|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Oct 17, 2013 10:15:06 GMT -5
The only one that makes any kind of damn sense was the order to never say that a wrestler doesn't care about winning a match. If only they booked using that kind of logic...
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Oct 17, 2013 10:21:28 GMT -5
These are just dumb, especially Dunn. Telling the announcers what to say isn't his job. An employer has to set out the shows guidelines for everybody or else you get nuisances like JBL and Matt Striker making the show unwatchable. Vince Mcmahon and company have been doing this for years and must have good reasons for ensuring that the commentators know their place. I wish there was someone to make Vince et al "know their place." These notes are beyond stupid and are intelligence insulting. Especially the choked thing. Newsflash: THEY ARE CHOKING PEOPLE. It'd be like a TV show having people be shot with guns, but passing down a mandate that it couldn't be mentioned. "THAT UNDERCOVER COP WAS HIT WITH A LAUNCHED PROJECTILE AT A HIGH VELOCITY AND HAS SUFFERED GRIEVOUS INJURY AS A RESULT."
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Oct 17, 2013 10:26:31 GMT -5
They should be able to say the Shield doesn't care when they get themselves DQ'ed and swarm their opponent. Other than that, yeah, don't say they don't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2013 10:59:45 GMT -5
It amazes me at how successful the WWE is with morons like this running the show.
|
|
BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Oct 17, 2013 11:03:32 GMT -5
The only one that makes any kind of damn sense was the order to never say that a wrestler doesn't care about winning a match. If only they booked using that kind of logic... I don't even mind this, as it often makes sense when they say it. Like when they have a wrestler go out there and beat his opponent to the point where he ends up getting a dq, because he were more interested in hurting them than winning the match.
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Oct 17, 2013 11:23:52 GMT -5
The only one that makes any kind of damn sense was the order to never say that a wrestler doesn't care about winning a match. If only they booked using that kind of logic... I don't even mind this, as it often makes sense when they say it. Like when they have a wrestler go out there and beat his opponent to the point where he ends up getting a dq, because he were more interested in hurting them than winning the match. That, I have no problem with. I'm talking about shit like Fandango walking out of a match every other week.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Oct 17, 2013 11:23:56 GMT -5
They should be able to say the Shield doesn't care when they get themselves DQ'ed and swarm their opponent. Other than that, yeah, don't say they don't. Well, the whole thing kind of exposes a flaw inherent in the entire WWE. When there's no obvious benefit to winning a match (they don't even mention that the winner gets more money anymore), and when people like The Shield end up losing a lot of matches but are still treated as super-important, then why the hell would anyone care about winning?
|
|
StuntGranny®
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Not Actually a Granny
Posts: 16,099
|
Post by StuntGranny® on Oct 17, 2013 11:25:31 GMT -5
If this is legit, the WWE is somehow worse than I thought. What a dumb list of rules.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Oct 17, 2013 11:26:08 GMT -5
They should be able to say the Shield doesn't care when they get themselves DQ'ed and swarm their opponent. Other than that, yeah, don't say they don't. Well, the whole thing kind of exposes a flaw inherent in the entire WWE. When there's no obvious benefit to winning a match (they don't even mention that the winner gets more money anymore), and when people like The Shield end up losing a lot of matches but are still treated as super-important, then why the hell would anyone care about winning? Just because one group doesn't care about something doesn't mean no one else does. They're unique, and it doesn't tear down the veil to treat them as unique.
|
|
|
Post by RowdyRobbyPiper on Oct 17, 2013 11:32:25 GMT -5
I would have loved to kno what would have happened if Vince tried pulling this on Monsoon and Ventura (and maybe Heenan too) back in the day. Me too. I would love to think that Gorilla was the one guy who could put the fear of God into Vince.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Oct 17, 2013 11:36:01 GMT -5
Well, the whole thing kind of exposes a flaw inherent in the entire WWE. When there's no obvious benefit to winning a match (they don't even mention that the winner gets more money anymore), and when people like The Shield end up losing a lot of matches but are still treated as super-important, then why the hell would anyone care about winning? Just because one group doesn't care about something doesn't mean no one else does. They're unique, and it doesn't tear down the veil to treat them as unique. But what are they sacrificing? Why doesn't everyone just come to the ring with two friends who run in and beat up their opponents if they start losing? This isn't perfect, but it'd be something to show that The Shield members have to eat Ramen every night because they get themselves DQed all the time, but they are so committed to their cause, they do it anyway. Or hell, it could fit into the storyline. "The Shield are losing all their matches by DQ, so they should be getting way less money. But I looked into their lifestyles, and they seem to be doing just fine. I looked at their contracts, and it turns out they get paid the same amount even if they lose! Some evil authority figure must have done this on purpose!" Truth is, it's just a problem in the whole thing. The competitions are supposed to stand on their own, but meanwhile there's storyline, personal reasons for all the big fights. Why should Randy Orton care about fighting Kofi Kingston, if Orton's beef is with Bryan? What does Orton gain by not just getting counted out? There's just not a good answer to that question.
