Page 2 of 155 FirstFirst 12341252102 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 6178

Thread: WWE General Discussion Thread

  1. #41
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,087
    Here's a thought, would NBC ever bump Leno to 30 minutes and give Raw a network spot on Monday nights (or scale them back to two hours and run 8-10)?

    They could move some of their higher-performing shows (The Voice) to a less competitive Wednesday night and dominate there completely.

    I guess it would just depend on whether or not Raw would draw bigger numbers on network TV.

    I wonder if both parties would ever be willing to take the risk and try it for one re-run heavy night.

  2. #42
    That would be a brilliant move, and that's precisely why NBC won't do it. The people running that network right now are either too scared, too incompetent or both to make a move that ballsy.


  3. #43
    Don't WHAT? Me.
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Little Caesars Arena
    Posts
    4,620
    I always thought a wrestling show after SNL would be cool. Capitalize off the 20 something nostalgia and draw them back in w/a Saturday Night's Main Event show.

    Honestly I'd like to see WWE go to Fox Sports. They could put Saturday Morning Slam on sundays before their NFL shows. Main Event on Saturday nights (where currently they have a wack block of Adult Swim knockoffs) Live RAW & SD monday & tuesday on Fox Sports 1 with re-runs during the day, and Total Divas w/Ultimate Fighter in the same block. Since Fox has a deal with UFC they could cross-promote too. In my scenario idk what WWE does with NXT & Superstars tho.

  4. #44
    Follows buzzards Smart_Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Gotham, MS
    Posts
    2,578
    Would moving to a sports channel do anything to hurt the perception of wrestling with sports fans that don't dig it? In my experience, that's the most annoying group to try to watch wrestling around.
    I think it's awesome that the word lisp has an "s" in it.

  5. #45
    Is Your Superior PEN15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    You wouldn't be watching it with them. What's the problem?

  6. #46
    I beat up Kong! Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,932
    Quote Originally Posted by T.O. View Post
    So supposedly FOX and ESPN are considering bidding for WWE TV rights when the USA deal expires.

    Assuming this is true and not the usual internet BS, if WWE signed with either of them, how much would it impact their TV strategy? Would ESPN move RAW from Mondays during football season so as not to compete with itself? Would FOX urge WWE to fire Mark Henry for impersonating Santa Claus?
    I cannot see ESPN truly bidding for the WWE contract. It seems like a conflict of interest. For 4 months of the year, they have Monday Night Football, and do everything in their power to make Monday night "Must see TV" for their network. Which happens by the way, and then during baseball season they run the nationally televised Monday Night Baseball Game. So why would they get their direct competition? If they did, which would they promote? They would lose viewers to either show, but not on their family of networks. Would that translate to dollars? I have no idea, but it seems unlikely.

    Quote Originally Posted by phemom View Post
    I always thought a wrestling show after SNL would be cool. Capitalize off the 20 something nostalgia and draw them back in w/a Saturday Night's Main Event show.
    It would never happen. SNL is on from 11:30 - 1:00AM. I do not see many people staying away until 2:30-3:00 on a Saturday night just to watch a Wrestling show. It would clearly be a DVR show. The original SNME was on in place of SNL. But a show after SNL, the chances of that happening are zero.

    Quote Originally Posted by Smart_Mark View Post
    Would moving to a sports channel do anything to hurt the perception of wrestling with sports fans that don't dig it? In my experience, that's the most annoying group to try to watch wrestling around.
    Not sure if you remember, but ESPN used to show wrestling all the time, and they still show Wrestling Classics (not WWF/E or WCW) on one of their channels. So moving to a sports network is not that bad of an idea, after all pro-wrestling is a scrpted athletic program.
    Last edited by Powder; 12-18-2013 at 09:59 AM.

  7. #47
    Is Your Superior PEN15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    WWE has always been on a sports channel in Canada. Started with TSN, then it was The Score, which recently became Sportsnet 360.

  8. #48
    I beat up Kong! Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,932
    In all seriousness, does Canada have ESPN or is it some other network that you said? (I have absolutely no idea) I could honestly see that ESPN is an American Channel, but if you do, do they show MNF? After all, you guys have the Grey Cup and Canadian Football, so I could understand why Canadian broadcasting would not show American Football.

