ghost
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,762
|
Post by ghost on May 1, 2023 17:36:03 GMT -5
Cody could have won the titles, and then Heyman could have come out the next night and said "read the fine print, it was only for the WWE title", or some Russo level BS to keep the Universal title on Reigns and let him get to a million days with that belt. If they give Cody the Raw belt, and they probably will, then this will be a joke.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on May 1, 2023 17:45:06 GMT -5
In an industry where hindsight is this eternal lesson in "Okay yeah we should've pulled the trigger at this obvious moment and waiting cost us in the long run even if it wasn't immediate", I think it's stunning that we keep ending up here. The longest tenured booker in the history of the industry, still not 'getting it'. Especially with the threat of a new title being made and Cody not even getting his hands on the one he feels his father was robbed of when that's the thesis statement of his run. I get that business business flow charts business and all, but there's something to be said for just like, actually telling a good story to engage in the craft of storytelling that it feels WWE is just eternally too short-sighted to understand. Which also leads to why it's so weird when people make ratings and business metrics their bottom line in terms of considering something a good decision or not. Storyteling is an art. Good storytelling is a much more profitable business than smashing that reset button and coasting. But more importantly, good storytelling is better entertainment. WWE is weekly televised live theater. Andy Bernard should have never been regional manager, Dexter should have ended at season 5, True Detective Season 2 should never have happened and Roman should have dropped the title to Cody at Wrestlemania 39 - all regardless what the immediate ratings showed. Good storytelling is entertainment, and I think WWE needs to look at the bigger picture, which obviously Vince makes impossible because he's an indecisive crazy person flipping on a dime non-stop. But there's an interesting dynamic in the eternality of WWE, in contrast to your very reasonable examples. Something like the later seasons of Dexter are bad, but there's a very static decision to be had between its existence or its nonexistence. Jobs people want to keep having, and the vested interests those people have in finding reasons for a show to go on to keep those jobs. The show was out of ideas and they had a reasonable stopping point, but instead, they kept doing it. It's how Supernatural went on for literally twice as long as it had been good. It's how The Simpsons keeps existing. There's a question of "Okay but then what?" to the idea that everyone goes their separate ways and finds a new project. Even maybe philosophical questions on if bad art is truly worse to have than no art at all. Questions that bear at least asking and discussing. WWE is not in that state. WWE does not live or die by the whims of a single TV contract and it never could. If Raw was suddenly worth half what it is now to networks for some reason, it could and would persist. There'd be cuts, there'd be stock problems, lots of people would be mad, but Raw would go on. It's a year-round show that doesn't need to find a way to captivate interest over a long summer off-season and make a bid for renewal. It doesn't need to secure extensions and guarantee a full length season run instead of a shortened run that reads of being a surefire network politics casualty. WWE needs to sell tickets, needs to find reasons for people to tune in next week, needs to build PPVs, but these things aren't life or death questions of the entire product's existence. All of this is to say that WWE doesn't need to settle for seasonal rot and weaker storytelling, or make decisions that have to exist in the life or death scope of its own existence. Which is all to say, they don't need to squeeze every imaginable ticket out of the idea that maybe they can keep a chase lit. There's other options. Other ways to move things forward. They aren't constantly trying to stay three steps ahead of cancellation and network entropy. Narrative catharsis isn't a boogeyman. Going with the hot hand in the moment to create a genuinely impactful and electrifying moment at the right time will not hurt the company. If WWE is making the exact same money but with a more successfully told story that better stands the test of time, then there doesn't seem like a strong reason to just dismiss offhand that the other option is there.
|
|
TWERKIN' MAGGLE
Crow T. Robot
Black Lives Matter
Posts: 46,054
Member is Online
|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on May 1, 2023 17:48:06 GMT -5
Fine, I'll take the belt off Roman, you all don't need to keep bugging me about it.
I expect pizza after though.
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,985
|
Post by chazraps on May 1, 2023 18:03:44 GMT -5
Cody could have won the titles, and then Heyman could have come out the next night and said "read the fine print, it was only for the WWE title", or some Russo level BS to keep the Universal title on Reigns and let him get to a million days with that belt. If they give Cody the Raw belt, and they probably will, then this will be a joke. I mean, the "read the fine print" scenario would be the one time they could have gotten away with it as it would have been a true "Dusty finish," furthering the parallels to his dad while still making it his own.
