|
Post by HMARK Center on Nov 12, 2019 18:31:44 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. Yeah, if anything what most fans want, I think, is a clear tier system for wrestlers. It's good to know who's on top (S tier, I guess?), who the A guys are, all the way down to the jobber level. When stuff like that is clear it helps the structure and narrative of a show and its matches. It also ends up meaning a lot more when someone from a lower even just manages to go toe to toe with a top guy, even if they can't beat them. And if they do, it's a big moment.
|
|
nisidhe
Hank Scorpio
O Superman....O judge....O Mom and Dad....
Posts: 5,718
|
Post by nisidhe on Nov 12, 2019 18:56:25 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. 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 Once upon a time, there was a pecking order. You had your preliminary bums who came from local promotions and got paid to count lights for the stars on TV. You also had your jobbers-to-the-stars, who could beat the preliminary guys but couldn't win against the bigger stars. Then you had your tag teams, midcarders (when midcarders competed for the IC title or had decent feuds going) and then your main-eventers. With the Attitude Era, the squash matches were discontinued; you then had your JTTS gang, then your "serious" mid-carders, your tag teams (increasingly booked as jokes or to further the main event or midcard scenes), and then the main-eventers. This makes the 50/50 booking almost inevitable. Clearly, not everyone can be a "star", but what fans consider star material is clearly different from what Vince considers star material. The 50/50 booking formula cannot work long-term, not with people you want topping your card every night. All it does is remove fan incentive to get emotionally invested in a character; if you don't have _anyone_ in that ring to care about when you watch, where is the emotional hook for the fan?
|
|
|
Post by hbkid718 on Nov 12, 2019 19:11:45 GMT -5
I thought wins & losses don't matter and this is from someone who keeps tracks of wins & losses. I have a feeling that this won't even be mentioned in NXT UK and they will continue to say WALTER is undefeated as they said with Asuka, though she lost in tag matches like WALTER, but since Aichner was pinned, it doesn't count. And he lost by DQ, so that doesn't count either.
|
|
|
Post by ogreknee on Nov 12, 2019 19:19:24 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. Will wwe book raws and sd full of tag matched to save singles matched or will the internet be mad nothing matters but the ppv. I am irritated that roman lost to corbin and it will mean nothing. Just like bryan losing to cole means nothing. Wins and losses mean nothing because nobody matters. Internet is too fickle. Wwe too dumb to use their wrestling to create narratives anymore
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Nov 12, 2019 20:02:19 GMT -5
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. Yeah, if anything what most fans want, I think, is a clear tier system for wrestlers. It's good to know who's on top (S tier, I guess?), who the A guys are, all the way down to the jobber level. When stuff like that is clear it helps the structure and narrative of a show and its matches. It also ends up meaning a lot more when someone from a lower even just manages to go toe to toe with a top guy, even if they can't beat them. And if they do, it's a big moment. In a nutshell, every company needs an "ace" or two to do good business. (Look for two on the face and two on the heel side, ideally.) They don't need to be invincible, but they need winning streaks here and there because the fans want stars they can believe in. Those are the ones who are gonna sell the toys and be on the advertising for the networks, so they shouldn't be eating booty in the ring for weeks on end.
|
|
TWERKIN' MAGGLE
Crow T. Robot
Black Lives Matter
Posts: 45,276
Member is Online
|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on Nov 12, 2019 20:07:58 GMT -5
Or Doobers, one might say.
I don't know who that one would be, but one might.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2019 20:12:51 GMT -5
Or Doobers, one might say. I don't know who that one would be, but one might. Doobers are clearly fans of these guys
|
|
Sam Punk
Hank Scorpio
Own Nothing, Be Happy
Posts: 6,304
|
Post by Sam Punk on Nov 13, 2019 12:35:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 13, 2019 16:00:45 GMT -5
Jobbers prevent goobers.
|
|
wildojinx
Wade Wilson
Posts: 26,815
Member is Online
|
Post by wildojinx on Nov 13, 2019 18:45:02 GMT -5
Goobers?
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Nov 13, 2019 19:54:07 GMT -5
God, I legit cannot believe people want some kind of clear set of tiers of wrestlers. There is nothing remotely fun about knowing who will win a match the second it's booked! It just feels pointless to watch it play out, and people get sympathy for the 'losers' booked to lose, because they know how arbitrary it was that you get put into tier 3 rather than tier 2 (much less the top tier).
