is determined by rankings or something that would give you reason to pay attention because as of now there is very little value in them. Not only does it handcuff the writers, but it seems like they often don't mean anything because of things like the tag battle royal and the fatal four way women's match. It's more trouble than it's worth to try to keep it consistent which they often don't do. And if he Cody really compared this to college football that's even worse. Everyone absolutely hates the college football postseason. Why on Earth would you want to replicate their shitty post season format that is based on the opinions of a group of people and not actual performance? If they really want to keep a sports-like presentation they should do what TNA did on Foxsports and have a graphic on the screen with the wrestlers' names and the time limit of the match
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
344 Posts
People will find anything to bitch about...especially these members with obvious agendas against AEW
Go watch the shitty WWE product. Why are you spending 905 % of your time in the AEW section
 

·
Tiger Driver '91
Joined
·
2,676 Posts
I would like to propose a chip. A tournament for a chip. Whoever wins is the chip holder.

If you beat the chip holder you become the chip holder and have claim that you are better than the previous chip holder (s), and so on. You have a chip on your shoulder, but can never compete for a title while chip holder.


That's it. Book some stuff around it
Sounds even stupider than this rankings system, so kudos for accomplishing that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,728 Posts
I think that AEW uses the rankings to give the appearance of a "real sport". The difference is mainly visual and they're still gonna do whatever they want when it comes to booking.

One positive is that they prompt the commentators to talk about matches that happened a while ago, whereas other companies would expect you to forget about those.
How does it lend the appearance of a "real sport" when you've got a guy like Orange Cassidy going into fights with his hands in his pockets?

People will find anything to bitch about...especially these members with obvious agendas against AEW
Go watch the shitty WWE product. Why are you spending 905 % of your time in the AEW section
905% of their time? That feels like an AEW statistic.

A lot of the people who don't like AEW (gasp) don't like WWE. It's not one or the other. Both can suck. And the "bitching" in here is totally logical and relevant.

Stats in wrestling have been a historical flop for as long as anyone has been alive. The nature of the business itself goes against the logic of having them.
 
21 - 40 of 48 Posts
Top