  9. #49
    Is Your Superior PEN15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    I don't follow sports networks, or any football. Here's what I do know:
    We have ESPN Classics Canada, I have no idea what airs on there because it's a notch below TSN and Sportsnet. I won't google either.
    CFL is on TSN and CBC.
    American Football (which really is among one of the worst and stupidest sports possible, if I am allowed an aside) is aired on the American affiliates of CBS, and Fox, usually the ones near our borders (I remember Fox Buffalo NY when I was in Montreal, and I think Halifax airs the Boston feed). On Mondays, TSN no longer carries WWE, so they air NFL. Atlanta vs San Francisco is what I saw on a commercial for the 23rd, I think.

  10. #50
    I beat up Kong! Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,932
    Well then in Canada, it does not seem like it would be a conflict of interest. But down here in the States, American Football is the most popular sport in the country due to the increasingly popular Fantasy Football. So if ESPN chose to bid on the rights for the WWE, it would be a huge conflict of interest.

    From Wikipedia:

    Canada

    ESPN International does not directly operate its own channels in Canada, but owns a 20% voting interest (and slightly larger equity interest) in CTV Specialty Television, a subsidiary of the Canadian media company Bell Media.

    CTV Specialty Television in turn operates the following sports television channels:
    The Sports Network (TSN)
    TSN2
    Réseau des sports (RDS)
    RDS2
    RDS Info
    ESPN Classic (Canada)
    NHL Network (Canada) (21.42%)

    Although these channels have mainly retained their local brands (ESPN having acquired part-ownership several years after TSN and RDS launched), they now mostly have ESPN-style logos and use other ESPN branding elements. TSN has also adopted the SportsCentre title for its sports highlights programs.

    Through CTV Specialty, ESPN also has an indirect interest in Discovery Channel Canada and several related channels, which are operated in partnership with Discovery Communications, as well as a small indirect interest in Canadian pay-per-view service Viewers Choice. These holdings date to CTV Specialty's previous incarnations as Labatt Communications and later as NetStar Communications, in which ESPN also held a minority interest. ESPN is not believed to have any involvement with the Discovery and Viewers Choice operations.
    So it is true that ESPN is NOT broadcast in Canada, with the exception of ESPN Classics.

    And is the WWE broadcasted on the USA network there too? Or not as the name of the channel changed for obvious reasons.

  11. #51
    Is Your Superior PEN15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    I don't believe we get USA. At least I've never seen it anywhere. Most WWE programming is aired on Rogers Sportsnet 360, which is our strongest competition to TSN which I would equate to being ESPN Canada (we have our own Sportscenter with the same logos I think as the US version).

  12. #52
    I beat up Kong! Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,932
    Gotcha....then if WWE is consistently broadcast on a Sports Channel and it works up there, then it could work just as well down here.

  13. #53
    Is Your Superior PEN15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    I really don't see why not.

  14. #54
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,087
    Newfoundland gets USA on their basic cable package, I think. I haven't been in years but I remember watching Raw on USA at my grandmother's. They have the strangest assortment of stations on their basic cable, though. I'm sure you could get it on satellite, but I don't even think my digital cable provider offer it. I don't remember seeing it anywhere and I get some strange channels (an NY WB affiliate in Alberta for some reason)

    Sportsnet 360 (which still hasn't changed their mobile app name or branding from The Score, by the way) has exclusive rights to all WWE programming in Canada (unless you're picking up American feeds, obviously) including Raw, Smackdown, Vintage Collection and NXT. As far as I know nobody airs Superstars or Main Event. They package it really nicely and treat it with a ton of respect.

    I actually like the ad campaign that they released this week (at least, I hadn't seen it before this week) encouraging you to "cap your week with WWE", Raw on Mondays and Smackdown on Fridays.

    I feel like something really good could come of having both shows on one network. Why isn't SmackDown on USA, again? (Other than the fact that it'd be like the fifth network change in less than a decade).

  15. #55
    Is Your Superior PEN15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    Quote Originally Posted by Team Farrell View Post
    Newfoundland gets USA on their basic cable package, I think.
    If this is true, it isn't through EastLink, Rogers, Bell, or Shaw.

