|
Post by "Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik on Aug 31, 2014 20:49:03 GMT -5
The Elimination Chamber match (and the PPV by association) is one of my favorites in the WWE. It guarantees an awesome match almost every time and gives us some fresh match ups and underutilized guys time to shine. However, I hate its current placement on the calendar. Since it is sandwiched between the Rumble and Mania, the Chamber match itself is very predictable because there are only so many guys they will have in the main event of Mania (also made predictable by often knowing who the winner will face). For example, it was very easy to telegraph Swagger winning his match (to have the feud with Del Rio) and Cena winning his in 2011 (to face Miz). Having the PPV during another time of the year (a dull point, perhaps October), will really make the matches more worthwhile and less predictable. What say you?
|
|
|
Post by RI Richmark on Aug 31, 2014 21:08:18 GMT -5
Yes, especially now that there's only one World Title. I actually think the Elimination Chamber and Hell In A Cell shouldn't have thier own annual PPVs, just have the matches when it makes sense to have them.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Aug 31, 2014 21:13:24 GMT -5
No. I like the Elimination Chamber in February because I like it as the "last chance" for someone to get into the main event at WrestleMania. I wish WWE put a few lower carders in the match though for added drama; while a guy like John Cena or Randy Orton will be on the WM card no matter what, guy like Zack Ryder or Tyson Kidd may have to win the championship just to be at WM AT ALL. For lower level talent, the Elimination Chamber adds an intriguing "Go big or go home" element to it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2014 21:15:04 GMT -5
Yes, especially now that there's only one World Title. I actually think the Elimination Chamber and Hell In A Cell shouldn't have thier own annual PPVs, just have the matches when it makes sense to have them. I agree with that on Hell in a Cell, but the Elimination Chamber's a six man match. It's rare you're going to get the chance to have one without it coming off as contrived. Personally, I say replace Survivor Series with it.
|
|
|
Post by Main Eventer on Aug 31, 2014 21:21:44 GMT -5
Yes, a thousand times yes!!! Having the Elimination Chamber happen right after the Royal Rumble devalues the Royal Rumble. Oh you didn't win a 30 man over the top rope battle royal? Here's another shot where you have a 1 in 6 chance of winning. See you in the Main Event of Wrestlemania.
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Aug 31, 2014 21:27:20 GMT -5
Make it annually at Survivor Series.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Aug 31, 2014 21:27:55 GMT -5
I agree completely. It's a big match, and should be special, but it's given a terrible spot where there's no suspense at all. It either enforces the status quo already in place, or goes into a completely predictable direction given who the Rumble winner is. No. I like the Elimination Chamber in February because I like it as the "last chance" for someone to get into the main event at WrestleMania. I wish WWE put a few lower carders in the match though for added drama; while a guy like John Cena or Randy Orton will be on the WM card no matter what, guy like Zack Ryder or Tyson Kidd may have to win the championship just to be at WM AT ALL. For lower level talent, the Elimination Chamber adds an intriguing "Go big or go home" element to it. Why, in-universe, would someone like Zack Ryder or Tyson Kidd be allowed anywhere near the WWE title? They already put in one or two midcarders every year like Sheamus or Barrett who serve as the unlikely underdogs, but Zack Ryder is a total jobber. There is no reason why he should have a title match, and literally no drama is added by throwing him in there.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Aug 31, 2014 21:29:15 GMT -5
I agree completely. It's a big match, and should be special, but it's given a terrible spot where there's no suspense at all. It either enforces the status quo already in place, or goes into a completely predictable direction given who the Rumble winner is. No. I like the Elimination Chamber in February because I like it as the "last chance" for someone to get into the main event at WrestleMania. I wish WWE put a few lower carders in the match though for added drama; while a guy like John Cena or Randy Orton will be on the WM card no matter what, guy like Zack Ryder or Tyson Kidd may have to win the championship just to be at WM AT ALL. For lower level talent, the Elimination Chamber adds an intriguing "Go big or go home" element to it. Why, in-universe, would someone like Zack Ryder or Tyson Kidd be allowed anywhere near the WWE title? They already put in one or two midcarders every year like Sheamus or Barrett who serve as the unlikely underdogs, but Zack Ryder is a total jobber. There is no reason why he should have a title match, and literally no drama is added by throwing him in there. Idk. I just liked the pop Santino got in 2012 and wished WWE would repeat moments like that every once in a while. Plus it's hard to think of Sheamus and Barrett as "unlikely underdogs" when they're mostly considered "equals" to the big players from a kayfabe perspective. No one is going to think of Sheamus beating John Cena as a "major upset".