|
|
|
Post by woowoowoox on Oct 17, 2013 11:41:20 GMT -5
So this memo is about three years old right? Does anyone know/remember if these bans have stuck or if the announcers have used these terms since?
Either way, this is really dumb.
|
|
Dean-o
Grimlock
Haha we're having fun Maggle!
Posts: 13,865
|
Post by Dean-o on Oct 17, 2013 11:42:38 GMT -5
It amazes me at how successful the WWE is with morons like this running the show. In their eyes, it's probably this stupid amount of micro management that makes them think is the reason why they make millions and millions of dollars. There is a reason why most 3 hour Raw's feel like 8. It's because they are so repetitive it becomes tiresome, and I'm not talking about rematches on the card. I'm talking about entrances, camera shots, how they always cut to commercial when the action spills to the outside, 9pm/10pm segments starting, stock quotes from commentary that sound like they are being read off a piece of paper, etc. The list can go on forever.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Oct 17, 2013 11:45:57 GMT -5
Just because one group doesn't care about something doesn't mean no one else does. They're unique, and it doesn't tear down the veil to treat them as unique. But what are they sacrificing? Why doesn't everyone just come to the ring with two friends who run in and beat up their opponents if they start losing? This isn't perfect, but it'd be something to show that The Shield members have to eat Ramen every night because they get themselves DQed all the time, but they are so committed to their cause, they do it anyway. Or hell, it could fit into the storyline. "The Shield are losing all their matches by DQ, so they should be getting way less money. But I looked into their lifestyles, and they seem to be doing just fine. I looked at their contracts, and it turns out they get paid the same amount even if they lose! Some evil authority figure must have done this on purpose!" Truth is, it's just a problem in the whole thing. The competitions are supposed to stand on their own, but meanwhile there's storyline, personal reasons for all the big fights. Why should Randy Orton care about fighting Kofi Kingston, if Orton's beef is with Bryan? What does Orton gain by not just getting counted out? There's just not a good answer to that question. If someone at a job cares less about making more money than having freedom to pursue his hobbies, it doesn't mean everyone else has no logical reason to care about making more money. People sometimes have different goals in what they do, we all understand that, so why is it so illogical to think that The Shield just have different goals and motivations than CM Punk or Randy Orton? The Shield's motivations are in being feared and self-preservation more than winning matches. They will fight and try to win, but if things are looking bad they're not above using their numbers to ensure that, no matter what, they're standing tall at the end. You don't need to make a big storyline out of it, it makes sense as it is. Most superstars have pride/ego behind what they do and want to be considered the best because that's their ticket to the top, they have other reasons for being there. It's not a problem in the whole thing, it's a problem in the interpretation of it. If you look at WWE wrestlers like any other employee in the world, then it's perfectly logical to assume that they have different motivations that may not tie in to winning every match. As for the Orton/Kingston example, maybe he doesn't care about fighting Kofi, but he might care to send a message by demolishing Kofi. Kofi is beneath him, not a challenge, so he can decimate Kofi in an attempt at psychological warfare against Bryan.
|
|
paywindah
Dennis Stamp
He's goin' to da paywindah here on da muddaship TBS.
Posts: 3,678
|
Post by paywindah on Oct 17, 2013 11:46:20 GMT -5
It amazes me at how successful the WWE is with morons like this running the show. Like Punk said, millionaire that should be a billionaire.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Oct 17, 2013 11:57:14 GMT -5
The only one I like is the one "the wrestler doesn't care about winning the match". Then why are you wrestling? I hate that, it's such Russo bullshit.
In regards to Wrestlemania feeling old and dated, Wrestlemania is a yearly event. Wrestlemania 2 feels old and dated, not Wrestlemania 30.
I can see the choke deal with the Benoit thing, but it's also important that air chokes are still illegal. I'm trying to remember if I saw a heel do an air choke in wrestling in awhile though. Blood chokes like Sleepers and triangle chokes are totally different, though I guess the idea that Benoit killed his son with a blood choke while he was sedated makes them feel uncomfortable. It is corporate fear based though.