    I do agree that it was nice when wrestling was all on the same channel. Even during the Monday Night Wars, TSN aired both Raw and Nitro (though Nitro was delayed).

  16. #56
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,087
    It's entirely possible that whatever cable provider carried USA is defunct or was absorbed. Everyone I know there now has satellite so that they can pick up channels that make sense.

    At one point their basic cable (at least in the SW) was just a random assortment of madness. It had things like local access, USA network, NTV, Global, CBC, A-Chanel (which I think was an Alberta station) and your standard affiliates. The thing that made it the best, though, was that none of them were on Newfoundland time except NTV and not all were even necessarily coming from the same time zone.

    NTV might air a Global show two hours before it aired on Global and one affiliate might be in the Atlantic time zone, while another was Eastern or Central. Live TV, NTV and local access were the only things with reliable times, and with live TV it still required some math.

    Like I said, they've probably been absorbed these days, and all of the affiliates are probably standardized to the same time zones. But, you never know. I was last there in 2010 or 2011 and they didn't have Rogers cell service in my grandma's town.

  17. #57
    Don't WHAT? Me.
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Little Caesars Arena
    Posts
    4,620
    Oh, the best thing the dirt sheets pulled up: WWE doesn't have a problem with airing Smackdown live. YES PLEASE!!!!! I would love to get back to both RAW & SD being must-see every week again.

  18. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,210
    Agreed strongly. I hate that there are spoilers for shows; especially when WWE spoils themselves like they did twice in the last 12 months or so.

  19. #59
    Is Your Superior PEN15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    Are the spoilers the killer? Or the fact that nothing ever happens on Smackdown? I understand that there's still good wrestling, but there are rarely storyline or character advancement beats on Smackdown. There's also very little promotion towards what will be on Friday nights, or any resolutions to look forward to. I think that's the true killer, not the spoilers. When WWE announced Punk was winning the ECW Title from John Morrison, I was more interested in the show than ever. Ever since the merging of the rosters, everything takes place on Raw or PPV.

  20. #60
    WWE is already on sports channels here, we get Raw/Smackdown/Superstars and Nxt on sky sports 3 and we get the odd PPV for free on there, I think this year it's been MITB and TLC that were free and the rest were box office

  21. #61
    Don't WHAT? Me.
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Little Caesars Arena
    Posts
    4,620
    I don't think it's 1 problem....it's the whole. For instance....

    -Part of the audience just won't watch on Friday nights because they going out.
    -Part just read spoilers and pick which SD's they'll see (which is why SD's ratings jump once in a while).
    -Part just don't believe anything important happens on SD (people on the main page calls it a longer Main Event).

    Personally I like SD because they tend to have longer bouts, but sometimes it doesn't feel like an important show. Like last week, it felt like the go home week for TLC ended at that segment on RAW. If SD mattered SD would've gotten that segment.
    Last edited by phemom; 12-18-2013 at 03:11 PM.

  22. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,210
    But for a while during the summer, things were happening on Smackdown and people still didn't watch, because of the Friday night thing you just mentioned. I think if it were live and it had the same "anything can happen" sense that RAW does people would watch it more often. I know I, personally, have never liked it being on Friday nights. I wish it was still on Thursdays.

  23. #63
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,087
    From the MP:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Cornette
    "I think it would be best to have one champion and make it feel more special but I also think the horse has left the barn, cowboy. I hate to be negative Nancy or Debbie Downer but you can see why when I watch the current product it gives me gas because for years in wrestling everyone knew who the World Champion was. Of course it depended what part of the country you were. For most of the country, the NWA champion was the champion people knew. Harley Race would hold the title for 3 years, Dory Funk Jr. would have it for 3 years, Ric Flair would hold it for an amount of time, Lou Thesz, you know, practically lived with the thing. Everybody knew he's the champ. in the AWA it was generally Verne Gagne, home are hero. In the northeast it was Bruno Sammartino, no matter who came and went, everyone knew, Bruno's the champ. Well now the problem is, the title instead of being viewed as the prize in sports, the titles have been used as props. Oh lets switch the belt onto this guy or that guy, oh let the guy cash in a briefcase and cover the dead guy that's just been beaten up, it's just been turned into a prop, it's been devalued, it's been prostituted. Besides that, now that everyone pretty much knows pro wrestling is choreographed, pre-determined, whatever you wanna call it, everyone knows you're not really the champion and someone just awards you it. The only thing that ever annoyed me about the Bret Hart screwjob in Montreal is Bret called the newspapers in Montreal to tell them he's been screwed and hadn't really lost the title, well he didn't call them when he won the thing and say oh I didn't really win it, someone just gave it to me. Now, It's a shiny belt that people can buy a replica of and it's another tool in our toolkit that we've devalued to the point where it doesn't make us any money anymore and it's sad."
    Yep, I bet people will stay interested in three year Championship reigns again in this climate.

