|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on May 18, 2013 2:36:50 GMT -5
So, Derrick Bateman's potential wasn't wasted because The Shield is awesome? Percy Watson wasn't all that because Fandango got so hot? WWE doesn't try hard enough to give everyone something to do. Look at how everyone was booked during the Attitude Era and compare that to now. Back then, people didn't need a big time push to the World Title, or to squash the entire midcard and make them look like scrubs, to be over, credible, and relevant. Maybe if they and others were given an opportunity to get over, then WWE would not need to over-rely on the top guys to take up all the screen time and more guys would get the opportunity to show what they were capable of. This is the problem with all of that. You spend time and effort trying to get Derrick Bateman over, and someone else suffers for it. There's not enough TV time to go around for everybody. And I know there's the "stop spending so much time on top feuds", but those are the feuds that people care about. So that's the unfortunate fact. People need time to get over, but at the same time, time has to be given to the people that are already over (your Ortons, Cenas, Sheamuses, etc.). So the time that people need to get over, is also the time needed for the already over. In WWE you really have to be a hit fast (like the Shield), or you're probably never going to reach the top level. Yes, there's space for guys like Bateman on the undercard, but then you're just substituting one thing for another, and getting the same results. They could build up lower card feuds between guys like Ted DiBiase and Hunico, but there's the two sides to that as well. If the fans don't care, the 'E doesn't care. If the 'E doesn't care, then the fans don't care. It really is a lot of catching lightning in a bottle. Also, side note (slightly off-topic), but I love that you changed your first sentence to be more forceful while I was typing. Like you decided you wanted to change the tone completely at some point.  I agree that guys like Orton, Cena, Sheamus, are priority when it comes to giving them TV time. But the thing is that, too much time is allocated to them. The top guys don't need to make multiple appearances on RAW, SD, AND Main Event. WWE is simply relying on the same 12-15 "main eventers" to carry the load, and even the undercard seems to have its token, "status-quo" guys. The way I see it, WWE should make the effort to book every active wrestler in at least one appearance on WWE programming a week doing something of relative substance. Absolutely no one should be booked more than once unless extra spots have to be filled after everyone has been given something to do. |
|
froggyfrog
El Dandy
Scotty 2 Hotty 🐐
Posts: 8,559
Member is Online
|
Post by froggyfrog on May 18, 2013 2:54:59 GMT -5
Audrey Marie's hot so I'm annoyed.
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319 
|
Post by mrjl on May 18, 2013 5:36:53 GMT -5
Orton is very over, yeah, but he just comes off to me as a guy they could cut and have it make zero impact on the product. if he's just going to sit there doing a whole wad of nothing and beat guys he should be putting over with no endgame in sight they should just cut him loose. he's not necessarily the biggest stale main eventer but he still sticks out like a sore thumb. there are other guys who they could get rid of first, but WWE in general is just way too top-heavy, especially when half of them aren't as over as your average mid-carder and the company never has anything for them to do. well, the product would have one less over guy. That's a change. And I'm not even a big Orton fan |
|
Legion
Fry's dog Seymour
Amy Pond's #1 fan
Hail Hydra!
Posts: 23,494
|
Post by Legion on May 18, 2013 6:34:07 GMT -5
I shall miss Bateman cos he was both funny and really hot.
Surprised they fired their champs brother, I guess Dolph has zero pull backstage
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 7:04:16 GMT -5
I'd say the biggest thing that'd come out of cutting Orton is TNA would probably get one bigger buyrate than normal and maybe a few weeks of increased ratings. That'd probably be about it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 7:32:06 GMT -5
I'm amazed that Sakamoto was still signed.