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Aug 31, 2014 21:42:43 GMT -5
Yeah. Usually whoever wins the Royal Rumble usually will begin to feud with the current champ after Royal Rumble. So it's extremely unlikely for there to be a title change at the Elimination Chamber. And more importantly if Lesnar holds onto the belt until Wrestlemania, I'm pretty skeptical he works that match so it would be a non-title affair.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Aug 31, 2014 21:54:50 GMT -5
I agree completely. It's a big match, and should be special, but it's given a terrible spot where there's no suspense at all. It either enforces the status quo already in place, or goes into a completely predictable direction given who the Rumble winner is. Why, in-universe, would someone like Zack Ryder or Tyson Kidd be allowed anywhere near the WWE title? They already put in one or two midcarders every year like Sheamus or Barrett who serve as the unlikely underdogs, but Zack Ryder is a total jobber. There is no reason why he should have a title match, and literally no drama is added by throwing him in there. Idk. I just liked the pop Santino got in 2012 and wished WWE would repeat moments like that every once in a while. Plus it's hard to think of Sheamus and Barrett as "unlikely underdogs" when they're mostly considered "equals" to the big players from a kayfabe perspective. No one is going to think of Sheamus beating John Cena as a "major upset". Whoops, meant to type Cesaro there instead of Sheamus, but the point still stands. Santino may have been a comedy wrestler in 2012, but he was still someone who was booked in a way where he looked like he could do things. In fact his finisher was one of the strongest in the company at the time. Token midcarder is one thing, but jobbers would stick out and be really underwhelming.
|
|
Tony Schiavontay
Dennis Stamp
This is the greatest post in the history of this board!
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by Tony Schiavontay on Aug 31, 2014 22:22:08 GMT -5
In kayfabe, it makes the Royal Rumble almost not worth it.
Why would I want to risk it all in a 30 man match with random entrances, no strategy and eliminations just by being thrown out of the ring when I could qualify for a six man match the next month? Of course my entrance in the match will still be somewhat random but I still know that I'll be in there with some combination of five other guys so I can still train accordingly. In a Rumble, I could be in there with literally anybody on the roster or even some legend entering the match with something to prove and I could have to be in there for exhausting amounts of time. Plus, the Rumble's for a shot at the title, the Chamber's for the title itself.
f*** the "glory" of winning the Rumble and going on to the main event of Wrestlemania, I'm gonna win the title a month before and still get to be there. I'll risk the injury.
|
|
Jonathan Michaels
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Archduke of Levity
Here since TNA was still kinda okay
Posts: 18,024
|
Post by Jonathan Michaels on Sept 1, 2014 1:27:31 GMT -5
Idk. I just liked the pop Santino got in 2012 and wished WWE would repeat moments like that every once in a while. Plus it's hard to think of Sheamus and Barrett as "unlikely underdogs" when they're mostly considered "equals" to the big players from a kayfabe perspective. No one is going to think of Sheamus beating John Cena as a "major upset". Whoops, meant to type Cesaro there instead of Sheamus, but the point still stands. Santino may have been a comedy wrestler in 2012, but he was still someone who was booked in a way where he looked like he could do things. In fact his finisher was one of the strongest in the company at the time. Token midcarder is one thing, but jobbers would stick out and be really underwhelming. I still think it was a huge missed opportunity that they didn't capitalize on either of those Santino moments.
|
|
|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on Sept 1, 2014 1:53:42 GMT -5
I wish that Hell in A Cell and Elimination Chamber didn't exist as PPVs. Like, yes I want both these matches every year, but I don't want to know exactly when to expect them. Same for TLC.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Sept 1, 2014 3:23:35 GMT -5
I liked the Chamber where it was at first, but I've always wanted it to be that there would be one match. When there were two titles, I thought the Rumble winner faces one champion at Mania, and the chamber winner should face the other champion.
I agree that its current placement makes no sense, but I don't think they should get rid of it as an annual show. I think it should be a tentpole show like MITB and the Rumble and Survivor Series.
The Cell is a match for bitter rivalries, but as a six man match the Chamber doesn't work for that.
|
|
|
Post by King Devitt: Scrum Guzzler on Sept 1, 2014 3:27:18 GMT -5
Yes, a thousand times yes!!! Having the Elimination Chamber happen right after the Royal Rumble devalues the Royal Rumble. Oh you didn't win a 30 man over the top rope battle royal? Here's another shot where you have a 1 in 6 chance of winning. See you in the Main Event of Wrestlemania. Summed up my thoughts perfectly. They don't utilize it correctly for the month its in anyway, might as well move it and make it have some kind of drama/who will actually win?
