|
Post by Hit Girl on Aug 28, 2015 20:11:14 GMT -5
The booking of the Bellas has sucked, but so do they.
|
|
gl83
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,924
|
Post by gl83 on Aug 28, 2015 20:32:15 GMT -5
The booking of the Bellas has sucked, but so do they.
|
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Aug 28, 2015 20:51:45 GMT -5
Nikki's reign may suck, but so did AJ's. And Kaitlyn's. I can't think of a Divas' champion who had a particularly good reign off the top of my head. Consistently ok-more-or-less matches, consistently fun segments, when it comes to the women's/divas titles in WWE Laycool was flawless.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Aug 28, 2015 20:55:03 GMT -5
"Nikki Bella is the most polarizing Diva in WWE history!"
"I don't think anyone in the WWE Universe actually dislike Nikki, Michael. They just like to have fun with her!"
|
|
Sparkybob
King Koopa
I have a status?
Posts: 10,990
|
Post by Sparkybob on Aug 28, 2015 20:59:31 GMT -5
And yet, it's still miles better than AJ's reign. Go figure. Nikki's matches since becoming Divas Champion have been leagues better than AJ's as champion, if only for the sole reason that I actually remember the matches happening. AJ's reign as Divas Champion was the white noise of championship runs. That seems like a weird thing to me because Nikki's run is still happening now While AJ's was 18 months ago.
|
|
|
Post by Some Guy on Aug 28, 2015 21:15:52 GMT -5
Hmm..I honestly don't remember. Kaitlyn spent like 2 months straight without a single match on Raw after a disastrous match against Tamina. The EC match? That match was pretty harmless for the time. Nowhere near disastrous.
|
|
|
Post by Speedy Cerviche on Aug 28, 2015 21:39:56 GMT -5
This lioness needs to be put down. Much easier said than done. #FeartheLioness #Rawr Maybe you could tempt one of those hunters who are universally reviled for killing African wildlife with the promise of getting back in the good books with a small minority of people. Except don't, because actually doing that would probably get you jailed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2015 22:26:13 GMT -5
Nikki's reign may suck, but so did AJ's. And Kaitlyn's. I can't think of a Divas' champion who had a particularly good reign off the top of my head. Consistently ok-more-or-less matches, consistently fun segments, when it comes to the women's/divas titles in WWE Laycool was flawless. Nope, it was a terrible reign. The matches were generally good, but Michelle McCool got less heat than the South Pole in the dead of winter. She was a good wrestler who couldn't get crowd reactions to save her life. She made the perfect person to squash female jobbers and in turn, job out to whatever face held the title or chased after the title. Instead, they did the opposite with her for most of her run.
|
|
oneday
Bubba Ho-Tep
Posts: 642
|
Post by oneday on Aug 28, 2015 22:26:13 GMT -5
Kaitlyn spent like 2 months straight without a single match on Raw after a disastrous match against Tamina. The EC match? That match was pretty harmless for the time. Nowhere near disastrous. this match. www.dailymotion.com/video/xx4h6m_kaitlyn-vs-tamina-snuka-lumberjill-match-raw-1-28-2013_sportAfter this, the Kaitlyn/Tamina feud was regulated to backstage segments on the WWE app and the PPV match. Then I think Kaitlyn was only on Superstars/Main event/probably Smackdown for the next 2 months. I only recall them teasing Kaitlyn/Cody Rhodes liking each other during the Raw diva hiatus. Which lead to the Bella Twins returning and joining up with Rhodes Scholars.
|
|
|
Post by Alyce: Old Media Enthusiast on Aug 28, 2015 22:31:05 GMT -5
Cole: "Nikki invokes so much emotion!" The "Polarizing" Nikki Bella
|
|
|
Post by Toilet Paper Roll on Aug 28, 2015 22:52:25 GMT -5
I've always thought the Divas division was a waste of time. HOnestly WWE has been pushing their version of a womans division for 15+ years and it's just deeply imbedded with countless reigns that are easily forgettable.