Much, much better is to make it so anyone on the roster could plausibly beat anyone else, because you have to be a world-class wrestler to work for the WWE. Someone might win or lose more at a given time because it fits a particular storyline they're in, but not because they're just better or worse. The problem with 50/50 booking is that it coexists with the WWE's "some people are just winners and some people are just losers!" thing, which is a combination that makes people confused about who's supposed to suck. But it's possible to present it so NOBODY sucks.
|
|
|
Post by ogreknee on Nov 13, 2019 23:22:34 GMT -5
Yeah, if anything what most fans want, I think, is a clear tier system for wrestlers. It's good to know who's on top (S tier, I guess?), who the A guys are, all the way down to the jobber level. When stuff like that is clear it helps the structure and narrative of a show and its matches. It also ends up meaning a lot more when someone from a lower even just manages to go toe to toe with a top guy, even if they can't beat them. And if they do, it's a big moment. In a nutshell, every company needs an "ace" or two to do good business. (Look for two on the face and two on the heel side, ideally.) They don't need to be invincible, but they need winning streaks here and there because the fans want stars they can believe in. Those are the ones who are gonna sell the toys and be on the advertising for the networks, so they shouldn't be eating booty in the ring for weeks on end. The problem is ricochet goes on a tear beating everyone Then they have him trade wins with perpetual future world champion drew who they yoyo book having him lose every time he gets close to the main event Wins and losses do not matter because wwe said so
|
|
ssdrivin
ALF
Claims to be squishy, has yet to be proven.
Posts: 1,041
|
Post by ssdrivin on Nov 14, 2019 5:50:39 GMT -5
God, I legit cannot believe people want some kind of clear set of tiers of wrestlers. There is nothing remotely fun about knowing who will win a match the second it's booked! It just feels pointless to watch it play out, and people get sympathy for the 'losers' booked to lose, because they know how arbitrary it was that you get put into tier 3 rather than tier 2 (much less the top tier). Much, much better is to make it so anyone on the roster could plausibly beat anyone else, because you have to be a world-class wrestler to work for the WWE. Someone might win or lose more at a given time because it fits a particular storyline they're in, but not because they're just better or worse. The problem with 50/50 booking is that it coexists with the WWE's "some people are just winners and some people are just losers!" thing, which is a combination that makes people confused about who's supposed to suck. But it's possible to present it so NOBODY sucks.
But in real sports there is a sort of stepped gradient. Chances are pretty high that some rookie team or physically less capable competitor will lose against a top tier team because they're just not as good. You're allowed to be "not as good", you can still be competitive within your tier, and over time you might develop skills and strength to climb that ladder and eventually find yourself consistently in the next tier.
But it doesn't make a ton of sense to me to have someone, for example, failing to get anywhere chasing the IC title but then somehow a storyline says "ok, you're fighting Lesnar now, because we need a well-liked underdog" when there's very few (and more nuanced then WWE can muster) circumstances where that makes any logical sense. You know Lesnar's going to win, because his opponent a) isn't Lesnar, and Lesnar wins, and b) has demonstrated consistently in recent history that they just aren't on Lesnar's level.
To be Lesnar-specific for a moment, the issue I've always had with Lesnar is that he is essentially his own tier, it's rare that anybody else ever comes close, and that I agree is boring. If the tiers were more broad with more free flowing movement for people in them (given appropriate character development to make that meaningful) then it'd be less of an issue.
Besides, I don't mind there being a jobber tier, as long as they're still entertaining in some way. Think of the characters we had 20 years ago; Snow, Holly, Saturn, Venis, Kaientai, to name a few. They weren't gonna beat HHH or Austin or The Rock (at least not without shenanigans/a multi-way match), but they might've beaten Benoit, (E.) Guerrero, Malenko, etc, who might have stood a chance in a match with the top guys if the stars aligned. Then you had the other style of big midcarders, like Kane, Henry, Big Show, etc, who could've been a threat too, if the wind blew in the right direction.
Basically I guess what I'm saying is I like knowing where somebody is in the pecking order, because although there's some accounting for mismatched styles of wrestling there's going to be some sort of pecking order. There can be upsets and lucky wins, but you wouldn't expect Punk to beat Lesnar in a UFC fight, and I wouldn't expect Punk to beat Lesnar in WWE either - not just because of their physical size, training, and capabilities, but because of booking. Otherwise you end up with weird situations where (for example) Punk (as an upper midcarder/lower top tier) beats Lesnar (god tier, in WWE's eyes) but then somehow can't get the job done against, I dunno, Ziggler (lower midcarder/jobber). There needs to be some sort of consistency, structure, and logic, or else it's just "some guys fight sometimes, the outcome is determined by dice roll".