The title change hands one is an odd one. It's simply an expression that the title went from one guy to another. Do they think it's too generic? Do they think it's not epic enough? This one is the most confusing. I can see the corporate nonsense of the others, but not this one.
Man, Vince is not a Melzer fan. What if the announcers like learning about wrestling history and obscure wrestlers from the 40s?
In regards to the referee didn't see it, I'm still kinda not sure? Do they not want to put heat on the ref? Actually, no, I do get it. They don't want the referees to come across as really incompetent. It might be a subtle difference but I guess it goes back to some bad booking of the past when it comes to referees just completely missing something and looking dumb. In talking about blocked vision, your giving a good reason as to why the referee didn't see it, if you get me. So yes, I actually do agree with this one as well, and I commend WWE for wanting their refs to feel more legit.
I'll give you an example of "the ref didn't see it". In TNA, one of the worst referee moments was in Lethal Lockdown. Garett Bischoff hit his finisher on Christopher Daniels and goes to pin him. But, the referee just paid no attention and walked around them so Eric Bischoff could get in there. One could say "the referee didn't see it" but it's showing more referee incompetence then anything.
And lastly, funny enough, this was talked about in the Rise and Fall of ECW when TNN didn't want ECW to use the word hate. Now, in some cases, hatred isn't what fuels a feud, but in other cases, I can possibly say that Daniel Bryan hates the Authority for everything they've done to him, and why wouldn't he. Hate can still be a PG emotion, he has good reason to hate these people.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Oct 17, 2013 12:23:30 GMT -5
What on earth is wrong with "titles change hands"? I mean honestly, that's probably the stupidest thing I've read about WWE in a while.
|
|
|
Post by Beets by Schrute on Oct 17, 2013 12:43:14 GMT -5
Working for this company would be a nightmare for intelligent people.
|
|
|
Post by Lazy peon on Oct 17, 2013 12:51:27 GMT -5
It amazes me at how successful the WWE is with morons like this running the show. Like Punk said, millionaire that should be a billionaire. But Vince was in Battle of the Billionaires!
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Oct 17, 2013 12:52:22 GMT -5
If someone at a job cares less about making more money than having freedom to pursue his hobbies, it doesn't mean everyone else has no logical reason to care about making more money. People sometimes have different goals in what they do, we all understand that, so why is it so illogical to think that The Shield just have different goals and motivations than CM Punk or Randy Orton? The Shield's motivations are in being feared and self-preservation more than winning matches. They will fight and try to win, but if things are looking bad they're not above using their numbers to ensure that, no matter what, they're standing tall at the end. You don't need to make a big storyline out of it, it makes sense as it is. Most superstars have pride/ego behind what they do and want to be considered the best because that's their ticket to the top, they have other reasons for being there. It's not a problem in the whole thing, it's a problem in the interpretation of it. If you look at WWE wrestlers like any other employee in the world, then it's perfectly logical to assume that they have different motivations that may not tie in to winning every match. As for the Orton/Kingston example, maybe he doesn't care about fighting Kofi, but he might care to send a message by demolishing Kofi. Kofi is beneath him, not a challenge, so he can decimate Kofi in an attempt at psychological warfare against Bryan. It's still completely unclear why everyone doesn't just always do what The Shield does. It's clearly a strategy that works, so why does anyone ever follow the rules? Just have your friends beat up your opponent if you start to lose. You'll keep being booked on TV every week anyway. Easy. Losing doesn't matter. And when losing doesn't matter, why would anyone care if they win? And if the WWE employees aren't motivated to win every match, then why are they participating in every match and acting as if they want to win them? It needs to be made clear why THESE TWO SPECIFIC GUYS are willing to fight each other THIS WEEK RIGHT NOW. Pride/ego can work, the "pay window" can work, but the announcers won't tell us. Also, sometimes it directly contradicts the characters' specific motivations. If R-Truth can in no way benefit from fighting Ryback, why's he trying to win? If Randy Orton wants to send a message to Bryan by beating Kingston then, like, shouldn't the match be booked in a way that has Orton acting that way? Instead, it's just taken as a given: Oh, of course Orton would want to fight Kingston! They have a scheduled match! But that's not enough. Orton's not greedy (and presumedly he gets extra money from being the champ anyway) and he's not particularly honorable, so... dude, just get DQed and walk away.
|
|