Granted the guys have their fair share of long periods of "oh.. heh?" but the divas division has just constantly seemed like a rudderless mess of one champion, and another, and another and since they're only delegated one segment/match a show, it's always with title implications so the only way they build new talent is having them beat the champion in either a one on one match or a tag match. It's been the same formula for the same segmenmt in the same division for a long time, couple that with the fact 90% of the talent they bring in are bad wrestlers and it just becomes a chore to watch.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Pigwell on Aug 28, 2015 22:58:53 GMT -5
I've always thought the Divas division was a waste of time. HOnestly WWE has been pushing their version of a womans division for 15+ years and it's just deeply imbedded with countless reigns that are easily forgettable. Granted the guys have their fair share of long periods of "oh.. heh?" but the divas division has just constantly seemed like a rudderless mess of one champion, and another, and another and since they're only delegated one segment/match a show, it's always with title implications so the only way they build new talent is having them beat the champion in either a one on one match or a tag match. It's been the same formula for the same segmenmt in the same division for a long time, couple that with the fact 90% of the talent they bring in are bad wrestlers and it just becomes a chore to watch. With a new direction to being more "wrestling" orientated would that increase your interest in women's matches? Or is it so deeply embedded the thought bores you regardless? Not an attack or anything I'm legit curious on different views from the fanbase here about all of this.
|
|
|
Post by Toilet Paper Roll on Aug 28, 2015 23:07:07 GMT -5
I've always thought the Divas division was a waste of time. HOnestly WWE has been pushing their version of a womans division for 15+ years and it's just deeply imbedded with countless reigns that are easily forgettable. Granted the guys have their fair share of long periods of "oh.. heh?" but the divas division has just constantly seemed like a rudderless mess of one champion, and another, and another and since they're only delegated one segment/match a show, it's always with title implications so the only way they build new talent is having them beat the champion in either a one on one match or a tag match. It's been the same formula for the same segmenmt in the same division for a long time, couple that with the fact 90% of the talent they bring in are bad wrestlers and it just becomes a chore to watch. With a new direction to being more "wrestling" orientated would that increase your interest in women's matches? Or is it so deeply embedded the thought bores you regardless? Not an attack or anything I'm legit curious on different views from the fanbase here about all of this.I I really don't know. I still put Minami Toyota v Aja Kong 11/20/94 as one of my top ten favorite matches ever and the best woman's match I ever saw. it's the stiffest female match I've ever seen and they both went all out.
That being said, the WWE has conditioned us through a decade and a half to watch a product that just seems redundant. Honestly if I tried to piece together the liniage of the Divas or Womans title throughout history I'd miss 90% of it. It's just boring too often for me to even attempt to waste time on it.
They tease improving the division, only to drop it back down to status quo.
If you're going to let your whole product (womens wrestling) go on cruise control 99% of the time, why is the 1% you attempt to improve it supposed to draw me in?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2015 23:08:49 GMT -5
Why is it that everyone who defends Nikki's reign always has to say "well it's better than AJ's" like it's an accurate defense? Shit is shit at the end of the day regardless who's reign you liked more. A bad reign is a bad reign. They both have had horrible reigns so I don't care if you compare the two in reigns. At the end of the day, it's not acceptable for the "lead" women's title in the company.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2015 0:35:06 GMT -5
This lioness needs to be put down. Much easier said than done. #FeartheLioness #Rawr Eh...she's less Nala and more Shenzi. Let's face it, with a smile like his could Cena be anyone other than Ed?
|
|
|
Post by prettynami on Aug 29, 2015 0:38:54 GMT -5
Why is it that everyone who defends Nikki's reign always has to say "well it's better than AJ's" like it's an accurate defense? Shit is shit at the end of the day regardless who's reign you liked more. A bad reign is a bad reign. They both have had horrible reigns so I don't care if you compare the two in reigns. At the end of the day, it's not acceptable for the "lead" women's title in the company. Well there have been people saying something to the effect that Nikki doesn't deserve to surpass AJ's title reign record. And to those people's defense, it is not like this critique is coming from a vacuum, the company itself does keep mentioning the title reign length thing constantly on air. The WWE is inviting the comparisons. But yes, both AJ's and Nikki's reigns have not been spectacular. Nikki's in particular has suffered from a lack of title defenses and emphasis on the title. It's like all the feuds she has have been about how she is top but not about why she is on top (the title).
