|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on May 18, 2015 22:28:49 GMT -5
Parity booking in the main event segment.
THAT'S THAT SHIT THAT I DON'T LIKE.
|
|
|
|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on May 18, 2015 22:30:28 GMT -5
Because one of these months we'll stop giving away the Network for free.
|
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on May 18, 2015 22:34:41 GMT -5
I don't even know what they can do to balance it all out. First there's the need to have compelling matches on the PPVs/specials so they're worth buying the Network for, but they also have the need to have compelling matches on the TV shows so they're worth watching, while not giving away too many match combinations so they can be saved for PPV some time down the line... or having guys lose too often so they're protected for those future matches, or not having the TV matches have too many non-finishes so it doesn't feel like you've wasted your time.
So... What really can they do that pleases all concerns?
|
|
peter
AC Slater
Posts: 248
|
Post by peter on May 18, 2015 22:54:53 GMT -5
I've said it many times, as fun and financially lucrative as the Attitude Era/Monday Night War was, it created long term negatives to the television portion of the business. There is no way they can go back to having jobber matches on TV and risk losing viewers. 5 hours per week (6 if you include Main Event), and every match has to involve the main roster stars. Because of that, every match combination gets used up fairly quick.
Back in the day (even up to the mid-1990's), a feud could be run for 3-5 months because they weren't having their matches on TV. Only on house shows and PPVs. And when you add the fact that there is a PPV every month to go along with all those TV hours, I honestly have no idea how anyone could possibly keep the booking fresh. As big as the roster is, you'd almost have to double it to refrain from repeat matches.
While I kinda miss the 80's way, I wouldn't go back to it. I think the booking and pacing was great when the WWE had a 2 hour Raw and the 1 hour Sunday Night Heat. But then came SmackDown, then 3 hour Raws, then Main Event, etc. But all these extras have provided WWE with so much money that they can't go back. Sad but true.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 23:01:52 GMT -5
I don't even know what they can do to balance it all out. First there's the need to have compelling matches on the PPVs/specials so they're worth buying the Network for, but they also have the need to have compelling matches on the TV shows so they're worth watching, while not giving away too many match combinations so they can be saved for PPV some time down the line... or having guys lose too often so they're protected for those future matches, or not having the TV matches have too many non-finishes so it doesn't feel like you've wasted your time. So... What really can they do that pleases all concerns? They could start by doing at least one of those and going on from there... |
|
|
|
Post by 01010010 01101001 01100011 on May 18, 2015 23:04:21 GMT -5
I don't even know what they can do to balance it all out. First there's the need to have compelling matches on the PPVs/specials so they're worth buying the Network for, but they also have the need to have compelling matches on the TV shows so they're worth watching, while not giving away too many match combinations so they can be saved for PPV some time down the line... or having guys lose too often so they're protected for those future matches, or not having the TV matches have too many non-finishes so it doesn't feel like you've wasted your time. So... What really can they do that pleases all concerns? They got a roster of how many people not counting NXT? Use more of them. Whether between them, them as competitive job guys to the main stars or whatever. Not every matchup needs multiple match ups. We don't need 50 Wyatt/Ambrose matches in 6 months. Let Ambrose beat Adam Rose or follow him around as he tries to get to Seth. Maybe throw some promo time to Harper and Rowen's Laugh In so we can find out why they are together again or something like that. |
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on May 18, 2015 23:17:16 GMT -5
I don't even know what they can do to balance it all out. First there's the need to have compelling matches on the PPVs/specials so they're worth buying the Network for, but they also have the need to have compelling matches on the TV shows so they're worth watching, while not giving away too many match combinations so they can be saved for PPV some time down the line... or having guys lose too often so they're protected for those future matches, or not having the TV matches have too many non-finishes so it doesn't feel like you've wasted your time. So... What really can they do that pleases all concerns? They got a roster of how many people not counting NXT? Use more of them. Whether between them, them as competitive job guys to the main stars or whatever. Not every matchup needs multiple match ups. We don't need 50 Wyatt/Ambrose matches in 6 months. Let Ambrose beat Adam Rose or follow him around as he tries to get to Seth. Maybe throw some promo time to Harper and Rowen's Laugh In so we can find out why they are together again or something like that. OK, let's use your Ambrose v Rose hypothetical as an example... Right now, that match is a foregone conclusion