    That guy's so delusional and stuck in the past, it's stopped being funny. I'm glad he doesn't have the keys to a major promotion.

  24. #64
    Goldberg Rules!
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    West Saint Paul, MN
    Posts
    4,839
    He's funny though when he gets going on his rants. True or not (mostly true, despite this one), he's good comedic relief when you want a laugh. His shoots are high entertainment.

  25. #65
    Don't WHAT? Me.
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Little Caesars Arena
    Posts
    4,620
    Now, It's a shiny belt that people can buy a replica of and it's another tool in our toolkit that we've devalued to the point where it doesn't make us any money anymore and it's sad."
    That's the part I agree with. I just don't think World tittles has been devalued by shorter tittle reigns, but by lack of tittle defenses.

    Back in those times, Ric Flair would be on a random TV show and actually defend his belt...and while you didn't expect Magmum TA (for instance) to win, you respected Ric for it. So while he mad have held the belt for a year....he defended it against 5-10 people during his reign.

    Now I can't respect Orton's reign because he's on faced 3 people in 4+ months for his championship. It's just not the same.

  26. #66
    I beat up Kong! Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,932
    ^^^But how many people did Cena face for the title in the 6 weeks that he held the WHC? That's right 2. Once against Damien Sandow the night after HIAC and against ADR at Survivor Series. So it is the exact same thing.

    Also let's look at Cena's most recent WWE Title run.
    1 Defense at Extreme Rules against Ryback
    1 Defense at Payback against Ryback
    1 Defence at Money in the Bank against Mark Henry
    1 Defence at Summer Slam against Daniel Bryan.

    So Cena was champion for 4+ months and had 4 title defenses. Basically the same thing as your arguement against Orton, but you do not complain about lacking respect for Cena.

  27. #67
    Don't WHAT? Me.
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Little Caesars Arena
    Posts
    4,620
    My argument isn't for or against 1 wrestler....I wanna see more tittle defenses across the board. I was just using Orton because he's current. My bad...

    I want WWE to make more ME's of RAW's & SD where it isn't rehashes of PPV's or lame tag matches, but Cena defending V Fandango, Or Orton V Zach Ryder....make me as a viewer feel like the champ is unbeatable. That's how I felt about Flair or Race even Raven in ECW.
    Last edited by phemom; 12-18-2013 at 09:05 PM.

  28. #68
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,087
    Giving the likes of Ryder or Fandango a shot devalues the belt.

    Having regular title defences on free TV devalues the belt, makes defences less special and gives people less reason to buy the PPV title defences.

    Flair or Race defended the belt every night in an era before national TV deals.

    Prior to the 80s there was no national TV, and even when NWA got the weekly World Championship Wrestling show rarely, if ever, was the NWA Championship defended. That's why the TV title existed.

    Flair was defending the belt every week in untelevised, or regionally televised matches that the large majority of people wouldn't have seen. It was the fact that he was the World Champion that was a big deal.

    The exposure of the business hurt that more than fewer title defences. Ric Flair in the 1980s was what Cain Velasquez is today, and even he isn't exactly a household name outside of MMA, so I guess a more apt comparison would be to Mike Tyson in the 90s.

    More title defences don't make the title more important (if anything, they make title defences less "must see"), how you treat the guy with the belt is what does that. Flair had the belt, Race and Thesz before him, because they were the "faces" of the NWA. Just like John Cena is today. You put the belt on him for three years, and the fans would revolt.

    EDIT: The belt was just as big a prop in Flair's day as it is now. The only reason a company was an NWA affiliate was so that Ric Flair could come in and, in a roundabout way, put over their top regional guy.

