Venti
Unicron
Posts: 3,002
|
Post by Venti on May 19, 2021 15:07:10 GMT -5
Hogan/Rock not going on last at WMX8. Nobody could have known that the match would end up as good as it turned out to be (the angle leading up to it was memorable, but a memorable lead-up doesnt always equal a memorable match). I agree with this point plus the fact that I believe the world title should always be last.
|
|
|
Post by Edge of Insanity on May 20, 2021 3:56:56 GMT -5
I'll go with a really controversial one. HHH's Reign of Terror. Some of the guys he "buried" had no business being Champ in my eyes with the exception of RVD who was a well known pot user and potential liability. Looking back, was anyone really hoping to see a Scott Steiner, Kevin Nash, Kane or Booker T title run? They gained more by having HHH as a dominant heel champion and using it to build a big star in Batista in my opinion. If it was up to me, I wouldn't have even had him lose to Goldberg or Benoit. Benoit in hindsight proved to be disastrous decision as WM20 was built around him. I may be one of the world's biggest Kevin Nash marks, so yes I was hoping for a Kevin Nash title run...
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on May 20, 2021 4:22:17 GMT -5
Here’s another one: Asuka’s booking on the main roster. Yeah, I’m generally okay with it. She could look stronger at certain points, for example I thought that one time she got distracted by a lame Ellsworth trick was bad for her. But I don’t mind Charlotte, Becky, Banks or others getting wins off her now and then, because she still gets to beat plenty of people and win some titles in her own right. Her being booked as a dominant character in NXT and early on Raw/Smackdown was fine, but I don’t need her to forever be constantly Goldberging everyone in her path. And really you could argue Asuka's booking in NXT hurt the credibility of Ember when she became champ because she never got the win her story called for. Plus it goes with something Kevin Nash said in talking about Goldberg "when your gimmick is you don't lose it eventually becomes hard to book an interesting story. Because once you lose you don't have much else going for ya" They had the perfect storyline for Asuka's streak ending, it should have been Ember ending it. Ember was the thorn in Asuka's side, the one who had gotten closer to beating her than anybody else, one match Asuka had to cheat to beat her. Ember being the one to dethrone Asuka would have been the perfect culmination for Asuka's streak.
|
|
|
Post by 3cheers4ramirez on May 21, 2021 16:37:51 GMT -5
Brock ending the streak & going on his crazy dominant title run. Firstly, streaks are meant to be broken at some point, otherwise what's the point in them? Secondly, the person who broke the streak had to get a huge push, otherwise it would've been a waste. It had to be someone believable to beat 'Taker, rather than a newbie who may not live up to the billing. And whilst Brock being an absentee champion wasn't ideal, at least he didn't get booked like an idiot like the rest of the roster. Yeah, not breaking the streak at all would've been a huge waste of a story and them being marks really. Building someone new up to beat it would've a) been a huge risk if that person was rejected like Roman and b) totally telegraphed it in the same way that Bryan and Kofi winning at WrestleMania were great moments - but neither had anything like the shock value of the streak ending. Brock was the perfect guy with bulletproof credibility. Huge credit to Vince for having the balls to do it, and to The Undertaker for accepting it.
|
|
Jonathan Michaels
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Archduke of Levity
Here since TNA was still kinda okay
Posts: 18,236
|
Post by Jonathan Michaels on May 21, 2021 22:48:47 GMT -5
I'll go with a really controversial one. HHH's Reign of Terror. Some of the guys he "buried" had no business being Champ in my eyes with the exception of RVD who was a well known pot user and potential liability. Looking back, was anyone really hoping to see a Scott Steiner, Kevin Nash, Kane or Booker T title run? They gained more by having HHH as a dominant heel champion and using it to build a big star in Batista in my opinion. If it was up to me, I wouldn't have even had him lose to Goldberg or Benoit. Benoit in hindsight proved to be disastrous decision as WM20 was built around him. I may be one of the world's biggest Kevin Nash marks, so yes I was hoping for a Kevin Nash title run... Nash should have been the one to win the belt off of Punk instead of Del Rio, in retrospect.
|
|
|
Post by Edge of Insanity on May 22, 2021 3:02:02 GMT -5
I may be one of the world's biggest Kevin Nash marks, so yes I was hoping for a Kevin Nash title run... Nash should have been the one to win the belt off of Punk instead of Del Rio, in retrospect. Not sure if serious or not, but id have been ok with that
|
|
Blade
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,943
|
Post by Blade on May 22, 2021 8:03:20 GMT -5
It was totally the correct decision to put Cena over Brock in his first return match.
First, from a non-kayfabe perspective, it showed that Brock was willing to put someone over and not pitch a hissy fit and half-ass the job like he had in the final match of his first run against Goldberg.
Secondly, the match told an amazing story and had Cena-hating Chicago cheering uproariously for him to slay the unstoppable Brock.
Third, it did not particularly make Brock look weak. He dominated the match and Cena only briefly knocked him out by smashing him in the head with a chain. Brock's booking afterwards hampered him far more than this match did, where he looked like a star and a monster both regardless of the technical outcome.
