|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Feb 6, 2017 11:00:52 GMT -5
What I'm saying is, there are some storylines I've been critical of, as much as any other fan. But if it results in great wrestling, I'm probably still going to mostly enjoy the product despite the issues with the writing.
An example would be Daniel Bryan vs. The Authority. There's a ton of stuff to criticize about it. But the awesome matches Bryan had with Cena, Orton and Triple H are the primary things I associate in my mind with that period. I'm not quite sure exactly how I would have written it differently. I'm just glad I got to see those matches.
Now if it's something like WCW 2000, where the writing is absolute booty and there's not much in the way of good wrestling or memorable promos to make up for it, then the crap comes to the forefront in my mind.
I think that's why I've enjoyed this era of WWE so much in spite of its problems, at least over the past four or five years the in ring product has become so good.
It's like this thing with Rollins and Triple H. Do I think Seth has looked like a strong, good babyface? Ehhh, not really, but I still want to see the match. I might be pulling for Hunter, but I expect them to put on a good show.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2017 11:03:37 GMT -5
At this point, I only watch the PPVs and Takeovers, so I have little to no idea what the angles even are. If I hear of a match that I know will be good, I'll be sure to watch, though.
|
|
|
Post by lionelp on Feb 6, 2017 11:03:50 GMT -5
Me.
Great wrestling will always be great regardless of who said what in the 4 weeks beforehand
|
|
thecrusherwi
El Dandy
the Financially Responsible Man
Brawl For All
Posts: 7,656
|
Post by thecrusherwi on Feb 6, 2017 11:09:04 GMT -5
It sounds like a cop out, but both. Great wrestling without any story context can be rather boring, but a great storyline that ends with Sting vs Hogan in the ring isn't good either. I want matches that are at least of a certain quality with some interesting or logical storyline reason for these people to be to fighting.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Feb 6, 2017 11:13:14 GMT -5
It sounds like a cop out, but both. Great wrestling without any story context can be rather boring, but a great storyline that ends with Sting vs Hogan in the ring isn't good either. I want matches that are at least of a certain quality with some interesting or logical storyline reason for these people to be to fighting. Oh, I don't want contextless wrestling either. But if a match is really great, I won't consider it a burial or get super mad if my favorite doesn't go over. That's totally opposite from an obvious mess like Hogan/Sting.
|
|
|
Post by Nickybojelais on Feb 6, 2017 12:37:22 GMT -5
The best example I can think of is the Invasion.
Even though the angle was a complete atrocity and I hated the weekly story of it, I love every single PPV from Invasion to Survivor Series due to the match quality.
|
|
Zone Was Wrong
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Currently living off the high that AEW brings every Wednesday and Friday
Posts: 16,200
|
Post by Zone Was Wrong on Feb 6, 2017 12:52:21 GMT -5
I'm the same. I cared about the Sami/Nakamura match because of the in ring stuff despite the fact the stuff before it was basically here's a dream match. Or recently the Cena/AJ match that had him burying AJ and yet I still thought the match was one of the best of the early year, surpassed by maybe a couple from Wrestle Kingdom 11
|
|
ayumidah
Wade Wilson
Don't bother pretending I seem fine, I like that I'm a mess
Posts: 27,313
|
Post by ayumidah on Feb 6, 2017 13:02:45 GMT -5
I dunno, it all kind of goes hand in hand for me. The angles make me care about the wrestlers, the wrestlers make me care about the matches. There are times when matches with people I don't usually care about make me sit up and go "Hey that was kind of awesome" but that emotional connection does matter a lot.
|
|
|
Post by alexwrightspackage on Feb 6, 2017 13:09:24 GMT -5
Feels like bc the title's on the line, championship matches should just he about the wrestling so I almost find it ironic that there's a disproportionate amount of story there. Not saying they shouldn't have, but if the kayfabe motivation is glory and fame, that should be enough.
But anywell, matches are still the reason to be engaged in a show for me, but I usually get tempted by a good storyline.
And when they get it just right, like DIY/The Revival in Toronto...well, that there's magic.