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,985
|
Post by chazraps on May 1, 2023 18:05:38 GMT -5
Which also leads to why it's so weird when people make ratings and business metrics their bottom line in terms of considering something a good decision or not. Storyteling is an art. Good storytelling is a much more profitable business than smashing that reset button and coasting. But more importantly, good storytelling is better entertainment. WWE is weekly televised live theater. Andy Bernard should have never been regional manager, Dexter should have ended at season 5, True Detective Season 2 should never have happened and Roman should have dropped the title to Cody at Wrestlemania 39 - all regardless what the immediate ratings showed. Good storytelling is entertainment, and I think WWE needs to look at the bigger picture, which obviously Vince makes impossible because he's an indecisive crazy person flipping on a dime non-stop. But there's an interesting dynamic in the eternality of WWE, in contrast to your very reasonable examples. Something like the later seasons of Dexter are bad, but there's a very static decision to be had between its existence or its nonexistence. Jobs people want to keep having, and the vested interests those people have in finding reasons for a show to go on to keep those jobs. The show was out of ideas and they had a reasonable stopping point, but instead, they kept doing it. It's how Supernatural went on for literally twice as long as it had been good. It's how The Simpsons keeps existing. There's a question of "Okay but then what?" to the idea that everyone goes their separate ways and finds a new project. Even maybe philosophical questions on if bad art is truly worse to have than no art at all. Questions that bear at least asking and discussing. WWE is not in that state. WWE does not live or die by the whims of a single TV contract and it never could. If Raw was suddenly worth half what it is now to networks for some reason, it could and would persist. There'd be cuts, there'd be stock problems, lots of people would be mad, but Raw would go on. It's a year-round show that doesn't need to find a way to captivate interest over a long summer off-season and make a bid for renewal. It doesn't need to secure extensions and guarantee a full length season run instead of a shortened run that reads of being a surefire network politics casualty. WWE needs to sell tickets, needs to find reasons for people to tune in next week, needs to build PPVs, but these things aren't life or death questions of the entire product's existence. All of this is to say that WWE doesn't need to settle for seasonal rot and weaker storytelling, or make decisions that have to exist in the life or death scope of its own existence. Which is all to say, they don't need to squeeze every imaginable ticket out of the idea that maybe they can keep a chase lit. There's other options. Other ways to move things forward. They aren't constantly trying to stay three steps ahead of cancellation and network entropy. Narrative catharsis isn't a boogeyman. Going with the hot hand in the moment to create a genuinely impactful and electrifying moment at the right time will not hurt the company. If WWE is making the exact same money but with a more successfully told story that better stands the test of time, then there doesn't seem like a strong reason to just dismiss offhand that the other option is there. Dang, well said.
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on May 1, 2023 18:50:23 GMT -5
Yeah, they blew it, lmao.
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on May 1, 2023 19:23:39 GMT -5
In an industry where hindsight is this eternal lesson in "Okay yeah we should've pulled the trigger at this obvious moment and waiting cost us in the long run even if it wasn't immediate", I think it's stunning that we keep ending up here. The longest tenured booker in the history of the industry, still not 'getting it'. Especially with the threat of a new title being made and Cody not even getting his hands on the one he feels his father was robbed of when that's the thesis statement of his run. I get that business business flow charts business and all, but there's something to be said for just like, actually telling a good story to engage in the craft of storytelling that it feels WWE is just eternally too short-sighted to understand. Which also leads to why it's so weird when people make ratings and business metrics their bottom line in terms of considering something a good decision or not. Storyteling is an art. Good storytelling is a much more profitable business than smashing that reset button and coasting. But more importantly, good storytelling is better entertainment. WWE is weekly televised live theater. Andy Bernard should have never been regional manager, Dexter should have ended at season 5, True Detective Season 2 should never have happened and Roman should have dropped the title to Cody at Wrestlemania 39 - all regardless what the immediate ratings showed. I think the reaction of responding with merch, crowd response, ratings, tickets metrics has to do with what people were originally saying about the finish. They weren’t just arguing that creatively/storytelling wise he should’ve won (I think almost all would agree with that), many were also saying there was going to be a mass exodus of viewers, that Cody was red hot and was now going to cool off and they’d never have the opportunity for him to be the face of the company/a brand again. And those aspects at least have still been strong.
|
|
|
Post by avenger on May 1, 2023 19:45:59 GMT -5
Sami in Montreal is how it actually should have ended. Cody at Mania would have been fine as the crowd was waiting for it, but Sami was the logical storyline. WWE going to keep blueballing us until we can’t keep it up anymore though and it will end with a weak and unsatisfying climax. I used to think that Sami was the logical storyline, but he isn't. Jey Uso is.