|
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Aug 29, 2015 0:43:09 GMT -5
Why is it that everyone who defends Nikki's reign always has to say "well it's better than AJ's" like it's an accurate defense? Shit is shit at the end of the day regardless who's reign you liked more. A bad reign is a bad reign. They both have had horrible reigns so I don't care if you compare the two in reigns. At the end of the day, it's not acceptable for the "lead" women's title in the company. Well there have been people saying something to the effect that Nikki doesn't deserve to surpass AJ's title reign record. And to those people's defense, it is not like this critique is coming from a vacuum, the company itself does keep mentioning the title reign length thing constantly on air. The WWE is inviting the comparisons. But yes, both AJ's and Nikki's reigns have not been spectacular. Nikki's in particular has suffered from a lack of title defenses and emphasis on the title. It's like all the feuds she has have been about how she is top but not about why she is on top (the title). I know when I say Nikki setting the record will be a horrible thing I mean from a symbolic standpoint, having a woman who represents everything wrong with women's wrestling set this huge record is just awful for any kind of movement toward something better. Not at all for AJ's sake, especially as I probably can tolerate Nikki more than AJ anyway. It's about Nikki not setting that record right now.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Aug 29, 2015 0:53:42 GMT -5
Consistently ok-more-or-less matches, consistently fun segments, when it comes to the women's/divas titles in WWE Laycool was flawless. Nope, it was a terrible reign. The matches were generally good, but Michelle McCool got less heat than the South Pole in the dead of winter. She was a good wrestler who couldn't get crowd reactions to save her life. She made the perfect person to squash female jobbers and in turn, job out to whatever face held the title or chased after the title. Instead, they did the opposite with her for most of her run. Yeah, the crowd DID NOT care about Laycool... at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2015 0:58:39 GMT -5
Why is it that everyone who defends Nikki's reign always has to say "well it's better than AJ's" like it's an accurate defense? Shit is shit at the end of the day regardless who's reign you liked more. A bad reign is a bad reign. They both have had horrible reigns so I don't care if you compare the two in reigns. At the end of the day, it's not acceptable for the "lead" women's title in the company. Well there have been people saying something to the effect that Nikki doesn't deserve to surpass AJ's title reign record. And to those people's defense, it is not like this critique is coming from a vacuum, the company itself does keep mentioning the title reign length thing constantly on air. The WWE is inviting the comparisons. But yes, both AJ's and Nikki's reigns have not been spectacular. Nikki's in particular has suffered from a lack of title defenses and emphasis on the title. It's like all the feuds she has have been about how she is top but not about why she is on top (the title). When people mentioning surpassing AJ's reign they don't mean it as a highlight to AJ, they're referring to it as a highlight towards the division. AJ's not in a great place in the company's eyes right now so anything to have her reign be taken over is good to them. "Nikki won't pass her reign? Ok let's stop mentioning AJ's reign in general" has turned into "Let's mention Nikki's reign because she's about to surpass AJ and we really don't have to mention her anymore afterwards". It's not even about the quality of AJ's reign, it's about having something overtake it in the company's eyes. As for those who literally compare the quality of AJ's reign to Nikki? Yeah, that's something else entirely.
|
|
Abdullah
Hank Scorpio
Thank you, Ishmeal Loves Bayley!
Posts: 6,420
|
Post by Abdullah on Aug 29, 2015 0:58:55 GMT -5
Why is it that everyone who defends Nikki's reign always has to say "well it's better than AJ's" like it's an accurate defense? Shit is shit at the end of the day regardless who's reign you liked more. A bad reign is a bad reign. They both have had horrible reigns so I don't care if you compare the two in reigns. At the end of the day, it's not acceptable for the "lead" women's title in the company. This is what bugs me: what's better about it? Nikki hasn't had a match as well-booked as AJ/Kaitlyn at Payback. That bout had as much story to it any Takeover, just obviously shorter. She probably won't have a match as good as AJ did with Natalya at TLC or later on Main Event. Coming out of those PPVs, most people said at the time that those were probably the best or second best matches on their respective PPVs. Take into account her feud with Kaitlyn to start off her reign, which was the most natural brief divas push the main roster has seen in years, and the fact that she was consistently over and in one alignment and it actually meant something when she dropped the title because she gave a f*** about putting it over... I don't know. I get that opinions are subjective but I feel like people are retroactively crapping on AJ's heel reign while they enjoyed it at the time. And I'm never too sure if the Nikki fandom around here is a meme or genuine but, objectively, the only time she was gaining steam was when they actually let her be a heel for a few months against Paige. It's been tragic otherwise and it's annoying that they won't even let her defend the thing. TL;DR: How can Nikki's reign be better when the matches suck enough to get a crowd to zone out and she hasn't even defended the title in over two months?
|
|