Fourth, in kayfabe it also made sense for Brock to be a bit rusty after so much time away from the ring, and he was going up against the very top guy. Narrowly losing was more a testament to him than a detriment.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,352
|
Post by The Ichi on May 22, 2021 14:52:41 GMT -5
Punk not winning at NoC 2011. He should've won a rematch at Hell in a Cell, or even bigger, WrestleMania. However, I think booking him to lose to HHH was the right call. Sure, but he didn't get a rematch. So once again, HHH had zero business winning.
|
|
mc74
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,410
|
Post by mc74 on May 22, 2021 16:33:07 GMT -5
I'll go with a really controversial one. HHH's Reign of Terror. Some of the guys he "buried" had no business being Champ in my eyes with the exception of RVD who was a well known pot user and potential liability. Looking back, was anyone really hoping to see a Scott Steiner, Kevin Nash, Kane or Booker T title run? They gained more by having HHH as a dominant heel champion and using it to build a big star in Batista in my opinion. If it was up to me, I wouldn't have even had him lose to Goldberg or Benoit. Benoit in hindsight proved to be disastrous decision as WM20 was built around him. I'll agree with the reign of terror being good in the sense it made it much more meaningful when someone eventually beat HHH for the belt. But I'll say this. Even though I agree Steiner and Nash had no business winning the title from him, Kane and Booker T were guys who you could definitely have take the title off of him. As for Benoit, I have to disagree with that being disastrous for the simple fact seeing him and Eddie celebrate made for an iconic Wrestlemania moment.
|
|
|
Post by TOK Hehe'd Around & Found Out on May 22, 2021 19:55:30 GMT -5
So Christian is one of my favorites of all time, but there was no way that he could have been a long-term main eventer in 2005 WWE. No heels who weren't monsters of the week were going to look strong against Cena or Batista, and they had no idea how to book a guy with Christian's strengths until the past half-decade (other than WWECW, but I'm not even sure Vince remembered that existed until they gave the timeslot to NXT). Going to TNA and showing that he could carry a ultrahot show as the top face and top heel was the best thing that could have happened to his career, both in terms of his development as a talent and for his legacy.
|
|
|
Post by The Rick Jericho on May 22, 2021 20:20:50 GMT -5
Bringing back Warrior in 1996. Bret was leaving and the Shawn experiment was starting. Razor and Diesel were leaving too, so the roster was getting decimated. And listen to the crowd reactions, everytime Warrior was there, the crowd was still rabid for him. Even after 4 years being away. Maybe not winning the WWF title, but if he beat Goldust for the IC title or when Ahmed went down, if Warrior was still around, give him the IC title and 1996 looks more exciting. Then have Stone Cold defeat him for the IC title to give him the rub.
|
|
|
Post by TOK Hehe'd Around & Found Out on May 22, 2021 22:13:03 GMT -5
Making John Cena the guy. Was this ever controversial other than between the first PPV where Cena was on Raw against Jericho and Christian and ONS 2006? He was always clearly the right choice and that was validated when they had to clean up their act post-Benoit. If they didn't have a dude who's pretty much Captain America at the head of the ship, I doubt that WWE (and pro wrestling) would be anywhere near being in the position to make billion dollar deals with both Fox and Comcast. A lot of these posts have the form of "this person isn't championship material" or "this person has no business being champion" and... I dunno. You're not agreeing with the booking because you think it was entertaining or made sense, you're agreeing that a certain person is at a particular place in some sort of hierarchy, and... yeah, I don't get it. That's what booking is. Wrestling can be a whole lot of different things, but no matter if it's straight-up pseudo MMA with three 5'8" white dudes with buzz cuts at the top of the card, a living comic book featuring breakdancing Ancient Egyptian cultists who can hypnotize their opponents at will and multiple generations of ant/human hybrids, or an underground fight ring that's a front for Aztec gods, its a fictional combat sport. The basic narrative structure doesn't work without some sort of in-universe hierarchy and when the performance of real people is at the center of maintaining that narrative structure, people will have opinions about how the performers fit into that hierarchy.
|
|
|
Post by RadcapRadsley on May 23, 2021 1:05:06 GMT -5
Tamina might not be the next Dynamite Kid or Ricky Steamboat in the ring,but WWE was correct to pull the trigger on her and give her the title.
Only mistake in her booking the last month is they never let her make Reginalds face look like Ellsworth
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on May 23, 2021 12:00:36 GMT -5
A lot of these posts have the form of "this person isn't championship material" or "this person has no business being champion" and... I dunno. You're not agreeing with the booking because you think it was entertaining or made sense, you're agreeing that a certain person is at a particular place in some sort of hierarchy, and... yeah, I don't get it. That's what booking is. Wrestling can be a whole lot of different things, but no matter if it's straight-up pseudo MMA with three 5'8" white dudes with buzz cuts at the top of the card, a living comic book featuring breakdancing Ancient Egyptian cultists who can hypnotize their opponents at will and multiple generations of ant/human hybrids, or an underground fight ring that's a front for Aztec gods, its a fictional combat sport. The basic narrative structure doesn't work without some sort of in-universe hierarchy and when the performance of real people is at the center of maintaining that narrative structure, people will have opinions about how the performers fit into that hierarchy. There are two problems with this. No, establishing a hierarchy is absolutely not narratively necessary. If all you mean by "hierarchy" is just that there are title-holders and there are not-title-holders, then sure (though obviously plenty of booking doesn't involve titles, so you're already being way too rigid). And maaaaaaybe we can stretch that to say, ok, there's champions, champion CONTENDERS, and then everyone else. But all this means is, for booking involving championships, there's a hierarchy at any given time. But there is absolutely no reason to stretch that to some general thing beyond who has a title shot right now. And second, the performance of real people is not at the center of the narrative structure in the way that you mean it, because here, "the performance of real people" just means acting, and no one's saying "Cesaro isn't championship material because he's a bad actor."
|
|
|
Post by Edge of Insanity on May 24, 2021 2:14:58 GMT -5
Tamina might not be the next Dynamite Kid or Ricky Steamboat in the ring,but WWE was correct to pull the trigger on her and give her the title. Only mistake in her booking the last month is they never let her make Reginalds face look like Ellsworth I respect your opinion, and to each their own on who you like or dont like, but Tamina to me is an instant fast foward to me, no real personality to me, and very little ring skill. But then again, I feel the same way about Nia Jax, so i guess they just replacing one fast foward as champion with another.
|
|