|
|
|
Post by Big Bad Kahuna on Feb 6, 2017 15:50:40 GMT -5
There are workers (Sami, Owens, Cesaro, AJ, Rollins, Revival, A. Alpha among a few others) who make most matches so watchable and fun, that it wouldn't matter if there was no story behind it
So yeah
|
|
thecrusherwi
El Dandy
the Financially Responsible Man
Brawl For All
Posts: 7,656
|
Post by thecrusherwi on Feb 6, 2017 16:10:57 GMT -5
It sounds like a cop out, but both. Great wrestling without any story context can be rather boring, but a great storyline that ends with Sting vs Hogan in the ring isn't good either. I want matches that are at least of a certain quality with some interesting or logical storyline reason for these people to be to fighting. Oh, I don't want contextless wrestling either. But if a match is really great, I won't consider it a burial or get super mad if my favorite doesn't go over. That's totally opposite from an obvious mess like Hogan/Sting. I agree with your general point. I think if you ultimately aren't here to watch the wrestling matches above all else, I'm not exactly sure what wrestling provides you. The thing about angst over booking in the modern era despite great matches I think has somewhat to do how little they invest in characters and long term planning these days. If you're watching in the late 80s/Early 90s and Jake Roberts loses his feud to Ted Dibiase or Big Bossman fails to capture the IC title from Mr Perfect, there was a confidence that Jake or Bossman wasn't just going to go away and not get anything interesting new to do. They were strong characters that were still going to get TV time dedicated to them and put into feuds that matter. I think that's where the mentality of fans today comes from, where people think someone is being wasted if they aren't in the main event. They just don't put that much effort into the non-main eventers as they used to, so it feels like guys are going out there and having great matches that ultimately aren't going to lead to anything.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 6, 2017 16:11:10 GMT -5
It's really the only practical way to enjoy WWE today, since the angles are usually shit. The in-ring quality of WWE never fails to impress, no matter how terrible the writing is.
|
|
|
Post by NickRedMachine on Feb 6, 2017 16:12:34 GMT -5
Nah, I watch wrestling for the story and angles. I love wrestling matches, but I can't say I care much if there's nothing going into it. This is not ALWAYS true, because I CAN appreciate a good wrestling match if it's really good and the match itself tells the story, but overall, I watch it for the soap opera portion.
Hell, my top 5 of all time is Kane, Undertaker, Randy Savage, Chris Jericho, and probably The Rock. All 5 names are well known for their out-of-ring work (promos, segments, etc), and with the possible exception of Jericho and Savage, I wouldn't call them technical greats.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Feb 6, 2017 18:21:28 GMT -5
I only watch the PPV and Network specials, so I totally get your viewpoint. I think the storytelling outside the ring is garbage, but the matches are the one thing the wrestlers mostly control on their own, and it shows.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2017 23:08:58 GMT -5
An angle as simple as "underdog wants to finally prove himself against a cocky champ" is ideal for me, because that's a story the match can build on and utilize to great effect.
It's hard to tell a story in the ring that conveys "if this guy loses, he'll have to do a performance review to determine if he gets to wrestle Sheamus at some throwaway PPV." Maybe if you just had the guy constantly laying his head on the turnbuckle and sighing "UGHHH."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2017 23:10:16 GMT -5
At this point, there's no shortage of good matches but there is a major shortage of good storylines, so I care about the stories far more.
|
|
The Yes Man
Unicron
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 2,502
|
Post by The Yes Man on Feb 6, 2017 23:13:15 GMT -5
You can have great matches without storyline, but a great match with a great storyline can make a great match even better.
|
|
|
Post by Adam Black on Feb 7, 2017 0:03:39 GMT -5
A great match is good for me there's nothing wrong with that but a great match tied in with a storyline is magical. We wouldn't get Zayn's NXT title win or Bryan's Wrestlemania moment on good matches alone.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Feb 7, 2017 1:15:12 GMT -5
At this point, there's no shortage of good matches but there is a major shortage of good storylines, so I care about the stories far more. Well, the thing is that I watch ALL wrestling primarily for the matches, even if the storylines are good (and that's a pretty subjective subject to begin with). It's not a matter of "making due with what I'm given " or anything like that.
|
|
segaz
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,381
|
Post by segaz on Feb 7, 2017 2:52:13 GMT -5
It sounds like a cop out, but both. Great wrestling without any story context can be rather boring, but a great storyline that ends with Sting vs Hogan in the ring isn't good either. I want matches that are at least of a certain quality with some interesting or logical storyline reason for these people to be to fighting. Eh true but if the story and moment is big enough, it can be parlied into making a match seem more special, such as Yoko Bret at WMX. Hardly a stellar match by any accounts but the celebration and Owen returning with the setup of him beating Bret previously and then going onto challenge him at SummerSlam and winning King of the Ring, really made it a stronger part of the storyline as a whole. More so than the whole 'get the belt off of Yokozuna' the WWE were going for at the time. So in that sense I think Hogan vs Sting isn't too bad. Especially as the same shenanigans happened in WM14 and that always gets a pass despite not being an amazing match. It's about the followup. The followup killed Hogan and Sting, just like it killed the NWO Elite Storyline or fpod. The actual result of the match made sense and provided some satisfaction at least for Hogan vs Sting. That was missing from Luger vs Yokozuna. The result was a dud even in terms of the storyline, and the celebration made no sense. Just the WWE trying to create a feel good moment.
|
|