Lt. Palumbo
Hank Scorpio
On again off again watcher of a wrestling TV show
Posts: 6,067
|
Post by Lt. Palumbo on Nov 11, 2019 23:13:22 GMT -5
Don't worry about it. Now that the Saudi shows are canon nothing else is.
|
|
|
Post by autisticgeordie on Nov 12, 2019 2:37:21 GMT -5
Cause it's not like the Imperium are just going to head on over to the USA to mess with Dorky McDorkface? NXT UK is firmly entrenched as being stuck in England. They won't fight anyone unless it's in their yard so... They're only relevant twice a year? The only one that isn’t already based in the US is WALTER, because the other three had signed to NXT before NXT UK started up, so they’d already relocated to the US and only fly out to the UK for the NXT UK tapings. That’s why they’ve been able to make so many appearances on regular NXT at the start of their USA Network deal. Sorry to be a bear with this, it’s just me sitting here trying to figure out how to make a 200 person roster all look strong at the same time. Then if you look too strong, people complain, there's no pleasing some people.
|
|
|
Post by Brian Suntan on Nov 12, 2019 7:31:15 GMT -5
I'm going to say if it's your big heel stable making their most high-profile appearance to date just to immediately lose twice in a row to a complete throw together then yeah, they look horrible. It’s just... Why are they essentially RUINED FOREVER now? It’s like literally nobody in this company can afford to lose, and it’s impossible to run a company like that. And this only seems to be a WWE problem, too. It seems to be that you can't just say that you didn't like that someone you like didn't win, there has to be an extra layer of logic behind it. That it was objectively bad booking, it buried someone, x is ruined forever. Take Kofi for example. The simple fact that he was able to be ruined forever by Brock is proof enough that the idea of being ruined forever is nonsense. Dude spent a decade in the mid-card doing nothing then suddenly didn't lose a match in six months. If the WWE ever want to seriously get behind WALTER on the main roster, they will do and this one-off appearance on Raw will have no bearing on his success or failure.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
Celestial Princess in Exile.
Posts: 46,057
Member is Online
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Nov 12, 2019 7:37:34 GMT -5
It’s just... Why are they essentially RUINED FOREVER now? It’s like literally nobody in this company can afford to lose, and it’s impossible to run a company like that. And this only seems to be a WWE problem, too. It seems to be that you can't just say that you didn't like that someone you like didn't win, there has to be an extra layer of logic behind it. That it was objectively bad booking, it buried someone, x is ruined forever. Take Kofi for example. The simple fact that he was able to be ruined forever by Brock is proof enough that the idea of being ruined forever is nonsense. Dude spent a decade in the mid-card doing nothing then suddenly didn't lose a match in six months. If the WWE ever want to seriously get behind WALTER on the main roster, they will do and this one-off appearance on Raw will have no bearing on his success or failure. It's a lot different with Kofi, because of who he is, and what he represented, especially juxtaposed to a guy like Brock, Mr. Inevitable himself. It felt like Vince saying "Nah, that's enough of that." The only way it could have been worse is if he dropped the belt to Lars.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Nov 12, 2019 10:13:25 GMT -5
The only one that isn’t already based in the US is WALTER, because the other three had signed to NXT before NXT UK started up, so they’d already relocated to the US and only fly out to the UK for the NXT UK tapings. That’s why they’ve been able to make so many appearances on regular NXT at the start of their USA Network deal. Sorry to be a bear with this, it’s just me sitting here trying to figure out how to make a 200 person roster all look strong at the same time. Then if you look too strong, people complain, there's no pleasing some people. Couple things on that argument: -First, I think sometimes we get caught up in seeing internet posts as one big amalgam instead of a bunch of individual opinions. It's true that no matter what booking decision any wrestling promotion makes, somewhere there'll be people who dislike it, that's just the nature of all entertainment. However, it doesn't do much good to say "you can't book someone too strong or people get mad, can't book 50/50 or people get mad, can't book someone to fight from under or people get mad, oh well!" - it's important to stick with what you, as a writer/booker, truly believe to be a worthwhile creative idea, and accept that you'll never please 100% of viewers out there, it's just not feasible. Commit to telling a decent story and most folks will come along with you, however you present it. -I don't think it's always a matter of people needing to "look strong", though; I keep saying this again and again, but I think people just want wrestlers, even those low on the card, to matter on some level. You can book someone to win a lot, lose a lot, or be in the middle, but what people will care about in the end is if they have something memorable about them that makes them relevant to the larger fictional world the promotion has created, and the outcomes of their matches should play into those things, giving characters new motivations, chances to change and evolve, or just serve a practical purpose (e.g. someone being a "midcard gatekeeper" doesn't have to win a lot, they just need to be strong enough that beating them means something for an up and comer, etc.). It's where WWE fails most of the time: so much of what they put on TV is meaningless because there's almost zero thought to future plans, where things are going, or what the end goal of a given feud or story actually is for the characters involved.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Nov 12, 2019 11:51:43 GMT -5