  29. #69
    Is Your Superior PEN15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    Quote Originally Posted by XanMan View Post
    But for a while during the summer, things were happening on Smackdown and people still didn't watch, because of the Friday night thing you just mentioned. I think if it were live and it had the same "anything can happen" sense that RAW does people would watch it more often. I know I, personally, have never liked it being on Friday nights. I wish it was still on Thursdays.
    What took place during the summer on Smackdown? I really don't remember anything. The only moment that I can think of is Big E's face turn.

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Farrell View Post
    Cornette's so delusional and stuck in the past, it's stopped being funny. I'm glad he doesn't have the keys to a major promotion.
    He goes off too much, but I see his point. I don't think it's the bad thing he made it out to be, but the value of the title( s ) has not been what it once was. The Money in the Bank thing is short term excitement, but could have some long term detriment (I'm not convinced of this, but open to the idea).

    The NWA no longer exists, and he needs to accept it. But he seemed on board with modern wrestling when he was in WWF and ROH. Was he ever in TNA?

    Quote Originally Posted by phemom View Post
    That's the part I agree with. I just don't think World tittles has been devalued by shorter tittle reigns, but by lack of tittle defenses.

    Back in those times, Ric Flair would be on a random TV show and actually defend his belt...and while you didn't expect Magmum TA (for instance) to win, you respected Ric for it. So while he mad have held the belt for a year....he defended it against 5-10 people during his reign.

    Now I can't respect Orton's reign because he's on faced 3 people in 4+ months for his championship. It's just not the same.

    I want WWE to make more ME's of RAW's & SD where it isn't rehashes of PPV's or lame tag matches, but Cena defending V Fandango, Or Orton V Zach Ryder....make me as a viewer feel like the champ is unbeatable. That's how I felt about Flair or Race even Raven in ECW.
    Quote Originally Posted by Team Farrell View Post
    Giving the likes of Ryder or Fandango a shot devalues the belt.

    Having regular title defences on free TV devalues the belt, makes defences less special and gives people less reason to buy the PPV title defences.

    Flair or Race defended the belt every night in an era before national TV deals.

    Prior to the 80s there was no national TV, and even when NWA got the weekly World Championship Wrestling show rarely, if ever, was the NWA Championship defended. That's why the TV title existed.

    Flair was defending the belt every week in untelevised, or regionally televised matches that the large majority of people wouldn't have seen. It was the fact that he was the World Champion that was a big deal.

    The exposure of the business hurt that more than fewer title defences. Ric Flair in the 1980s was what Cain Velasquez is today, and even he isn't exactly a household name outside of MMA, so I guess a more apt comparison would be to Mike Tyson in the 90s.

    More title defences don't make the title more important (if anything, they make title defences less "must see"), how you treat the guy with the belt is what does that. Flair had the belt, Race and Thesz before him, because they were the "faces" of the NWA. Just like John Cena is today. You put the belt on him for three years, and the fans would revolt.

    EDIT: The belt was just as big a prop in Flair's day as it is now. The only reason a company was an NWA affiliate was so that Ric Flair could come in and, in a roundabout way, put over their top regional guy.

    That's a tough one. I agree that less TV matches for the champion is better for the belt. I also agree that midcard title matches should be highlighted more on TV, allowing the World Title to take the PPV main events.

    But I do remember Saturday Night's Main Event having more title matches. Much like I'm noticing from NWA/WCW's Clash of the Champions (wow, did the WWF suck with their special TV outings compared to their competition).

    I think more TV title matches are ok, if done right. Advertise them ahead of time. I know with 3 week PPV build's, it's impossible to expect WWE to book their TV matches more than a week in advance. But this needs to happen all over the card. There's a #1 contendership match on Smackdown tomorrow for another championship. Once the winner is announced, book the match on Raw in 2-3 weeks. It seems like they only go this route once a or twice a year, with the first Raw of the year being a prime example.