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,985
|
Post by chazraps on May 1, 2023 19:53:44 GMT -5
Sami in Montreal is how it actually should have ended. Cody at Mania would have been fine as the crowd was waiting for it, but Sami was the logical storyline. WWE going to keep blueballing us until we can’t keep it up anymore though and it will end with a weak and unsatisfying climax. I used to think that Sami was the logical storyline, but he isn't. Jey Uso is. Jey Uso doesn't need the belt for that story though. He just has to beat Roman. Cody/Sami needed the belt.
|
|
|
Post by Finish Uncle Muffin’s Story on May 1, 2023 19:57:37 GMT -5
I feel like I've made my thoughts on this one abundantly clear and I've still not watched a single full episode of WWE TV since Mania.
Cody should have won. Nothing they'll do will be as satisfying from a storytelling standpoint. That said, if I was to put my feelings around it aside, I think this weekend is genuinely the first true test of how they treat him. Dude needs to beat Brock. If he loses to Brock, then I think some of the hyperbole around Bitchalla is justified.
Seth staying on RAW makes me think Cody/Roman is the match for SummerSlam. My guess is we get Cody/Brock at Backlash and the Saudi PPV, then Cody wins MITB and calls his shot at Roman in August while Seth wins the WWE Title at NoC and goes into a feud with Balor for SummerSlam.
Did they need to get this cute about it? No. I think the larger issue is that they never should have unified the belts in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by Finish Uncle Muffin’s Story on May 1, 2023 20:00:27 GMT -5
I used to think that Sami was the logical storyline, but he isn't. Jey Uso is. Jey Uso doesn't need the belt for that story though. He just has to beat Roman. Cody/Sami needed the belt. Honestly, Jey winning the belt would probably do him more harm than good in the long run given how tied he is to the Roman story. I know people thought Cody/Roman didn't have as much juice, but the reason why Cody's the guy to do this is because he's tied enough to Roman to have a story that makes sense but not SO tied to the whole thing that people go "OK, now what."
|
|
|
Post by joeiscool on May 1, 2023 21:02:33 GMT -5
If the plan is for Cody to win it at WM next year it makes sense to move him to raw. My guess is he tries to get the world heavyweight title and fails. He then wins Money in the bank and challenges roman
|
|
|
Post by firsttimelongtime on May 1, 2023 22:18:04 GMT -5
Cody should have won. However, Roman being Champion is not bad booking. Both can be true.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on May 2, 2023 1:35:09 GMT -5
It was such an easy lay-up that you didn't think it was impossible to f*** up, but WWE has that magical way of still surprising you sometimes. Plus what's so funny is if they didn't ultimately want to go with Rhodes, they'd accidentally made Sami Zayn a completely suitable replacement, and they didn't go with him either. It's just full steam forward with the Reigns train, problem is no one seems to know where it's going.
It's also objectively bad booking when you consider Cody was regularly outdrawing Reigns in house shows, drawing higher rated segments, and selling more merch by comparison. I can laugh at it, cause I don't give a f***, but I can't understand WWE fans trying to spin this as a good decision.
|
|
Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-]
FANatic
Writer, Lover of all things Wrestling. Analytical, Critical, Lovable (hopefully). Lets all have fun!
Posts: 235,930
Member is Online
|
Post by Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-] on May 2, 2023 1:44:07 GMT -5
Cody should have won. However, Roman being Champion is not bad booking. Both can be true. Both can be true, but I highly disagree about the latter It was good at one point, but the justification for this title reign continuing on has gotten less and less the longer it has Drew was a good time Sami was a better time Cody was THE time And now they have to make another belt just for other guys to win a "world title" because it's never actually the time for Roman. I don't agree in any metric that keeping the belt on Roman has been good booking at this point nor are the ends actively justifying the means.