I'm going to say if it's your big heel stable making their most high-profile appearance to date just to immediately lose twice in a row to a complete throw together then yeah, they look horrible. It’s just... Why are they essentially RUINED FOREVER now? It’s like literally nobody in this company can afford to lose, and it’s impossible to run a company like that. And this only seems to be a WWE problem, too. IMO, WWE’s main booking problem is they think everyone can afford to lose at any time now, and that isn’t true. If they wanted to debut Walter and seriously have him make an impact but without him beating Seth, then they probably should have booked Walter against another opponent, honestly. You gotta protect your monsters so they keep their mystique.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Nov 12, 2019 12:01:20 GMT -5
It’s just... Why are they essentially RUINED FOREVER now? It’s like literally nobody in this company can afford to lose, and it’s impossible to run a company like that. And this only seems to be a WWE problem, too. IMO, WWE’s main booking problem is they think everyone can afford to lose at any time now, and that isn’t true. If they wanted to debut Walter and seriously have him make an impact but without him beating Seth, then they probably should have booked Walter against another opponent, honestly. You gotta protect your monsters so they keep their mystique. It's not even just that for me. Right now, Imperium are feuding with Gallus on NXT UK, who are another established unit who just gained a new member. Most people don't watch NXT UK but the people who do know that are aware of that. So if a makeshift team of Seth Rollins, the Street Profits and Kevin Owens can beat a cohesive unit in their first go...why are Gallus taking so long? Hell, why did British Strong Style struggle so much? Even before that, why did Tyler Bate struggle so much with Walter? If Seth can have him downed in not even half the time their big NXT UK Takeover match was, it makes Bate's resistance look not as good as Seth's. It makes NXT look bad for relying on these guys, NXT UK look bad for not being able to hang with the Raw roster when NXT somewhat could and it makes Raw look like the odds on favourites to win Survivor Series because of course they could, they didn't get pulverised like Smackdown did. It also makes nobody want to watch NXT UK because those guys are apparently just spare bodies for the Raw guys to beat and not actual people you want to watch. Like, there's so much to unpack here and it could have been easily solved by not booking any of it at all.
|
|
Pushed to the Moon
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Tony Schiavone in Disguise
Working myself into a shoot
Posts: 15,819
|
Post by Pushed to the Moon on Nov 12, 2019 13:49:27 GMT -5
IMO, WWE’s main booking problem is they think everyone can afford to lose at any time now, and that isn’t true. If they wanted to debut Walter and seriously have him make an impact but without him beating Seth, then they probably should have booked Walter against another opponent, honestly. You gotta protect your monsters so they keep their mystique. It's not even just that for me. Right now, Imperium are feuding with Gallus on NXT UK, who are another established unit who just gained a new member. Most people don't watch NXT UK but the people who do know that are aware of that. So if a makeshift team of Seth Rollins, the Street Profits and Kevin Owens can beat a cohesive unit in their first go...why are Gallus taking so long? Hell, why did British Strong Style struggle so much? Even before that, why did Tyler Bate struggle so much with Walter? If Seth can have him downed in not even half the time their big NXT UK Takeover match was, it makes Bate's resistance look not as good as Seth's. It makes NXT look bad for relying on these guys, NXT UK look bad for not being able to hang with the Raw roster when NXT somewhat could and it makes Raw look like the odds on favourites to win Survivor Series because of course they could, they didn't get pulverised like Smackdown did. It also makes nobody want to watch NXT UK because those guys are apparently just spare bodies for the Raw guys to beat and not actual people you want to watch. Like, there's so much to unpack here and it could have been easily solved by not booking any of it at all. This has just been WWE's view of tag teams for ages. They just don't buy into the idea of cohesive units beating thrown together teams. Just last week the women's tag team champions lost to Charlotte and Nattie. They love the "can they coexist??!?!" thing and individual stars and stories will always overshadow teams in WWE unless Vince suddenly becomes obsessed with tag teams for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 12, 2019 13:51:24 GMT -5
No one on the roster means anything, and this has been the case for years. 50/50 booking and repetitive matches are the main causes.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Nov 12, 2019 14:02:32 GMT -5
I mean, yes, when you hammer in to your audience that your roster can be cleanly divided into Winner Awesome Dudes and Jobber Lame Jobber Losers, a single loss can be pretty demoralizing to a particular wrestler's fans.