    I do like the idea of seeing champions taking on midcard guys. In fact, these are the types of matches we should be seeing on TV more often when it comes to the main event guys. Look what Cena vs Sandow did for Damian? Forget the ending and the stupid "bury" argument. Just look at how much better Sandow looked in the ring when he was competitive with the #1 guy. The announcers have to play their part, which they did with Sandow. They talked him up, and paid attention to many usually unnoticed details. No doubt it was because his opponent was Cena, so all eyes are on the ring, and not taking selfies. No matter what, Sandow looked his best when keeping up with the then-World Champion. Sandow's drop is due to the follow up more than anything, because in that match, people were behind 100% of his moves. Taking the title out of the equation does take a bit of the excitement out, but having Sandow keep up next time with a Daniel Bryan or CM Punk on Raw will still be more exciting than what he normally does. Not everything needs to advance a storyline, sometimes it just needs to advance a character.

    In terms of championships, I think there should be a healthy balance. More TV title matches can work, and won't make the title less important. What it could do is make the PPVs less important. But proper booking can fix that, and I believe it's something within the realm of possibility. For example, Sin Cara has 2 victories over former World Champion Alberto Del Rio. While that is not a PPV match, why couldn't it be announced that next week, Sin Cara will get a WWE Title match vs Randy Orton? Orton gets a clean victory (or cheap if there are legs to ADR vs Cara), leading to a promo where Cena points out how the champ is still ducking Bryan and Cena, or whoever ends up as the next big time challenger. The PPV title match isn't hurt by the title bout on TV, it builds up the champion, it doesn't hurt Cara at all...etc.

  30. #70
    Goldberg Rules!
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    West Saint Paul, MN
    Posts
    4,839
    Cornette was the Director of Authority or something in TNA in like 2007 or so. His big thing was, when many different problems arose in TNA, to hold a town hall meeting and offer his solutions to every problem in one fell swoop. Actually was kind of entertaining. He'd solve 5 problems in 10 minutes.

    Not sure if this is a good example since I'm at work and can't listen, but stuff like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvUS-tckFkQ

  31. #71
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,087
    Quote Originally Posted by PEN15 View Post
    I think more TV title matches are ok, if done right. Advertise them ahead of time. I know with 3 week PPV build's, it's impossible to expect WWE to book their TV matches more than a week in advance. But this needs to happen all over the card. There's a #1 contendership match on Smackdown tomorrow for another championship. Once the winner is announced, book the match on Raw in 2-3 weeks. It seems like they only go this route once a or twice a year, with the first Raw of the year being a prime example.

    I do like the idea of seeing champions taking on midcard guys. In fact, these are the types of matches we should be seeing on TV more often when it comes to the main event guys. Look what Cena vs Sandow did for Damian? Forget the ending and the stupid "bury" argument. Just look at how much better Sandow looked in the ring when he was competitive with the #1 guy. The announcers have to play their part, which they did with Sandow. They talked him up, and paid attention to many usually unnoticed details. No doubt it was because his opponent was Cena, so all eyes are on the ring, and not taking selfies. No matter what, Sandow looked his best when keeping up with the then-World Champion. Sandow's drop is due to the follow up more than anything, because in that match, people were behind 100% of his moves. Taking the title out of the equation does take a bit of the excitement out, but having Sandow keep up next time with a Daniel Bryan or CM Punk on Raw will still be more exciting than what he normally does. Not everything needs to advance a storyline, sometimes it just needs to advance a character.
    This year in particular they've been good at making televised title defenses seem like a big deal. They're not booking them weeks out, but the one that they had (and I think that they only had one) seemed "big" because they talked about how it was a "rare WWE Title defense on Raw" and they put over the fact that the Champion doesn't typically defend his belt on TV.

    I'm all for more matches for mid carders with top guys, so long as they stay away from that 2012 trend of just having the top guys kill the mid carders. But not title matches. Title matches should seem like something important that you have to earn.

    Sure, give one to Sin Cara. His character has earned one. But Zack Ryder or Fandango? Fandango should, maybe, get a competitive match out of John Cena/Randy Orton at best, but not a title shot. Zack Ryder is such a geek at this point that he shouldn't even get anything remotely competitive out of those guys.

    I seem to remember guys like Austin and Triple H putting over the fact that just getting that shot was an honour because you never knew if you were ever going to get another one and the number of guys who came and went and never did. That's changed somewhat today in the era of multiple title rematches and PPV's being headlined by the same match three or four times in a row, but the basic principle is still there.