|
|
|
Post by stoptheclocks on May 2, 2023 2:09:53 GMT -5
It was such an easy lay-up that you didn't think it was impossible to f*** up, but WWE has that magical way of still surprising you sometimes. Plus what's so funny is if they didn't ultimately want to go with Rhodes, they'd accidentally made Sami Zayn a completely suitable replacement, and they didn't go with him either. It's just full steam forward with the Reigns train, problem is no one seems to know where it's going. It's also objectively bad booking when you consider Cody was regularly outdrawing Reigns in house shows, drawing higher rated segments, and selling more merch by comparison. I can laugh at it, cause I don't give a f***, but I can't understand WWE fans trying to spin this as a good decision. Is Cody now drawing less people to house shows, drawing lower rated segments and selling less merch? I've not seen (m)any people saying it was a good decision, just that the reaction to it with people gleefully suggesting it would tank the company was absurd. One massively popular guy beat another massively popular guy and the world moves on.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on May 2, 2023 3:10:36 GMT -5
It was such an easy lay-up that you didn't think it was impossible to f*** up, but WWE has that magical way of still surprising you sometimes. Plus what's so funny is if they didn't ultimately want to go with Rhodes, they'd accidentally made Sami Zayn a completely suitable replacement, and they didn't go with him either. It's just full steam forward with the Reigns train, problem is no one seems to know where it's going. It's also objectively bad booking when you consider Cody was regularly outdrawing Reigns in house shows, drawing higher rated segments, and selling more merch by comparison. I can laugh at it, cause I don't give a f***, but I can't understand WWE fans trying to spin this as a good decision. Is Cody now drawing less people to house shows, drawing lower rated segments and selling less merch? I've not seen (m)any people saying it was a good decision, just that the reaction to it with people gleefully suggesting it would tank the company was absurd. One massively popular guy beat another massively popular guy and the world moves on. It's mainly from a few weirdly agressive contraians, who are really trying to insist that because the bottom hasn't fallen out that it was a good move. Problem is regardless of what decision they had made on the day, the result would have largely been the same. A curiosity bump post Mania, a general flattening out, and then a bump for the draft. Any issues that are gonna be felt from this would be longer term, but also not enough to affect their business in any meaninful way. So it doesn't really matter, nothing they do really matters anymore. They make money by just existing at this point. So they don't really need to please the fanbase, but that also means they also don't have to actively fight against it either.
|
|
|
Post by Alice Syndrome on May 2, 2023 5:36:12 GMT -5
Sami in Montreal is how it actually should have ended. Cody at Mania would have been fine as the crowd was waiting for it, but Sami was the logical storyline. WWE going to keep blueballing us until we can’t keep it up anymore though and it will end with a weak and unsatisfying climax. I used to think that Sami was the logical storyline, but he isn't. Jey Uso is. Yeah but we have to ask, will Jey Uso fall in line again? (seriously it's been like 6 times they've done that.)
|
|
|
Post by eJm on May 2, 2023 6:08:09 GMT -5
In an industry where hindsight is this eternal lesson in "Okay yeah we should've pulled the trigger at this obvious moment and waiting cost us in the long run even if it wasn't immediate", I think it's stunning that we keep ending up here. The longest tenured booker in the history of the industry, still not 'getting it'. Especially with the threat of a new title being made and Cody not even getting his hands on the one he feels his father was robbed of when that's the thesis statement of his run. I get that business business flow charts business and all, but there's something to be said for just like, actually telling a good story to engage in the craft of storytelling that it feels WWE is just eternally too short-sighted to understand. This is what gets to me. Podcasts and YouTube channels have talked about Luger at SummerSlam 94, Booker at WrestleMania 19, Rey Mysterio period, literally every dumb thing WWE says WCW did and yet, somehow, against all odds, the people on top (the same people who have mostly been there since the 70s/80s) are still making these same missteps. Vince has been there for 99% of them and made the call on at least 80% of them. And yeah, business isn’t going to bottom out right away or at all. WWE could scrap house shows, international tours, cancel the 2K video game deal and still be mega profitable off of TV deals and Middle Eastern monarchies and it’s all by design. That still doesn’t counteract that shit can be considered bad ideas especially since none of us fans are going to make a dime off of any of it.
|
|
|
Post by stoptheclocks on May 2, 2023 6:12:02 GMT -5
Is Cody now drawing less people to house shows, drawing lower rated segments and selling less merch? I've not seen (m)any people saying it was a good decision, just that the reaction to it with people gleefully suggesting it would tank the company was absurd. One massively popular guy beat another massively popular guy and the world moves on. It's mainly from a few weirdly agressive contraians, who are really trying to insist that because the bottom hasn't fallen out that it was a good move. Problem is regardless of what decision they had made on the day, the result would have largely been the same. A curiosity bump post Mania, a general flattening out, and then a bump for the draft. Any issues that are gonna be felt from this would be longer term, but also not enough to affect their business in any meaninful way. So it doesn't really matter, nothing they do really matters anymore. They make money by just existing at this point. So they don't really need to please the fanbase, but that also means they also don't have to actively fight against it either. I'd go along with all of that. Although I think in the past it's been framed as WWE not having to really try as they have a hardcore fanbase who'll just passively accept anything and keep watching out of habit. I don't think that's quite the case here - I think an underrated amount of WWE fans just really, really like Roman Reigns and so they aren't outraged at all that he won.
|
|