They should have just stuck him in a tag team with Yoshi.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on May 18, 2013 9:26:53 GMT -5
I'd say the biggest thing that'd come out of cutting Orton is TNA would probably get one bigger buyrate than normal and maybe a few weeks of increased ratings. That'd probably be about it. Orton would boost TNA's ratings long term. Who wouldn't be into Orton/Angle, Orton/Sting, Orton/Hardy and Orton/Morgan? Orton could be the biggest heel in TNA ever and could probably make a pretty decent baby face if need be. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 9:30:48 GMT -5
I'd say the biggest thing that'd come out of cutting Orton is TNA would probably get one bigger buyrate than normal and maybe a few weeks of increased ratings. That'd probably be about it. Orton would boost TNA's ratings long term. Who wouldn't be into Orton/Angle, Orton/Sting, Orton/Hardy and Orton/Morgan? Orton could be the biggest heel in TNA ever and could probably make a pretty decent baby face if need be. Nothing will boost TNA's ratings long-term. Angle, Sting, Hogan, Jeff, Christian, Flair, and Nash are a few of the testaments to that, and to boot Orton has a history of having the ratings drop when he's the top guy. Though I do figure Orton would be much more fun to watch if he were more free to cut loose, so he probably would be pretty great in TNA. |
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on May 18, 2013 9:48:30 GMT -5
Orton would boost TNA's ratings long term. Who wouldn't be into Orton/Angle, Orton/Sting, Orton/Hardy and Orton/Morgan? Orton could be the biggest heel in TNA ever and could probably make a pretty decent baby face if need be. Nothing will boost TNA's ratings long-term. Angle, Sting, Hogan, Jeff, Christian, Flair, and Nash are a few of the testaments to that, and to boot Orton has a history of having the ratings drop when he's the top guy. Though I do figure Orton would be much more fun to watch if he were more free to cut loose, so he probably would be pretty great in TNA. Who has TNA got on the level of Orton though that is in their prime? Maybe Jeff and Angle are on the same level as him but both of them debuted many many years ago. A lot more people know TNA now and I think with what TNA throws out now a big star leaving WWE and joining TNA could hook the casual fan onto TNA. That's how good I feel their show is right now. I also think TNA would be smart enough to push Orton to the moon so the Orton fans would stick around at least. |
|
|
|
Post by Digital Witness on May 18, 2013 11:09:36 GMT -5
I think WWE should take better advantage of the internet and have lower card guys cut promos and have matches for wwe.com/youtube.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on May 18, 2013 11:18:53 GMT -5
Orton would boost TNA's ratings long term. Who wouldn't be into Orton/Angle, Orton/Sting, Orton/Hardy and Orton/Morgan? Orton could be the biggest heel in TNA ever and could probably make a pretty decent baby face if need be. Nothing will boost TNA's ratings long-term. Angle, Sting, Hogan, Jeff, Christian, Flair, and Nash are a few of the testaments to that, and to boot Orton has a history of having the ratings drop when he's the top guy. Though I do figure Orton would be much more fun to watch if he were more free to cut loose, so he probably would be pretty great in TNA. agreed. in spite of what I said, I am still a fan of Orton, I just think he's useless as he currently stands. that said he'd do nothing for TNA.. if Jeff Hardy (whose a bigger star with more crossover appeal than Orton), Kurt Angle and HULK FREAKING HOGAN couldn't boost their ratings, Orton wouldn't either. he might pop the rating by .1 or .2 but it'd last for a week before going back to status quo. TNA's problem isn't that their talent doesn't draw, their problem is that their name doesn't draw. |
|
|
|
Post by Wrestling Curmudgeon on May 18, 2013 11:36:17 GMT -5
I wish they would release Emma, she's friggin useless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 11:40:57 GMT -5
I wish they would release Emma, she's friggin useless. Might as well shut down the whole NXT after that. NXT is Emma. |
|
FinalGwen
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Particularly fond of muffins.
Posts: 16,545 
|
Post by FinalGwen on May 18, 2013 11:45:18 GMT -5
Randy Orton is what TNA needs to break into the big time, brother! They'll be ready for a new Monday Night Wars in no time with him in the company!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 11:51:59 GMT -5
Yeah, it sucks that talent has gotten released without showing their full potential but in the grand scheme of things this really isn't any kind of a loss to the WWE. They've been bringing in alot of people into NXT lately and they obviously needed to free up some space.
It reminds me of when a lower midcarder gets released and some people make a big deal about it, and then within a week everyone has forgotten about it and moved on.
|
|
TGM
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,073
|
Post by TGM on May 18, 2013 12:36:57 GMT -5
The people who have been released are all still relatively young. There's still a chance if they wanna go to Japan or the indys.