|
|
|
Post by Andy Martin on Nov 12, 2019 14:28:47 GMT -5
Clearly the answer is the bring in more pencil neck geeks.
|
|
|
Post by ogreknee on Nov 12, 2019 14:42:28 GMT -5
I'm going to say if it's your big heel stable making their most high-profile appearance to date just to immediately lose twice in a row to a complete throw together then yeah, they look horrible. It’s just... Why are they essentially RUINED FOREVER now? It’s like literally nobody in this company can afford to lose, and it’s impossible to run a company like that. And this only seems to be a WWE problem, too. So everybody fights jobbers. And some guys become jtts. And then we have guys on top. Everybody complains about 50/50 booking But then wants everybody to be top stars
|
|
|
Post by Brian Suntan on Nov 12, 2019 16:42:49 GMT -5
IMO, WWE’s main booking problem is they think everyone can afford to lose at any time now, and that isn’t true. If they wanted to debut Walter and seriously have him make an impact but without him beating Seth, then they probably should have booked Walter against another opponent, honestly. You gotta protect your monsters so they keep their mystique. It's not even just that for me. Right now, Imperium are feuding with Gallus on NXT UK, who are another established unit who just gained a new member. Most people don't watch NXT UK but the people who do know that are aware of that. So if a makeshift team of Seth Rollins, the Street Profits and Kevin Owens can beat a cohesive unit in their first go...why are Gallus taking so long? Hell, why did British Strong Style struggle so much? Even before that, why did Tyler Bate struggle so much with Walter? If Seth can have him downed in not even half the time their big NXT UK Takeover match was, it makes Bate's resistance look not as good as Seth's. It makes NXT look bad for relying on these guys, NXT UK look bad for not being able to hang with the Raw roster when NXT somewhat could and it makes Raw look like the odds on favourites to win Survivor Series because of course they could, they didn't get pulverised like Smackdown did. It also makes nobody want to watch NXT UK because those guys are apparently just spare bodies for the Raw guys to beat and not actual people you want to watch. Like, there's so much to unpack here and it could have been easily solved by not booking any of it at all. Isn't that logical though, that former world champion Owens and the current face of the company Rollins are a sterner test than Tyler Bate? NXT and NXT UK should be booked as lesser (generally), than Raw and Smackdown. They're the development brands. And it makes things like Adam Cole beating Bryan a bigger deal. None of that makes either of those shows look bad, or be less important. People still cared about LSU vs Alabama this weekend, despite the fact both teams would get wiped out by the Miami Dolphins.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Nov 12, 2019 16:49:29 GMT -5
It's not even just that for me. Right now, Imperium are feuding with Gallus on NXT UK, who are another established unit who just gained a new member. Most people don't watch NXT UK but the people who do know that are aware of that. So if a makeshift team of Seth Rollins, the Street Profits and Kevin Owens can beat a cohesive unit in their first go...why are Gallus taking so long? Hell, why did British Strong Style struggle so much? Even before that, why did Tyler Bate struggle so much with Walter? If Seth can have him downed in not even half the time their big NXT UK Takeover match was, it makes Bate's resistance look not as good as Seth's. It makes NXT look bad for relying on these guys, NXT UK look bad for not being able to hang with the Raw roster when NXT somewhat could and it makes Raw look like the odds on favourites to win Survivor Series because of course they could, they didn't get pulverised like Smackdown did. It also makes nobody want to watch NXT UK because those guys are apparently just spare bodies for the Raw guys to beat and not actual people you want to watch. Like, there's so much to unpack here and it could have been easily solved by not booking any of it at all. Isn't that logical though, that former world champion Owens and the current face of the company Rollins are a sterner test than Tyler Bate? NXT and NXT UK should be booked as lesser (generally), than Raw and Smackdown. They're the development brands. And it makes things like Adam Cole beating Bryan a bigger deal. None of that makes either of those shows look bad, or be less important. People still cared about LSU vs Alabama this weekend, despite the fact both teams would get wiped out by the Miami Dolphins. No, but if you want to make them matter later on, you make them seem important now or at the very least, don’t have them involved in two DQ losses on their debuts. You have one shot for a first impression, especially with an alleged dangerous stable, why waste that for putting someone over who doesn’t need it. Also I’m not an expert on American football but trying to compare College to the NFL seems really disingenuous to me. Especially since those serve two different purposes. NXT, until this year seemingly, was a way of creating stars for the main roster who would pay back the cost of the performance Centre. Now that it seems to be considered a third brand (HHH’s words, not mine) that treatment should be different. At the very least, you should be finding a way to get people to want to watch those shows on the network that, right now, is losing subscribers on a yearly basis.