|
|
|
Post by Nic Nemeth on Sept 1, 2014 3:27:50 GMT -5
If it were up to me:
January - Royal Rumble February - Battleground/Over the Limit/Payback/Breaking Point/Fatal Fourway/whatever random PPV name they come up with March - WrestleMania April - Extreme Rules May - Elimination Chamber June - King of the Ring July - Money in the Bank August - SummerSlam September - Night of Champions October - Hell in a Cell November - Survivor Series December - TLC
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2014 4:10:43 GMT -5
If it were up to me: January - Royal Rumble February - Battleground/Over the Limit/Payback/Breaking Point/Fatal Fourway/whatever random PPV name they come up with March - WrestleMania April - Extreme Rules May - Elimination Chamber June - King of the Ring July - Money in the Bank August - SummerSlam September - Night of Champions October - Hell in a Cell November - Survivor Series December - TLC I'd probably have it... January - Royal Rumble February - No Way Out or St. Valentine's Day Massacre (always liked the name) Early April - WrestleMania Late April / Early May - Backlash (with the Extreme Rules gimmick, preferably for the whole show instead of half-assing it like the past few years) May - Random filler PPV. June - TLC with Money in the Bank as part of it. July - Great American Bash August - SummerSlam September - Night of Champions October - Halloween Havoc November - Elimination Chamber, or Survivor Series but with a guaranteed Chamber main event. December - Random filler PPV. Arranges it so that after each of the big concept PPVs, there's a more standard skippable one following it, and removes the redundancy of having two ladder match-based PPVs each year.
|
|
|
Post by Nic Nemeth on Sept 1, 2014 4:53:59 GMT -5
If it were up to me: January - Royal Rumble February - Battleground/Over the Limit/Payback/Breaking Point/Fatal Fourway/whatever random PPV name they come up with March - WrestleMania April - Extreme Rules May - Elimination Chamber June - King of the Ring July - Money in the Bank August - SummerSlam September - Night of Champions October - Hell in a Cell November - Survivor Series December - TLC I'd probably have it... January - Royal Rumble February - No Way Out or St. Valentine's Day Massacre (always liked the name) Early April - WrestleMania Late April / Early May - Backlash (with the Extreme Rules gimmick, preferably for the whole show instead of half-assing it like the past few years) May - Random filler PPV. June - TLC with Money in the Bank as part of it. July - Great American Bash August - SummerSlam September - Night of Champions October - Halloween Havoc November - Elimination Chamber, or Survivor Series but with a guaranteed Chamber main event. December - Random filler PPV. Arranges it so that after each of the big concept PPVs, there's a more standard skippable one following it, and removes the redundancy of having two ladder match-based PPVs each year. See the reason, I liked my version better is because they use up all the matches that would be on filler PPVs anyway during episodes of RAW/SD so they need the gimmicks just to get people interested. The way my model is set-up, everything but the February PPV has a theme because it's the final stop before WrestleMania so they can toss all the midcard matches no one cares about on there. January has the Rumble leading into Mania. Extreme Rules shouldn't be half-assed, all gimmick matches. Elimination Chamber can be for the title but also include a team-style now that it's not stuck in February. King of the Ring should be brought back because with less titles, they need more accomplishments. Money in the Bank should feature both the title and briefcase ladder matches. SummerSlam is always in August. Night of Champions should see all titles defended. Hell in a Cell should be where all blood feuds get a cell match not just the main-event. Survivor Series is always in November. As for TLC, all four match types should be used on the show.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Grimlock
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 14,948
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Sept 1, 2014 4:53:57 GMT -5
If it were up to me: January - Royal Rumble February - Battleground/Over the Limit/Payback/Breaking Point/Fatal Fourway/whatever random PPV name they come up with March - WrestleMania April - Extreme Rules May - Elimination Chamber June - King of the Ring July - Money in the Bank August - SummerSlam September - Night of Champions October - Hell in a Cell November - Survivor Series December - TLC I'd probably have it... January - Royal Rumble February - No Way Out or St. Valentine's Day Massacre (always liked the name) Early April - WrestleMania Late April / Early May - Backlash (with the Extreme Rules gimmick, preferably for the whole show instead of half-assing it like the past few years) May - Random filler PPV. June - TLC with Money in the Bank as part of it. July - Great American Bash August - SummerSlam September - Night of Champions October - Halloween Havoc November - Elimination Chamber, or Survivor Series but with a guaranteed Chamber main event. December - Random filler PPV. Arranges it so that after each of the big concept PPVs, there's a more standard skippable one following it, and removes the redundancy of having two ladder match-based PPVs each year. I'd break the year down into 3 4 month sections, 2 months buildup, one a special attraction show and an "inbetween" one, the big event and aftermath. That way you can have a couple of mini-manias where these are the BIG shows, spiking interest. January- Royal Rumble February- No Way Out March- Wrestlemania April- Extreme Rules/Backlash May-King Of The Ring June-Night of Champions July- Summerslam (I know it's moving it a month, but it's still summer, and it's my pattern dammmit) August- Elimination Chamber September- Money in the Bank October- Battleground November- Survivor Series December- Hell in a Cell
|
|
|
Post by Ishmeal Loves Kaseyhausen on Sept 1, 2014 11:58:35 GMT -5
Since them bringing back King of the Ring is extremely unlikely, I would put Elimination Chamber in June (where KOTR used to be) and have the EC be a #1 Contenders match to set up the run to Summerslam.
|
|