    You want an angle for Zack Ryder or Fandango that makes sense? Play that one up. Zack Ryder earns a shot in a fluke win over John Cena on the RTWM where the guy Cena's really feuding with distracted him. Advertise the match to take place on Raw in three weeks (since you usually have six weeks+ to build to WrestleMania) and as Orton's final defense before Mania.

    Orton doesn't need to pay any mind to Ryder in the lead-up, but the whole story is that this match is his first, and probably only, shot at the WWE World Heavyweight Title and is must win, all or nothing for him. Give him a win over another mid carder on week one and a win over an upper mid carder on week two as if he's gaining confidence (that's where the announcers and maybe a backstage interview come in) that he might actually do it, and then give him something somewhat competitive against Orton on week three where Orton still gets the decisive win (Ryder isn't on his level) but Ryder gets in a lot of offense (Ryder has the potential to be on his level).

    Then give Ryder an advertised singles or tag match at WrestleMania to keep the rehabilitation going an so as not to stall the momentum gained.

    That's an angle that could be played out with any undercard guy, Ryder was just my example. But plug Kidd, Gabriel Darren Young in there and it's the same story.

    But what makes that story special is that a) the guy earned the match (even if it was in a fluky way) and b) title matches don't happen very often and guys like that never get them.

    If you're handing out title shots to mid carders like candy, suddenly it doesn't matter at all who gets a shot and everyone is on the same level. That should not be the case. The top Champion should be clearly above, if not physically than intellectually in terms of cheating, every other competitor.

  32. #72
    Goldberg Rules!
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    West Saint Paul, MN
    Posts
    4,839
    That Punk/Ryback match really was the only WWE Championship match on RAW for the whole year? Wow if true (too lazy to look it up).

  33. #73
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,087
    I can specifically remember them announcing a title match on Raw as a "rare WWE Title match on Raw", and I can also remember them pointing out that one match was the first only one this year.

    Those may be two separate matches, with Punk's being the first one, but even so that's only two...assuming Bryan vs Orton wasn't for the Title. That was never actually clarified, I assumed it wasn't because they never said that it was.

    EDIT:

    Via another site:

    WWE Unified WWE World Champion

    (1) Current Champion: Randy Orton
    Created: 12/15/13 TLC PPV)

    WWE Title - Raw brand

    (1) Champion: C.M. Punk
    Held Since: 11/20/11 (Survivor Series PPV)
    -- completed 2012 as WWE champion
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- TLC victory vs. Ryback (01/07/13 Raw TV)
    -- pinfall loss vs. The Rock (01/27/13 Royal Rumble PPV)

    (2) Champion: The Rock
    Held Since: 01/27/03 (Royal Rumble PPV)
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- pinfall vs. C.M. Punk (02/17/13 E. Chamber PPV)
    -- pinfall loss vs. John Cena (04/07/13 WM29 PPV)

    (3) Champion: John Cena
    Held Since: 04/07/13 (WM29 PPV)
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- No Finish retention vs. Ryback (05/19/13 Extreme Rules PPV)
    -- Three Stages of Hell victory vs. Ryback (06/16/13 Payback PPV)
    -- submission vs. Mark Henry (07/14/13 MITB PPV)
    -- pinfall loss vs. Daniel Bryan (08/18/13 Summerslam PPV)
    -- #1 contender: The Rock

    (4) Champion: Daniel Bryan
    Held Since: 08/18/13 (Summerslam PPV)
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- pinfall loss vs. Randy Orton (08/18/13 Summerslam PPV)

    (5) Champion: Randy Orton
    Held Since: 08/18/13 (Summerslam PPV)
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- vs. Daniel Bryan (09/15/13 NOC PPV)

    (6) Champion: Daniel Bryan
    Held Since: 09/15/13 (NOC PPV)
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- title vacated (09/16/13 Raw TV)

    (7) Current Champion: Randy Orton
    -- No Finish for Bryan vs. Orton (10/06/13 Battleground PPV)
    -- pinfall vs. Daniel Bryan (HIAC (10/27/13 HIAC PPV)
    -- pinfall vs. Big Show (11/24/13 S. Series PPV)
    -- John Cena in-line for re-match (previously from D-Bryan)
    -- TLC victory vs. John Cena (12/15/13 TLC PPV)
    -- Unified World Title (12/15/13 TLC PPV)