because of where Ambrose is and where Rose is. If Ambrose v Rose is a competitive match, most will likely gravitate towards the opinion of "Ambrose looks bad because Rose is getting this much offense in" instead of "Rose looks great because he's being competitive with Ambrose". You'd have to build Rose up somehow for the match with Ambrose so Ambrose can get a tangible rub from it... So who does ROSE in a match beat for credibility? Everyone else on his level is in the same situation, with no credibility to give. That's where you need to put proper NON-ROSTER enhancement talent back in somehow... But that's even more of a foregone conclusion than the original Ambrose v Rose match and apparently a possible ratings-killer. This is how we end up with all this 50/50 stuff, where nearly anyone can beat anyone else, which sounds great in concept, but really doesn't get anyone anywhere in the end. |
|
|
|
Post by 01010010 01101001 01100011 on May 18, 2015 23:30:11 GMT -5
They got a roster of how many people not counting NXT? Use more of them. Whether between them, them as competitive job guys to the main stars or whatever. Not every matchup needs multiple match ups. We don't need 50 Wyatt/Ambrose matches in 6 months. Let Ambrose beat Adam Rose or follow him around as he tries to get to Seth. Maybe throw some promo time to Harper and Rowen's Laugh In so we can find out why they are together again or something like that. OK, let's use your Ambrose v Rose hypothetical as an example... Right now, that match is a foregone conclusion because of where Ambrose is and where Rose is. If Ambrose v Rose is a competitive match, most will likely gravitate towards the opinion of "Ambrose looks bad because Rose is getting this much offense in" instead of "Rose looks great because he's being competitive with Ambrose". You'd have to build Rose up somehow for the match with Ambrose so Ambrose can get a tangible rub from it... So who does ROSE in a match beat for credibility? Everyone else on his level is in the same situation, with no credibility to give. That's where you need to put proper NON-ROSTER enhancement talent back in somehow... But that's even more of a foregone conclusion than the original Ambrose v Rose match and apparently a possible ratings-killer. This is how we end up with all this 50/50 stuff, where nearly anyone can beat anyone else, which sounds great in concept, but really doesn't get anyone anywhere in the end. This is where you (well WWE) have to put in the time and work to make this work. There are no changes that can work overnight, I mean, shit look at what we're seeing with Cena right now. He starts this open challenge stuff with Ambrose (or week later, doesn't matter) in a good competitive match and when it was over all people we talking about was lolCena wins but now that match with Cena is part of Ambrose's move up the card. So yeah, Rose/Ambrose right now doesn't look great for Ambrose now, if Rose starts wresting on RAW and winning matches that match with Ambrose doesn't look bad. Maybe you give Rose and Ambrose a 3 week feud only on RAW (Ambrose can win every match in different ways to show he's ready to face Rollins) to keep him from touching Rollins again. You cycle the 40 people you don't normally use and in with the 10 or 15 you do and try to deepen the roster so not everyone needs a match. Then the guys that don't need matches can have skits or watch the matches or cut a box in promo instead of sitting in on commentary. Shit, maybe one of these guys even catches on and gives you a new star to use making this whole thing a little easier. Or you can have more than 1 Divas feud along with more than 1 tag feud on TV to take up the time. |
|
|
|
Post by "Mr Wonderdick" Dick Dastardly on May 18, 2015 23:35:18 GMT -5
Use the TV for enhancement matches and build the storylines through promos and angles.
Seth Rollins destroys some local guy, then after the match, Ambrose comes out and brawls with Rollins.
It won't happen, though, because the fans are too spoiled and expect "name" talents facing each other every week.
|
|
Dean-o
Grimlock
Haha we're having fun Maggle!
Posts: 13,865 
|
Post by Dean-o on May 18, 2015 23:54:34 GMT -5
At the very least use everybody on your roster. Big deal if Zack Ryder jobs on Raw every Monday, at least he can eat the loss at the expense of making his opponent look good.
|
|
|
|
Post by rapidfire187 on May 19, 2015 0:11:40 GMT -5
I enjoy WWE a lot more by sticking to the network. I look up the occasional good match or segment on YouTube but RAW and especially SmackDown seem kind of obsolete.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hobby Drifter on May 19, 2015 2:39:59 GMT -5
I have zero problem w/ most RAW matches being "tune-up" matches for the PPV.
"Name" guys teeing off in exhibition-style matches against local talent. The main event can be a tag match w/ four legit Superstars.
So what if the outcomes of matches on free-TV are obvious? You'll STILL get to see (hopefully) good matches, AND we won't wind up seeing the same matches over and over again, contracted guys looking like total jokes, or non-finishes accounting for roughly half of all match endings. Plus, you won't wind up giving away potential moneymaking first-time matches on some random RAW.
If this means that guys aren't on Raw every week...GOOD. I think Lesnar has shown that not being forced onto TV when "creative has nothing for you" works.
|
|
