|
|
Post by arthuradams2002 on Apr 23, 2010 21:41:17 GMT -5
Does Vince own the rights to the Wargames trademark ? Does anybody know ? I know TNA used it for a brief time before they changed the match to "Lethal Lockdown."
|
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Apr 23, 2010 21:43:58 GMT -5
Trips supposedly keeps pushing for it to be used, so I would say that's a big yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by FailedGimmick on Apr 23, 2010 21:44:52 GMT -5
It was an option in that survey to replace Survivor Series, so they must own it.
|
|
EJS
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 18,857
|
Post by EJS on Apr 23, 2010 21:45:03 GMT -5
Certainly they can use the concept. And if they don't own the rights to the name, then no one does.
|
|
|
|
Post by arthuradams2002 on Apr 23, 2010 21:48:19 GMT -5
I don't know if it can work in a PG ear. Take a look back at WrestleWar 1992, that was brutal. But, you didn't have all the ratings like you do now. Wrestling can not confined to a rating system back then. They could crank up the notch whenever they saw fit.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Tank on Apr 23, 2010 21:49:27 GMT -5
They can, yes.
But the story that always seems to go around is that Vince doesn't want to use it since it's not his own creation.
|
|
|
|
Post by arthuradams2002 on Apr 23, 2010 21:52:53 GMT -5
But Vince used Great American Bash, and that wasn't his creation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lance Uppercut on Apr 23, 2010 21:55:32 GMT -5
I think maybe that it's a combination of:
Don't want to use the two ring set up.
The coin toss where the heel has to win is a bit contrived.
If he can't be bothered to put effort in setting up teams (good teams, not guys randomly thrown together or people who haven't wrestled each other on tv all year) for survivor series, his own thing, I don't think he's gonna care about War Games.
|
|
|
|
Post by arthuradams2002 on Apr 23, 2010 21:58:45 GMT -5
I think maybe that it's a combination of: Don't want to use the two ring set up. The coin toss where the heel has to win is a bit contrived. If he can't be bothered to put effort in setting up teams (good teams, not guys randomly thrown together or people who haven't wrestled each other on tv all year) for survivor series, his own thing, I don't think he's gonna care about War Games. Here is something to think about. The WWE already has two gimmick PPV with cage matches, would it be over saturating to add a third cage PPV ? |
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319 
|
Post by mrjl on Apr 23, 2010 22:01:52 GMT -5
I think maybe that it's a combination of: Don't want to use the two ring set up. The coin toss where the heel has to win is a bit contrived. If he can't be bothered to put effort in setting up teams (good teams, not guys randomly thrown together or people who haven't wrestled each other on tv all year) for survivor series, his own thing, I don't think he's gonna care about War Games. they don't have to use the two ring set up. They could easily modify it and use the HiaC. |
|
|
|
Post by arthuradams2002 on Apr 23, 2010 22:04:07 GMT -5
I think the WCW Wargames 2000 in a Hell in a Cell looking cage.
On a side note, with WCW putting Wargames on Nitro, it probably did wonders for their future buyrates.
I guess Russo didn't think about why you never saw a Hell in a Cell on Raw. Yes, they teased a HIAC match on Raw once, but it has always been fought on PPV.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kris Kobain on Apr 25, 2010 1:20:28 GMT -5
I think maybe that it's a combination of: Don't want to use the two ring set up. The coin toss where the heel has to win is a bit contrived. If he can't be bothered to put effort in setting up teams (good teams, not guys randomly thrown together or people who haven't wrestled each other on tv all year) for survivor series, his own thing, I don't think he's gonna care about War Games. VInce has been pushing hard to have War Games for at least 2 years now. |
|
|
|
Post by joeskvorecky on Apr 25, 2010 1:25:25 GMT -5
WWE has been snakebit about war-type things since 1991. They're hesitant to use "War Games" in today's world for fear that a real war will break out somewhere or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugh Mungus on Apr 25, 2010 1:34:43 GMT -5
WWE has been snakebit about war-type things since 1991. They're hesitant to use "War Games" in today's world for fear that a real war will break out somewhere or something. Don't you mean 2001 (specifically 9/11), which was why they dropped "is War" from Raw? Besides, two rings = less seats available = less ticket sales, as well as the logistics. |
|
|
|
Post by D2: Sweet & Sour Edition on Apr 25, 2010 4:01:05 GMT -5
I guess Russo didn't think about why you never saw a Hell in a Cell on Raw. Yes, they teased a HIAC match on Raw once, but it has always been fought on PPV. Mankind/Kane v Undertaker/Austin was in the Cell on Raw. |
|
ToyfareMark
Vegeta
A WINNER IS YOU!
In Hutch I trust!
Posts: 9,614
|
Post by ToyfareMark on Apr 25, 2010 6:57:02 GMT -5
I know its always been done with 2 rings, but is that absolutely required? If anything doing it in one ring could all the action together more tightly, but the purists would probably hate it no matter what.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oh Cry Me a Screwball on Apr 25, 2010 7:04:37 GMT -5
I guess Russo didn't think about why you never saw a Hell in a Cell on Raw. Yes, they teased a HIAC match on Raw once, but it has always been fought on PPV. Mankind/Kane v Undertaker/Austin was in the Cell on Raw. As was Kane vs. Mankind. |
|
|
|
Post by joeskvorecky on Apr 25, 2010 11:09:03 GMT -5
WWE has been snakebit about war-type things since 1991. They're hesitant to use "War Games" in today's world for fear that a real war will break out somewhere or something. Don't you mean 2001 (specifically 9/11), which was why they dropped "is War" from Raw? Besides, two rings = less seats available = less ticket sales, as well as the logistics. That highlights it but the last time their show was themed around war, Wrestlemania 7, it bombed horrifically. |
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips Has Left on Apr 25, 2010 12:13:10 GMT -5
I think maybe that it's a combination of: Don't want to use the two ring set up. The coin toss where the heel has to win is a bit contrived. If he can't be bothered to put effort in setting up teams (good teams, not guys randomly thrown together or people who haven't wrestled each other on tv all year) for survivor series, his own thing, I don't think he's gonna care about War Games. VInce has been pushing hard to have War Games for at least 2 years now. Vince McMahon has been pushing for it? Because Vince doesn't have to "push" for anything...if he wanted to have a War games, we'd have seen it already. |
|
|
|
Post by slickster on Apr 25, 2010 12:27:59 GMT -5
The logistics of using two rings and the fewer tickets for sale would be big disincentives to do it. Also, WWE's production crew has never done a two-ring setup so they would be reticent to film something they have no experience with. They wouldn't want to miss important spots and cool shots because they were out of position.
|
|