Bateman in particular would be great for TNA.
|
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on May 18, 2013 13:15:58 GMT -5
This is the problem with all of that. You spend time and effort trying to get Derrick Bateman over, and someone else suffers for it. There's not enough TV time to go around for everybody. And I know there's the "stop spending so much time on top feuds", but those are the feuds that people care about. So that's the unfortunate fact. People need time to get over, but at the same time, time has to be given to the people that are already over (your Ortons, Cenas, Sheamuses, etc.). So the time that people need to get over, is also the time needed for the already over. In WWE you really have to be a hit fast (like the Shield), or you're probably never going to reach the top level. Yes, there's space for guys like Bateman on the undercard, but then you're just substituting one thing for another, and getting the same results. They could build up lower card feuds between guys like Ted DiBiase and Hunico, but there's the two sides to that as well. If the fans don't care, the 'E doesn't care. If the 'E doesn't care, then the fans don't care. You're exactly right. The fans have already been trained to not care about anything that's happening unless it involves those certain people. It's a huge exception when they care about an undercarder, and half the time, the WWE scrambles and ends up sacrificing one undercarder's heat for another (like when they took away Clay's talking so Ryback could be the only guy who yells phrases during his matches). But that's not even the writers' fault at this point... the fans don't care. So when there IS some undercard action... like the pushes of the PTP or Primo/Epico... or the Goldust/Dibiase feud... the fans sit on their hands, because who are these losers? Everyone knows that even if they win their feuds, they'll be getting squashed by a main eventer in a meaningless match the next week. And so the writers freak out and quickly end the storylines, and the cycle continues. The solution is to retrain the fans to care and to believe that undercarders are important to the show, but they won't do that, because they're terrified of losing people during the adjustment period. But that's STUPID, because it's the WWE. People will watch. They just don't have the confidence. The real problem is: It's screwed up that they still think in terms of "stars" instead of the show as a whole. It's all about "who can get over" and not "what is most entertaining." So there's untouchable supermen main eventers who can only lose to one another, and then everyone else, and the system perpetuates itself. |
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on May 18, 2013 13:37:15 GMT -5
You're exactly right. The fans have already been trained to not care about anything that's happening unless it involves those certain people. It's a huge exception when they care about an undercarder, and half the time, the WWE scrambles and ends up sacrificing one undercarder's heat for another (like when they took away Clay's talking so Ryback could be the only guy who yells phrases during his matches). But that's not even the writers' fault at this point... the fans don't care. So when there IS some undercard action... like the pushes of the PTP or Primo/Epico... or the Goldust/Dibiase feud... the fans sit on their hands, because who are these losers? Everyone knows that even if they win their feuds, they'll be getting squashed by a main eventer in a meaningless match the next week. And so the writers freak out and quickly end the storylines, and the cycle continues. The solution is to retrain the fans to care and to believe that undercarders are important to the show, but they won't do that, because they're terrified of losing people during the adjustment period. But that's STUPID, because it's the WWE. People will watch. They just don't have the confidence. The real problem is: It's screwed up that they still think in terms of "stars" instead of the show as a whole. It's all about "who can get over" and not "what is most entertaining." So there's untouchable supermen main eventers who can only lose to one another, and then everyone else, and the system perpetuates itself. And in the case of more prominent guys like Cody Rhodes, Wade Barrett or Miz, WWE has to push them into the main event or into programs with main event talent to turn them into "stars" before sending them back into the midcard, but rather than being seamed back into the midcard ranks, they're instead in this weird limbo where they're above everyone else despite not being in the World Title picture. I think The Shield is doomed to this fate as well. And undercard guys suffer because they're simply jobbed out to keep these directionless uppercarders strong to a certain point because they're still "main event" despite not actually being in the main event for a long time. Guys like Zack Ryder, Ted DiBiase, Alex Riley, and 3MB get jobbed out to these guys all the time on TV, dark matches, and house shows. The likes of Bateman and his ilk, in the event that they DO get used in any capacity, are used simply to give the more consistently used low carders a token win every once in a while, and it makes them look bad. Everyone in the undercard is booked so weakly that when they do wrestle each other, the loser just looks like a "jobber to other jobbers". |
|
|
|
Post by cool guy on May 18, 2013 14:16:28 GMT -5
The way I see it, WWE should make the effort to book every active wrestler in at least one appearance on WWE programming a week doing something of relative substance. Absolutely no one should be booked more than once unless extra spots have to be filled after everyone has been given something to do. And this is why having a real brand split is important. |
|
|
|
Post by whiskers on May 18, 2013 14:45:27 GMT -5
The way I see it, WWE should make the effort to book every active wrestler in at least one appearance on WWE programming a week doing something of relative substance. Absolutely no one should be booked more than once unless extra spots have to be filled after everyone has been given something to do. And this is why having a real brand split is important. Agreed. It's like that literary adage: "Every character is someone's favorite." |
|