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Nov 14, 2019 6:00:30 GMT -5
God, I legit cannot believe people want some kind of clear set of tiers of wrestlers. There is nothing remotely fun about knowing who will win a match the second it's booked! It just feels pointless to watch it play out, and people get sympathy for the 'losers' booked to lose, because they know how arbitrary it was that you get put into tier 3 rather than tier 2 (much less the top tier). Much, much better is to make it so anyone on the roster could plausibly beat anyone else, because you have to be a world-class wrestler to work for the WWE. Someone might win or lose more at a given time because it fits a particular storyline they're in, but not because they're just better or worse. The problem with 50/50 booking is that it coexists with the WWE's "some people are just winners and some people are just losers!" thing, which is a combination that makes people confused about who's supposed to suck. But it's possible to present it so NOBODY sucks. But in real sports there is a sort of stepped gradient. Chances are pretty high that some rookie team or physically less capable competitor will lose against a top tier team because they're just not as good. You're allowed to be "not as good", you can still be competitive within your tier, and over time you might develop skills and strength to climb that ladder and eventually find yourself consistently in the next tier. But it doesn't make a ton of sense to me to have someone, for example, failing to get anywhere chasing the IC title but then somehow a storyline says "ok, you're fighting Lesnar now, because we need a well-liked underdog" when there's very few (and more nuanced then WWE can muster) circumstances where that makes any logical sense. You know Lesnar's going to win, because his opponent a) isn't Lesnar, and Lesnar wins, and b) has demonstrated consistently in recent history that they just aren't on Lesnar's level. To be Lesnar-specific for a moment, the issue I've always had with Lesnar is that he is essentially his own tier, it's rare that anybody else ever comes close, and that I agree is boring. If the tiers were more broad with more free flowing movement for people in them (given appropriate character development to make that meaningful) then it'd be less of an issue. Besides, I don't mind there being a jobber tier, as long as they're still entertaining in some way. Think of the characters we had 20 years ago; Snow, Holly, Saturn, Venis, Kaientai, to name a few. They weren't gonna beat HHH or Austin or The Rock (at least not without shenanigans/a multi-way match), but they might've beaten Benoit, (E.) Guerrero, Malenko, etc, who might have stood a chance in a match with the top guys if the stars aligned. Then you had the other style of big midcarders, like Kane, Henry, Big Show, etc, who could've been a threat too, if the wind blew in the right direction. Basically I guess what I'm saying is I like knowing where somebody is in the pecking order, because although there's some accounting for mismatched styles of wrestling there's going to be some sort of pecking order. There can be upsets and lucky wins, but you wouldn't expect Punk to beat Lesnar in a UFC fight, and I wouldn't expect Punk to beat Lesnar in WWE either - not just because of their physical size, training, and capabilities, but because of booking. Otherwise you end up with weird situations where (for example) Punk (as an upper midcarder/lower top tier) beats Lesnar (god tier, in WWE's eyes) but then somehow can't get the job done against, I dunno, Ziggler (lower midcarder/jobber). There needs to be some sort of consistency, structure, and logic, or else it's just "some guys fight sometimes, the outcome is determined by dice roll".
I can back that, too. To bring a sports comparison into it, there are teams in the Premier League who, at this moment, shouldn't be beating Liverpool because they're top of the league and, for the sake of this example, Southampton are 19th. So the narrative going into it is will this be another easy win for Liverpool or will Southampton have something prepared to dent their confidence and get a draw or even a win? But because of various reasons, Southampton still have their fanbase and history established so unless they go to pot, they'll be fine for the future but it's really about the narrative now. Zack Ryder isn't a high tier star right now but this is a guy whose won the IC title at WrestleMania with the odds against him, been a former US champion and helped guide him and Hawkins to a tag team title victory at the WrestleMania pre show. If you build him well enough, you could have a match where at the very least he can hang with AJ Styles for the US title. Reading between the lines, though, they've made him look like a goober regardless so it'd be hard for anyone to take him seriously when 99% of the time, he's losing his belt on the first defense or getting squashed by The Viking Raiders 2 out of 4 weeks of the month.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Nov 14, 2019 7:01:59 GMT -5