|
|
ssdrivin
ALF
Claims to be squishy, has yet to be proven.
Posts: 1,041
|
Post by ssdrivin on Nov 12, 2019 17:33:58 GMT -5
Isn't that logical though, that former world champion Owens and the current face of the company Rollins are a sterner test than Tyler Bate? NXT and NXT UK should be booked as lesser (generally), than Raw and Smackdown. They're the development brands. And it makes things like Adam Cole beating Bryan a bigger deal. None of that makes either of those shows look bad, or be less important. People still cared about LSU vs Alabama this weekend, despite the fact both teams would get wiped out by the Miami Dolphins. No, but if you want to make them matter later on, you make them seem important now or at the very least, don’t have them involved in two DQ losses on their debuts. You have one shot for a first impression, especially with an alleged dangerous stable, why waste that for putting someone over who doesn’t need it. Also I’m not an expert on American football but trying to compare College to the NFL seems really disingenuous to me. Especially since those serve two different purposes. NXT, until this year seemingly, was a way of creating stars for the main roster who would pay back the cost of the performance Centre. Now that it seems to be considered a third brand (HHH’s words, not mine) that treatment should be different. At the very least, you should be finding a way to get people to want to watch those shows on the network that, right now, is losing subscribers on a yearly basis.
I'd say NXT UK being a regional thing makes it different too. I mean, whether you consider NXT to be a third top-tier brand now or not, doesn't it seem reasonable that a specifically regional promotion's stars (be that NXT UK, a potential NXT Japan, a hypothetical NXT Mexico, whatever) that generally don't interact much with the main roster could be as good as the main roster?
It's not as simple as "RAW > Smackdown > NXT" when in terms of how strong the wrestlers are there's no established hierarchy, it's a different group of wrestlers in/from a different country, it's like saying "TNA's roster couldn't realistically face off against AEW's roster because TNA's a lower-tier promotion", it's a hollow and meaningless comparison. There could be wrestlers in NXT UK who are Lesnar-tier, and there could be wrestlers in NXT UK who are, I dunno, Ziggler-tier. But you'd only find that out when NXT UK goes head to head with the main roster guys, which comes down to the booking and how strong you want the regional offshoot of WWE to look, it's like Schrodinger's Promotion, nobody knows how strong they are in the context of WWE as a whole until someone books them. Until then, all you know is how the wrestlers stack up against each other in their own silos, there's no wider context.
Does that makes sense? I feel like I danced around my point a bit, but that's all my brain's giving me at the moment.
Edit: Also you have the option of booking around "they're a different style, the main roster's not used to it/they're not used to the main roster's style, etc" to explain why any given group go over or don't go over in any given interpromotional confrontation.
|
|
|
Post by ogreknee on Nov 12, 2019 17:35:44 GMT -5
So does everyone want 50 50 booking and schmoz finishes to keep everyone strong
That is some 80s all japan nonsense
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Nov 12, 2019 17:43:21 GMT -5
No, but if you want to make them matter later on, you make them seem important now or at the very least, don’t have them involved in two DQ losses on their debuts. You have one shot for a first impression, especially with an alleged dangerous stable, why waste that for putting someone over who doesn’t need it. Also I’m not an expert on American football but trying to compare College to the NFL seems really disingenuous to me. Especially since those serve two different purposes. NXT, until this year seemingly, was a way of creating stars for the main roster who would pay back the cost of the performance Centre. Now that it seems to be considered a third brand (HHH’s words, not mine) that treatment should be different. At the very least, you should be finding a way to get people to want to watch those shows on the network that, right now, is losing subscribers on a yearly basis. I'd say NXT UK being a regional thing makes it different too. I mean, whether you consider NXT to be a third top-tier brand now or not, doesn't it seem reasonable that a specifically regional promotion's stars (be that NXT UK, a potential NXT Japan, a hypothetical NXT Mexico, whatever) that generally don't interact much with the main roster could be as good as the main roster?
