Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,788 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Back in December last year the McMahons came out and said to all of us that rematch clauses were done with, they were a thing of the past. Yet from then till now all I see is rematches for titles.

In fact there is a new type of rematch clause being thrown into the mix.

For the examples. Look no further then Alexa Bliss and Lacey Evans.

Alexa competes agaisnt Bayley for the SD womens title at Stomping Ground. Alexa didnt gain the title. What happens next? She immediately "earns" another title shot again for Bayley's title this time with Nikki.

Lacey Evans got 3 count em 3 title shots back to back to back for Beckys belt. The matches did improve each time they competed I did enjoy the ER mixed match but still 3 times? And she just came up to the main roster to and first thing shes given is 3 title opportunities.

Then there was..sorry IS the old rematch clause thats still in play.

Finn Balor loses the Intercontinental championship to Bobby Lashey at Fastlane or Elimination Chamber. Then Finn competes at WM35 to get it right back from Bobby.

Charrlote just lost at WM35 yet next ppv MITB there she is again in the title picture winning the SD belt.

The latest one is Seth losing the universal strap at ER then the next night on Raw he's gonna face Brock at SummerSlam for the universal belt.

But the rematch clause is done away with right?

Back then whoever lost the title they would come out and say I invoke my rematch clause. Now they have to "earn" the right to compete for the title.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,000 Posts
The no rematch clause would make them have to come up with new feuds on a faster pace. Obviously, it's WWE, so they just went with the 'you gotta earn it again, oh shit, look who just earned it again' booking, which is actually more boring and obvious than just telling us dude is getting a rematch.
 

·
You need to be yourself, you can't be no-one else.
Joined
·
7,174 Posts
Back in December last year the McMahons came out and said to all of us that rematch clauses were done with

they also stood in that ring and announced in december that the product would be changing and they would be listening to the audience.

its fairly well established at this point that the mcmahons are full of shit. It's just time to accept that they are compulsive liars and will not change anything until vince at least steps down, retires or dies because he is the main issue. Thats the bottom line. Nothing will change with vince in charge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,830 Posts
Rematch clause came into play if a champion lost a title they immediately got a title rematch

In order for Brock to get rematch he had to win mitb, Seth had to win battle royal. I can't remember Bryan getting rematch with Kofi

Rousey didn't get rematch with Lynch, asuka i don't remember getting rematch with Lynch. Lynch herself didn't get rematch for SD title she lost
 

·
I'm too busy, faded in Japan with the crew
Joined
·
10,398 Posts
You are wrong.

As WWE stated, there is no more rematch clause.

However, that does not mean there is no more rematch. The wrestler still has the opportunity to compete for another championship match.

Example: Seth Rollins won the BR to become number one contender.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,593 Posts
I disagree. Rollins had to win a battle royal to get his rematch. I actually didn't mind the rematch clause, having that could help prove the new champ was worth it by defeating the old champ.
 

·
alexa = greatest of all time!
Joined
·
3,169 Posts
i suppose wwe might think it builds up the character in kayfabe to "earn" a rematch so you can suspend disbelief a bit for the match. (the challenger isn't as much of a 'loser'). but in reality the idea of a rematch is still going strong, they just arrive at it differently in storyline.

they got creative with lexi's rematch for ER by having her minion win the title shot for her, but in the end it was the same result.
 

·
Blaze is Elite
Joined
·
2,874 Posts
Something that would be nice sometimes, since they want to get rid of the rematches, don't have the person who could just get said "Rematch." win the match to get one, at least that way it's not always going to be "Well (superstar A) will get their rematch with (superstar b) sometimes let it be someone else so the fans are like whoa okay. Cause if the person who loses just "Earns" it back like that, than it's uh.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,872 Posts
Back in December last year the McMahons came out and said to all of us that rematch clauses were done with

they also stood in that ring and announced in december that the product would be changing and they would be listening to the audience.

its fairly well established at this point that the mcmahons are full of shit. It's just time to accept that they are compulsive liars and will not change anything until vince at least steps down, retires or dies because he is the main issue. Thats the bottom line. Nothing will change with vince in charge.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,336 Posts
Almost everything they’ve done since that segment has actually been worse than anything they did prior to it.

Let that sink in. We still have rematches but they bait fans into thinking there won’t be a rematch. Literal bait. This shit is crazy.

Vince is a senile old man who doesn’t understand his target audience. And what he’s done is hire 2 other old men as executive directors.

Instead of going back to basics, they add extra stipulations, implement dumb ideas and are genuinely doing the opposite of what I expect them to do.

does Vince watch anything but current day WWE?

If you look at a basic storyline in anything from wrestling to comic books and movies there is usually a bad guy who’s powerful and dastardly, does things to hurt good people. Then there’s the good guy who’s relatable - family man or humble (unless it’s iron man). In the first encounter, the bad guy goes over the good guy because the good guy isn’t as strong as the bad guy or doesn’t believe himself. But then in the second encounter, the good guy goes over because he’s spent the past hour working on himself getting stronger or fighting others to get his courage back. And then that’s the end of the feud. No more - there’s just 2 encounters but a lot happens in between.

Why can’t Vince do this? Just try it goddammit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,052 Posts
Nobody said there weren't going to be any more rematches, they're just not automatic. If someone loses a title and WWE think there's still money in the feud then obviously they're going to put them together again. Scrapping the clause just means that you don't have those boring obligatory rematches where everyone knows who's going to win.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Looking at your post, technically, they have gotten rid of the rematch clause because now the same contender/ex-champion has to "earn" it in a predictable match on TV instead of the automatic title shot. With all that said, I don't know why anyone at this point would even try to make sense of anything WWE does. They've done this "new era" shit a bunch of times now and it only takes them weeks before they revert to the same old shit.

I do laugh at the "YOU are the general manager!" promo pointing towards the audience, and I laugh even more at anyone who actually fell for that drivel.
 

·
WF's #1 Mox fan.
Joined
·
23,551 Posts
Yeah, it was the AUTOMATIC rematch clause for former champions they seem to have got rid of. Corbin literally got 3 title shots in a row and didn't earn any of them but he wasn't the former champ so it didn't matter. Seth at least earned his rematch in that battle royal, they didn't just hand it to him.

But they're inconsistent cos sometimes they enforce it, sometimes they don't. I remember back in January when Mox lost the IC title, he didn't get a rematch for it and I was mad :lol Probably a good thing in the long run, but at the time I was annoyed lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,859 Posts
That's why if there is a certain announcement, new match stipulation, or show change acknowledged on TV, you should take it with a grain of salt. The old man changes his mind so damn much, that it'll likely be gone and not referenced the very next week.

Remember when Mick Foley came out and said that the third hour of Raw from now on will have a totally different feel to it, it would have a grittier lighting and ring presence? Yeah, that lasted two weeks. On the second week, they didn't even do it until the last 20 minutes of the show. After that, never done or mentioned again. And it was actually a neat idea.

Or when WWE was introducing a new segment called "The Electric Chair", where fans would get to ask a chosen wrestler random questions of their choosing? That lasted 1 week and ended the same night that it debuted. All because Vince got pissed off that Sami Zayn mentioned AEW, which was the following Raw after All In.

Oh how about the Wild Card Rule, where 3 wrestlers of a show can appear on a different show, including NXT and 205 talent? Yeah, that was a big fucking lie. It way surpassed 3 wrestlers, and it was the same wrestlers jumping shows every single week. Also, the NXT or 205 guys were never even used.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top