Departing WWE Stars: One last happy win or do the job?

[The Rick Jericho]

Seeing how it looks like the Edge run is done.

When it comes to departing WWE stars, would you rather they go over and get a happy last farewell win/storyline victory. Or would you rather them lose and put over whoever they have to like Ambrose/Bryan/Flair 1993 departure?

[Cranjis McBasketball]

Do the job. Ask the Kliq when they f***ed Bret. It’s just what you do.

[ChitownKnight]

Depends on the circumstances. If they spent a good portion of the end of their run putting people over then they can ride high with a win. Cena for instance, if he won his last match I wouldn’t be mad

[Nosnorb]

You go out on your back. Lose your last match.

[Aceorton]

It strikes me as kind of selfish to leave on "YAY, ME!" and not give your opponent the rub of "I'm the guy who retired/ran off this big star." If you're a major name, you're going to get an ovation anyway because most of the audience knows you're real-life leaving. So be generous in that moment for the person who's still going to be working there next week.

[Vice honcho room temperature]

Depends Who and why. Honestly we have too long a memory for it to mean anything. Like if the follow up is Baron Corben besting Angle... give us the memory of Angle beating Carbon. A Hell, the go out on your back was during the territory days, where you had a clean slate where you went next after doing the job

[Lizuka #BLM]

Depends on the circumstances but I'd generally prefer the former.

[The Foreigner™: OffSZN]

Shouldn't be 100% one or the other but I think the majority of departing wrestlers should do the job on their way out.

[Urethra Franklin]

I think it really depends on the circumstances, but generally, and as others have pointed out, the whole concept of putting somebody over on your way out is something from the territorial era and isn’t something that has to be gospel today.

Even if we go back to the days of the Monday Night Wars, I think that policy remained in effect for good reason. If I’m losing Paul Wight to WWF, then you better believe the last time you see him on WCW TV, he’s getting (almost literally) killed by Kevin Nash. It made sense to use an outgoing star to both put somebody else over and devalue them on the way out. Petty or not, you understood the logic.

Now, I think it’s different. It appears that Edge is on his way to AEW and his WWE career ended (for now?) with that terrific match with Sheamus in his hometown. He went over and it was a truly memorable moment for him and to honour the lengthy career of one of the company’s greatest ever performers in a final match against one of his good friends. In watching it, I cannot imagine it going down any other way.

But for argument’s sake, let’s say they decided to use the exiting Edge to put somebody over. Obviously, it wouldn’t have been Sheamus because he’s an all-time great in his own right and doesn’t need the rub. Grayson Waller would have worked perfectly and I think you could convince me to have him beat Edge on the way out. It would have been a giant victory for a guy looking for his first signature win.

But here’s my issue: Waller beating Edge would have had to mean something significant. It would have had to skyrocket him to a higher spot on the card because you don’t want a Baron Corbin/Kurt Angle scenario. God bless Baron Corbin, but retiring friggin’ Kurt Angle at WrestleMania did nothing for him at all. It’s a completely forgotten footnote now and in retrospect, it seems nuts that Angle didn’t ride off into the sunset with a win. Because of that, I’m fine with Edge going out with a victory.

[The Gallus Mark]

Aug 29, 2023 1:07:03 GMT -5 Urethra Franklin said:

I think it really depends on the circumstances, but generally, and as others have pointed out, the whole concept of putting somebody over on your way out is something from the territorial era and isn’t something that has to be gospel today.

Even if we go back to the days of the Monday Night Wars, I think that policy remained in effect for good reason. If I’m losing Paul Wight to WWF, then you better believe the last time you see him on WCW TV, he’s getting (almost literally) killed by Kevin Nash. It made sense to use an outgoing star to both put somebody else over and devalue them on the way out. Petty or not, you understood the logic.

Now, I think it’s different. It appears that Edge is on his way to AEW and his WWE career ended (for now?) with that terrific match with Sheamus in his hometown. He went over and it was a truly memorable moment for him and to honour the lengthy career of one of the company’s greatest ever performers in a final match against one of his good friends. In watching it, I cannot imagine it going down any other way.

But for argument’s sake, let’s say they decided to use the exiting Edge to put somebody over. Obviously, it wouldn’t have been Sheamus because he’s an all-time great in his own right and doesn’t need the rub. Grayson Waller would have worked perfectly and I think you could convince me to have him beat Edge on the way out. It would have been a giant victory for a guy looking for his first signature win.

But here’s my issue: Waller beating Edge would have had to mean something significant. It would have had to skyrocket him to a higher spot on the card because you don’t want a Baron Corbin/Kurt Angle scenario. God bless Baron Corbin, but retiring friggin’ Kurt Angle at WrestleMania did nothing for him at all. It’s a completely forgotten footnote now and in retrospect, it seems nuts that Angle didn’t ride off into the sunset with a win. Because of that, I’m fine with Edge going out with a victory.

I don’t think there’s a way that I could have worded my thoughts any better than you just did. You even used Grayson Waller as the person that Edge could have put over in a different scenario like I was thinking lol

[ERON]

It should be decided on a case by case basis. There shouldn't be a set in stone rule one way or the other. Sometimes the veteran should give the rub to an up and comer, and other times the hero ahould get one last hurrah.

[Doo Doo Dickhead]

Depends on if I like them or not.

[Feyrhausen]

Odds are even if some up and comer beats a departing legend the next week the UAC gets beat and made to look a fool. So what was the point. Wins and losses have to matter for doing jobs to matter.

[Bo Rida]

Depends on what's come before.
Cena has lost to everyone at this stage, even Theory, he was done as full-time years ago and isn't going anywhere else so when the time comes there's no harm of going out on a high.


Someone like like Danielson with a lot to give and going to another company should usually be putting someone over on the way out. Same if still relatively high card full-time Wrestler retires ala Foley (the first time).

[Raskovnik]

Losing on the way out is so predictable that I prefer we see the former a bit more often just to keep things from essentially being a foregone conclusion.

[Mid-Carder]

Generally yes people should job on their way out but there are some exceptions. I think after all the shit Trish went through to get where she was, her winning in 2006 was the right move. I also would have had Kurt win against Corbin.

[The Barber]

Job. Unless the wrestler is beating their rival that they never beat, then you go out on your back.

[XIII]

Honestly it doesn’t matter anymore. The territory system is gone and there is no real wrestling war going on at the moment as AEW and WWE both just seem to be doing their own thing.

That said a big star like Edge/Kurt Angle/etc. should only be having their last match with someone on their level anyways. There’s too many recent examples of guys losing to dudes that they have no business losing to(Corbin over Kurt, Theory over Cena, etc.). There are so few new guys that you can definitively say “this guy will be a star 100%” that it’s not worth it to try make them a star off of a top guy. Theory beat Cena at Wrestlemania and it’s merely a footnote that they mention now and again when that should be a huge accolade and should have rocketed him up the card or else why even bother doing it? Same with Corbin and Angle.

["Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik]

It depends. I generally lean job but it shouldn't just be losing for the sake of losing. It should matter and it should involve someone that tells a good story. Corbin beating Angle didn't do much for him so it wouldn't have hurt to give Kurt one last win. But I'd generally prefer he lose to someone like Gable and pass the torch.

[clc]

It depends:

Edge coming back in his late 40's and putting absolutely no one over his entire run: Bad.

Kairi who was basically a jobber on the main roster getting a win to set up a beat down to write her off: Good

Someone dominant during their career going out winning is a waste of an opportunity to help make a new star. If you do have them go out on top, it should be vs a long term established rival.
Someone who was not dominant finally getting a big win to go out is fine.