God, I legit cannot believe people want some kind of clear set of tiers of wrestlers. There is nothing remotely fun about knowing who will win a match the second it's booked! It just feels pointless to watch it play out, and people get sympathy for the 'losers' booked to lose, because they know how arbitrary it was that you get put into tier 3 rather than tier 2 (much less the top tier). Much, much better is to make it so anyone on the roster could plausibly beat anyone else, because you have to be a world-class wrestler to work for the WWE. Someone might win or lose more at a given time because it fits a particular storyline they're in, but not because they're just better or worse. The problem with 50/50 booking is that it coexists with the WWE's "some people are just winners and some people are just losers!" thing, which is a combination that makes people confused about who's supposed to suck. But it's possible to present it so NOBODY sucks. But in real sports there is a sort of stepped gradient. Chances are pretty high that some rookie team or physically less capable competitor will lose against a top tier team because they're just not as good. You're allowed to be "not as good", you can still be competitive within your tier, and over time you might develop skills and strength to climb that ladder and eventually find yourself consistently in the next tier. But it doesn't make a ton of sense to me to have someone, for example, failing to get anywhere chasing the IC title but then somehow a storyline says "ok, you're fighting Lesnar now, because we need a well-liked underdog" when there's very few (and more nuanced then WWE can muster) circumstances where that makes any logical sense. You know Lesnar's going to win, because his opponent a) isn't Lesnar, and Lesnar wins, and b) has demonstrated consistently in recent history that they just aren't on Lesnar's level. To be Lesnar-specific for a moment, the issue I've always had with Lesnar is that he is essentially his own tier, it's rare that anybody else ever comes close, and that I agree is boring. If the tiers were more broad with more free flowing movement for people in them (given appropriate character development to make that meaningful) then it'd be less of an issue. Besides, I don't mind there being a jobber tier, as long as they're still entertaining in some way. Think of the characters we had 20 years ago; Snow, Holly, Saturn, Venis, Kaientai, to name a few. They weren't gonna beat HHH or Austin or The Rock (at least not without shenanigans/a multi-way match), but they might've beaten Benoit, (E.) Guerrero, Malenko, etc, who might have stood a chance in a match with the top guys if the stars aligned. Then you had the other style of big midcarders, like Kane, Henry, Big Show, etc, who could've been a threat too, if the wind blew in the right direction. Basically I guess what I'm saying is I like knowing where somebody is in the pecking order, because although there's some accounting for mismatched styles of wrestling there's going to be some sort of pecking order. There can be upsets and lucky wins, but you wouldn't expect Punk to beat Lesnar in a UFC fight, and I wouldn't expect Punk to beat Lesnar in WWE either - not just because of their physical size, training, and capabilities, but because of booking. Otherwise you end up with weird situations where (for example) Punk (as an upper midcarder/lower top tier) beats Lesnar (god tier, in WWE's eyes) but then somehow can't get the job done against, I dunno, Ziggler (lower midcarder/jobber). There needs to be some sort of consistency, structure, and logic, or else it's just "some guys fight sometimes, the outcome is determined by dice roll".
Right, a key thing about a tier system is that it has to exist with a purpose in mind, like creating a path for new talent to get over, and establishing top stars who are your biggest ticket sellers. Like, before he left NJPW Trent Baretta beat Yujiro Takahashi in a singles match; not the biggest deal in the world on paper since Yujiro is a lower midcarder, but it established Trent as an up and coming heavyweight who could now start aiming higher. It allowed for progression. But yeah, the issue is trusting WWE to handle any of it well.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Nov 14, 2019 7:27:38 GMT -5
Tiers in wrestling are exciting because they automatically discourage endless 50/50 booking. If you know who’s supposed to suck, who’s supposed to be mid-tier and who the main eventers are, then it’s more thrilling and meaningful when a midcarder beats a top star. It needs to be rare in order to have an impact.
That’s why companies always need a few jobbers on deck, so midcarders aren’t constantly getting beat on TV.
|
|
|
Post by YAKMAN is ICHIBAN on Nov 14, 2019 15:01:11 GMT -5
Well he grew up to be a pretty hip dude
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 14, 2019 15:09:55 GMT -5
Back in the day....
Wrestler A..
W vs Iron Mike Sharpe W vs Sonny Blaze W vs Duane Gill W vs Louie Spicolli W vs Dusty Wolfe
Wrestler B...
W vs Pez Whatley W vs Buddy Rose W vs Black Bart W vs Michael Saxon W vs Barry Horowitz
Between all of this, A and B cut promos on each other but never meet. Eventually Wrestler A and Wrestler B have a face to face on a single "moderated by heat building heel host" interview segment, then wrestle each other on a PPV.
Modern day.....
Wrestler A vs Wrestler B in a no finish A and C vs B and D in a tag team match Wrestler A beats down Wrestler B A, C and E vs B, D and F in a six man Wrestler A beats down Wrestler B
At the PPV.....Wrestler A beats Wrestler B
In the rematch PPV.....Wrestler A beats Wrestler B
|
|
mcstoklasa
Hank Scorpio
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 6,927
|
Post by mcstoklasa on Nov 14, 2019 15:13:18 GMT -5
Bork is no nerd and he certainly ain't no goober.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 14, 2019 15:18:31 GMT -5
Melvin Eugene Puny-Lesnar
Chess club. Weightlifting. Suplexing f**ckers. Live your dreams!
|
|