|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 14, 2007 16:59:53 GMT -5
It was ALL about Risk.
The guys are risking their careers for a shot at a title.
They're risking the cases they won in a match after.
It was a risk to chance cases with someone else without know ing what is in there.
It's not suppose to be some cookie-cutter shot or anything. Hell, some of the guys in the thing wouldn't get shots at some of the belts there, and it might have been their only shot.
|
|
|
Post by lildude8218 on Dec 14, 2007 17:10:07 GMT -5
It was ALL about Risk. The guys are risking their careers for a shot at a title. They're risking the cases they won in a match after. It was a risk to chance cases with someone else without know ing what is in there. It's not suppose to be some cookie-cutter shot or anything. Hell, some of the guys in the thing wouldn't get shots at some of the belts there, and it might have been their only shot. I just wanna know who has control over those pink and purple areas of the board.
|
|
|
Post by big nasty on Dec 14, 2007 17:29:46 GMT -5
i wish it could've been feast, fired, or feces, just to see that one surprised face on opening the unlucky suitcase.
ok ill leave now
|
|
|
Post by laotioncommotion on Dec 14, 2007 17:34:18 GMT -5
I agree that the Feast or Fired premise is really bad. If I were a wrestler, I would not want a case. Having a case means you could get fired... and theoretically if you were a good enough wrestler, you wouldn't need to win a title shot from this, because you would already be EARNING it. The only person in a kayfabe world that would benefit from a case would be some jobber who could never earn a title match any other way, and who would probably be fired anyway. Having a case would mean having little to lose. You mean like Petey Williams, BG James, Scott Steiner and Senshi? None of those guys were on the fast track to success, so I could see any of them willing to risk their job for a title shot. You'd have a point if we were talking about people who are constantly in the main event and getting title shots, but how the hell was Petey Williams going to get a World Title shot? Plus, the whole thing's been different and exciting. I like that. I'd rather have a less realistic, interesting product than a more realistic and boring product.
|
|
MCMGM
Vegeta
WC's Official Jeff Buckley Stalkeress.
Red Sonic My Ass
Posts: 9,184
|
Post by MCMGM on Dec 14, 2007 17:42:38 GMT -5
I love Deal or No Deal.
|
|
mcmahonfan85
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 24,084
Member is Online
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Dec 14, 2007 17:55:02 GMT -5
You mean like Petey Williams, BG James, Scott Steiner and Senshi? None of those guys were on the fast track to success, so I could see any of them willing to risk their job for a title shot. exclude BG James because his gimmick was that he didn't want to be a part of it
|
|
|
Post by laotioncommotion on Dec 14, 2007 17:59:00 GMT -5
You mean like Petey Williams, BG James, Scott Steiner and Senshi? None of those guys were on the fast track to success, so I could see any of them willing to risk their job for a title shot. exclude BG James because his gimmick was that he didn't want to be a part of it Oh yeah, I guess I probably should've left him out. Point still made.
|
|
|
Post by ghettooverlord on Dec 14, 2007 18:09:55 GMT -5
How in God's name can one find interest in a game show where there is zero skill involved? A paper, rock, scissors competition has more skill than that game. It's about watching stupid people try and decide between common sense and greed. Usually greed wins, and they go home with subway fare. From a schadenfreude standpoint, it's quite fun. Jed Shaffer ~They need to bring back 1 vs. 100. That show was AWESOME. Yes, and now the question is: how does that translate into a wrestling angle that is going to make money? How in God's name can one find interest in a game show where there is zero skill involved? A paper, rock, scissors competition has more skill than that game. No skill involved in deciding what sort of odds you have in actually winning a higher amount than you are being offered? Seems like a lot of math involved there which would in fact require some sort of skill. Anyone who has taken fourth-grade math can figure out when to keep going and when to quit on that show.
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Dec 14, 2007 18:39:58 GMT -5
Deal or No Deal is the worst conceivable game show on the entire planet. Period. There is no debate to this. That's why I hate this Feast or Fired thing. Did you ever see the unaired NBC pilot "Gold Case"? ;D Yeah, Feast Or Fired was stupid, probably dumber than the Reverse Battle Royal idea. The idea was intriguing, but having it hinge on the idea that people would rather risk getting fired to get a shot at a title shot (and who would rather have a X-Division or Tag title shot over the World title) is not going to work. I appreciate them trying something new, but not when it defies this much logic.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 14, 2007 18:49:58 GMT -5
Deal or No Deal is the worst conceivable game show on the entire planet. Period. There is no debate to this. That's why I hate this Feast or Fired thing. Did you ever see the unaired NBC pilot "Gold Case"? ;D Yeah, Feast Or Fired was stupid, probably dumber than the Reverse Battle Royal idea. The idea was intriguing, but having it hinge on the idea that people would rather risk getting fired to get a shot at a title shot (and who would rather have a X-Division or Tag title shot over the World title) is not going to work. I appreciate them trying something new, but not when it defies this much logic. Well, it's not like they go "I won't get this case, cause it has the X shot in it. I'm going to the opposite corner to get the World shot". They don't know what are in the cases. For all they know, they might have the World title and that's what they are hoping for. That's not a logic jump at all. The goal for Steiner, Petey, and Daniels was the world title shot, and I think even BG said something about it in the wrap up video last week.
|
|
|
Post by GaTechGrad on Dec 14, 2007 18:59:54 GMT -5
I liked it, because it was something original (at least I don't ever remember it being done before). Some people seem to take this gimmick waaaaaaay too seriously. The only problem was that TNA should have let everyone know before the PPV that the briefcases would have been opened on Impact, and not on the night of the PPV.
|
|
|
Post by ghettooverlord on Dec 14, 2007 19:10:18 GMT -5
Did you ever see the unaired NBC pilot "Gold Case"? ;D Yeah, Feast Or Fired was stupid, probably dumber than the Reverse Battle Royal idea. The idea was intriguing, but having it hinge on the idea that people would rather risk getting fired to get a shot at a title shot (and who would rather have a X-Division or Tag title shot over the World title) is not going to work. I appreciate them trying something new, but not when it defies this much logic. I never saw it. I have a dislike for any sort of games that have a large element of luck in them, but these new-age game shows are f***ing preposterous. Well, it's not like they go "I won't get this case, cause it has the X shot in it. I'm going to the opposite corner to get the World shot". They don't know what are in the cases. For all they know, they might have the World title and that's what they are hoping for. That's not a logic jump at all. The goal for Steiner, Petey, and Daniels was the world title shot, and I think even BG said something about it in the wrap up video last week. Meh, I think the real problem is that the entire angle feeds into the notion that Vince Russo is a crazy bastard with a pole fetish.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 14, 2007 19:18:07 GMT -5
Meh, I think the real problem is that the entire angle feeds into the notion that Vince Russo is a crazy bastard with a pole fetish. You know they used poles before Russo? You know that there are more people on the team than Russo? You know that 2 of the most influential members have history in the southern style of booking, which shares some traits with iMPACT? Do Ya?
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Dec 14, 2007 19:20:40 GMT -5
Did you ever see the unaired NBC pilot "Gold Case"? ;D Yeah, Feast Or Fired was stupid, probably dumber than the Reverse Battle Royal idea. The idea was intriguing, but having it hinge on the idea that people would rather risk getting fired to get a shot at a title shot (and who would rather have a X-Division or Tag title shot over the World title) is not going to work. I appreciate them trying something new, but not when it defies this much logic. Well, it's not like they go "I won't get this case, cause it has the X shot in it. I'm going to the opposite corner to get the World shot". They don't know what are in the cases. For all they know, they might have the World title and that's what they are hoping for. That's not a logic jump at all. The goal for Steiner, Petey, and Daniels was the world title shot, and I think even BG said something about it in the wrap up video last week. That's true enough. I just don't see a wrestler willing enough to risk his job for a title shot, much less many of them. I'm still kinda glad they addressed that with Chris Harris wanting nothing to do with the match. Hey, if it gets VKM broken up, then the whole thing was worth it.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Dec 14, 2007 19:24:52 GMT -5
I had no problem with the concept, the execution of dragging it out for a couple of weeks was the only thing really lacking.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Dec 14, 2007 19:27:34 GMT -5
You know they used poles before Russo? You know that there are more people on the team than Russo? You know that 2 of the most influential members have history in the southern style of booking, which shares some traits with iMPACT? Do Ya? Yeah, but you have to admit, it doesn't do TNA good to be associated with too many "____ on a pole" matches.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 14, 2007 19:32:13 GMT -5
You know they used poles before Russo? You know that there are more people on the team than Russo? You know that 2 of the most influential members have history in the southern style of booking, which shares some traits with iMPACT? Do Ya? Yeah, but you have to admit, it doesn't do TNA good to be associated with too many "____ on a pole" matches. How many have they had? 5? 6? out of a couple hundred of matches from iMPACTs and PPVs? The only problem is that there have been 2 in a short span, and it's more offensive than over a span of a few months.
|
|
|
Post by Beebs is the Final Girl on Dec 14, 2007 19:32:55 GMT -5
my only problem is they made My Angel cry. and BG still has a job. that is just mean
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Dec 14, 2007 19:34:28 GMT -5
How many have they had? 5? 6? out of a couple hundred of matches from iMPACTs and PPVs? The only problem is that there have been 2 in a short span, and it's more offensive than over a span of a few months. The problem is, TNA has a general association not just with pole matches, but with gimmicky matches in general, in the view of many wrestling audiences. Its a stereotype they should make more of an effort to prove wrong (at least in my opinion).
|
|
mcmahonfan85
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 24,084
Member is Online
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Dec 14, 2007 19:59:27 GMT -5
The problem is, TNA has a general association not just with pole matches, but with gimmicky matches in general, in the view of many wrestling audiences. then those wrestling audiences need to pay attention. TNA, to my knowledge, has never had a gimmick match. True, they've had several thousand "concept" matches, but not one gimmick match! ;D
|
|