I just invented a new match concept idea...

[Jay Peas 42]

What's the point? You see, Gimmick matches exist only because two wrestlers have a feud that cannot be resolved by normal means. For example, Cage matches prevent interference. The gimmick should also provide some sort of resolution a normal match cannot. Submission matches are the best example of this. You can get a lucky rollup, but to force your opponent to scream "I quit," is the ultimate way to prove who the better man is. But this is basically a Ref on a pole match.

[FreZno]

Jan 17, 2009 16:30:15 GMT -5 Jay Peas 42 said:

What's the point? You see, Gimmick matches exist only because two wrestlers have a feud that cannot be resolved by normal means. For example, Cage matches prevent interference. The gimmick should also provide some sort of resolution a normal match cannot. Submission matches are the best example of this. You can get a lucky rollup, but to force your opponent to scream "I quit," is the ultimate way to prove who the better man is. But this is basically a Ref on a pole match.

I'd pay money to see an actual "Ref on a Pole" match.

But anyway, I agree with you in theory. But you're talking about what gimmick matches *should* be, which isn't quite what they are these days. RD has said it several times before, but the idea of a cage match being used to prevent interference is pretty well dead. And generally speaking, things aren't as bad as the final years of WCW, when gimmicks matches were done simply for the sake of having gimmick matches... but still, they really aren't reserved for feud-ending "blow off" matches any more.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that while you have a valid point, it's not one that would stop WWE or TNA from using this "ref in a box" idea.

[Reptar]

bradtherad is my favorite poster of all the times.

What do you think?

[HardKore]

I got an idea to improve this idea.

Multiple Referees.

The Heel has one of his lackeys as a special guest referee and if he unlocks his Ref he pretty much guarantees he wins the match.

The Face either has a normal ref or a face special quest Referee.

[threev]

Jan 17, 2009 16:30:15 GMT -5 Jay Peas 42 said:

What's the point? You see, Gimmick matches exist only because two wrestlers have a feud that cannot be resolved by normal means. For example, Cage matches prevent interference. The gimmick should also provide some sort of resolution a normal match cannot. Submission matches are the best example of this. You can get a lucky rollup, but to force your opponent to scream "I quit," is the ultimate way to prove who the better man is. But this is basically a Ref on a pole match.

It could be used as a match where a champion or heel is constantly attacking the referee to get out of losing.

[Magician under the moonlight]

Jan 17, 2009 15:56:30 GMT -5 mcmahonfan85 said:

could Robocop come down to the ring and rip the cage door down to let the ref out?

Although I get the reference but I'll mark.

[Bo Rida]

Is there anyway Kane can get involved? Maybe as a cage guard?

[Pushed to the Moon]

How bout all the fans are locked in chambers and they aren't allowed to cheer until they're unlocked by a wrestler. Once they've unlocked enough, the pop they receive should be enough to spur them to victory. "Why would they cheer for a heel if they unlocked them?" I hear you cry. Well my friend, the chambers are air tight, and the wrestlers are effectively saving their life. It shall be known as either a "Life in their hands match" or "Super Chamber Match 2000".

[stinger]

Wow...you guys are kinda being jerks about all this. I've heard worse ideas. I actually kind of like HardKore's variation on it.

[rrm15]

Jan 17, 2009 19:15:55 GMT -5 stinger said:

Wow...you guys are kinda being jerks about all this. I've heard worse ideas.

This.

I think it'd be a fun thing on a RAW roulette episode or something.

[bradtherad]

Thanks to everyone for reading my idea and contributing comments especially those who liked it lol.

[metylerca]

And next week's Impact main event....



Nah, just kidding. It's an idea, I'll give you that.

[TheShowStoppin Classic JBHENDU]

Jan 17, 2009 14:06:12 GMT -5 Sajoa Moe said:

I think this belongs in the TNA forum.

I only read the title of this thread and thought that.

Be honest sir! You ARE Vince Russo!

[thesunbeast]

I like it, but I think it could use a few variations/revisions before it's at it's best.

The thing is, is that all gimmick matches start because they have a concept behind them, but then they continue to be used even though the concept is gone, and this give the false perception that it's about the match, when it's really about the concept.

A cage match was made because there would bee too much outside interference. Then, when people interfered anyway after a while of learning how to manipulate the system, hell in a cell was made with a roof to stop interference once and for all. But, they kept the cage match around anyway, because....well.....I don't know.

You had no dq match made because of dq'a ruining a match that needed to settle an issue, It wasn't aboyt "having no rules for brutality" because if it was it would make no since to have no dq matches instead of the later invented hardcore matches. However, they still use no dq matches just for that purpose, to have a "brutal" match, when it dosen't make any sense.

When Steph earlier this week made the 3rd match between Punk and Regal a no dq match, it was the first time in a while where I saw a gimmick match made in a way that makes sense. You're supposed to use the "next best thing" so to speak, because you just want a match, but you have to do the things that strip away the negative stuff in order to have that match, and then you're left with what could potentially be a brutal match.

Like the ladder match, it wasn't made because you can damage someone with a ladder, it was to settle an issue with people regarding the possession of a material item. You can then manipulate the circumstances and use the ladder as a weapon. If you make that match primarily about the possibilities of it's manipulation, then if you don't do a whole lot of manipulation, then it won't be entertaining enough. If a cage match is about keeping people out, and you smash their face in the steel, then that's entertaining an creative, but if you make a cage match be about smashing people's faces into the cage, and in the match they smash your face in the cage, it dosen't seem creative or entertaining enough. You have to use reason to justify a match type.

So, I think this "ref in a cage" idea is pretty good, as long as it's made in light of you having a reason, which, for a match like this, there are definitely plenty. I think it would be great if you had a storyline where you had one biased referee who's cheated in the past for one guy, and another biased/or unbiased referee who has either cheated on behalf of the other guy, or been fair. You could have two cages with each ref in it. the heel would want the heel ref in the match and the face would want the face ref. The face ref could be biased towards the face, or could be nutral. The heel would want the heel ref so he could cheat throughout the match, and the face would want the other for obvious reasons. You could have one poll with a key for both cages, or you could have two different polls with two different keys.

In this match, you could do some manipulation, like using the cage as a weapon obviously or a ref and a wrestler trying to slam the door on the other wrestler's limbs or something. I think it's a good type of match.

[lmoney215]

maybe you could make it a special referee match where each guy picks their own special referee and during the match, you have to unlock your referee so that he can make calls that favor you. I'd add a no DQ stipulation in there to avoid any screwjobs.

the heel referee would be unlocked first, then he would try to screw over the babyface, but as the match progresses, somehow the babyface knocks out both the ref and the heel, then unlocks his referee and that refs counts the pin or submission in his favor to win.

[Robbymac]

With two refs, this works.

As a side note though, is bradtherad serious when he posts this stuff? Some of it seems too off the wall to be serious.

[Hulkshi Tanahashi]

Jan 17, 2009 14:45:43 GMT -5 bradtherad said:

Jan 17, 2009 14:44:54 GMT -5 Hulkshi Tanahashi said:

Couldn't the referee still disqualify the guy from the cage?

No the rules prohibit the referee from having any power while in the cage. Its a small cage like in the elimination chamber.

Then, couldn't he just disqualify the guy after he got out of the cage?

[Cela]

And the winner gets a jetpack!

[azz0r]

Well I kinda like it.

I'd like to see some of pole involved though. Perhaps Kane on a poll, if you get him off the poll then you get a free chokeslam.

[hargh]