It's not as simple as "RAW > Smackdown > NXT" when in terms of how strong the wrestlers are there's no established hierarchy, it's a different group of wrestlers in/from a different country, it's like saying "TNA's roster couldn't realistically face off against AEW's roster because TNA's a lower-tier promotion", it's a hollow and meaningless comparison. There could be wrestlers in NXT UK who are Lesnar-tier, and there could be wrestlers in NXT UK who are, I dunno, Ziggler-tier. But you'd only find that out when NXT UK goes head to head with the main roster guys, which comes down to the booking and how strong you want the regional offshoot of WWE to look, it's like Schrodinger's Promotion, nobody knows how strong they are in the context of WWE as a whole until someone books them. Until then, all you know is how the wrestlers stack up against each other in their own silos, there's no wider context.
Does that makes sense? I feel like I danced around my point a bit, but that's all my brain's giving me at the moment. Edit: Also you have the option of booking around "they're a different style, the main roster's not used to it/they're not used to the main roster's style, etc" to explain why any given group go over or don't go over in any given interpromotional confrontation.
No, that probably adds way more context to things then I did so I appreciate that. It’s the old thing of when people put comic book characters against each other that they’re only as powerful as the writer wants them to be.
|
|
Pushed to the Moon
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Tony Schiavone in Disguise
Working myself into a shoot
Posts: 15,819
|
Post by Pushed to the Moon on Nov 12, 2019 17:45:49 GMT -5
Clearly the answer is the bring in more pencil neck geeks. At last, all my years of whining online has gotten me a job offer!
|
|
ssdrivin
ALF
Claims to be squishy, has yet to be proven.
Posts: 1,041
|
Post by ssdrivin on Nov 12, 2019 17:48:25 GMT -5
I'd say NXT UK being a regional thing makes it different too. I mean, whether you consider NXT to be a third top-tier brand now or not, doesn't it seem reasonable that a specifically regional promotion's stars (be that NXT UK, a potential NXT Japan, a hypothetical NXT Mexico, whatever) that generally don't interact much with the main roster could be as good as the main roster?
It's not as simple as "RAW > Smackdown > NXT" when in terms of how strong the wrestlers are there's no established hierarchy, it's a different group of wrestlers in/from a different country, it's like saying "TNA's roster couldn't realistically face off against AEW's roster because TNA's a lower-tier promotion", it's a hollow and meaningless comparison. There could be wrestlers in NXT UK who are Lesnar-tier, and there could be wrestlers in NXT UK who are, I dunno, Ziggler-tier. But you'd only find that out when NXT UK goes head to head with the main roster guys, which comes down to the booking and how strong you want the regional offshoot of WWE to look, it's like Schrodinger's Promotion, nobody knows how strong they are in the context of WWE as a whole until someone books them. Until then, all you know is how the wrestlers stack up against each other in their own silos, there's no wider context.
Does that makes sense? I feel like I danced around my point a bit, but that's all my brain's giving me at the moment. Edit: Also you have the option of booking around "they're a different style, the main roster's not used to it/they're not used to the main roster's style, etc" to explain why any given group go over or don't go over in any given interpromotional confrontation.
No, that probably adds way more context to things then I did so I appreciate that. It’s the old thing of when people put comic book characters against each other that they’re only as powerful as the writer wants them to be.
I'm not a reader of comic books, but I think that's a great comparison, it's so... intuitively graspable. Gets right to the point, I like it.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Nov 12, 2019 18:12:44 GMT -5
So does everyone want 50 50 booking and schmoz finishes to keep everyone strong That is some 80s all japan nonsense I actually think WWE could take some cues from 1990's All Japan booking. They established their Four Pillars of Heaven for the top of their cards. Kawada, Misawa, Taue and Kobashi were always the toughest wrestlers to pin. There was no risk of them getting rolled up by a random midcarder one week like I've seen happened with Seth on occasion. Or, as much as I love Charlotte Flair, she would be allowed a decently long title run without losing the belt ten times, or getting pinned or even tapped out on multiple Raws while still a champion. Part of me thinks as big as she is, she could be even bigger had she not been 50/50'ed so often with Banks that one year. Or they could look at New Japan now. Top tier people like Naito, Okada, Tanahashi, even White lose when it makes sense for story progression. Otherwise they're kept strong, and crowds are into them because of it.
|
|