    WWE World Hvt. Title - Smackdown brand

    (1) Champion: Big Show
    Held Since: 10/28/12 (HIAC PPV)
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- Last Man Standing loss vs. Del Rio (01/11/13 Smackdown TV)

    (2) Champion: Alberto Del Rio
    Held SInce: 01/11/13 (SD TV)
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- LMS victory vs. Big Show (01/27/13 Royal Rumble PPV)
    -- pinfall vs. Big Show (02/17/13 E. Chamber PPV)
    -- submission vs. Jack Swagger (04/07/13 WM29 PPV)
    -- pinfall loss vs. MITB holder Dolph Ziggler (04/08/13 Raw TV)

    (3) Champion: Dolph Ziggler
    Held Since: 04/08/13 (Raw TV)
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- pinfall loss vs. Alberto Del Rio (06/16/13 Payback PPV)

    (4) Champion: Alberto Del Rio
    Held Since: 06/16/13 (Payback PPV)
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- DQ victory vs. Dolph Ziggler (07/14/13 MITB PPV)
    -- submission vs. Christian (08/18/13 Summerslam PPV)
    -- DQ retention vs. Rob Van Dam (09/15/13 NOC PPV)
    -- submission vs. Rob Van Dam (10/06/13 Battleground PPV)
    -- pinfall loss vs. John Cena (10/27/13 HIAC PPV)

    (5) Champion: John Cena
    Held Since: 10/27/13 (HIAC PPV)
    2013 TV/PPV title defenses:
    -- pinfall vs. Damien Sandow (10/28/13 Raw TV)
    -- pinfall vs. Del Rio (11/24/13 S. Series PPV)
    -- TLC loss vs. Randy Orton (12/15/13 TLC PPV)

    (6) Current Champion: Randy Orton
    Held Since: 12/16/13 (TLC PPV)
    Unified WWE & World Title (12/16/13 TLC PPV)

    According to that webiste, which is one of the torch bearers of online wrestling news, this year there was one WWE Title defense on TV (Punk vs Ryback) and one WWE Title vacated on TV. Including two MITB cash-ins, there were three WHC defenses on TV, although only two of them were what could be considered actual matches.

    Also, I'll take that site at their word that Monday was not a title defense.
    Last edited by Team Farrell; 12-19-2013 at 01:19 PM.

  34. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by PEN15 View Post
    What took place during the summer on Smackdown? I really don't remember anything. The only moment that I can think of is Big E's face turn.
    Right after Summerslam Smackdown was red hot for at least four weeks. They pretty much carried over the Daniel Bryan-Authority feud onto Smackdown, and Bryan continued to have some big time matches against guys like Wade Barrett while also trying to overcome Triple H and co. They legit felt like big shows, before the WWE kind of tailed off the show after Night of Champions.


  35. #75
    Goldberg Rules!
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    West Saint Paul, MN
    Posts
    4,839
    Batista is rumored to return?

    FUUUUUUUUCK YUUUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSS (not yes, more emphatic than yes)

  36. #76
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,087
    Whether it's true or they just C/P'd wording from a previous ad (I've been guilty of that at work, when I'm in a rush), doesn't Batista live in Vegas?

    EDIT: Just read the actual ad. If he's not returning, could it be a one-off?

  37. #77
    Goldberg Rules!
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    West Saint Paul, MN
    Posts
    4,839
    Don't kill my dreams, I have a ticket to the PPV the following Sunday!

  38. #78
    He's returning; sources within the WWE are saying that he is coming back for at least a Wrestlemania run.


  39. #79
    Don't WHAT? Me.
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Little Caesars Arena
    Posts
    4,620
    Will it be "it's all about me"....."kissing babies & hugging fat girls" Bats tho?

  40. #80
    wfrw07
    Guest
    A damn shame that the cat was let out of the bag on this one (assuming it is true). His theme going off during the Rumble out of nowhere would have been fantastic.

    Of course, I'm sure it would have been spoiled before the show somehow, but seeing it 5 weeks in advance will dampen that impact a bit. I still hope they have something good for him to come back to.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •