Has 'Wait and See' ever panned out?

[Deleted]

I would actually think that more potentially decent angles are scuttled because they're afraid to wait and see.

Unless it's an obvious money maker, it's only one lukewarm segment away from vanishing into the ether.

It's weird because they'll bail out on anything at the drop of a hat, but if it involves somebody they've already decided is somebody, they'll stick to their guns until the wheels fall off.

[Kevin Hamilton]

They do have a tendency to shove stuff down our throats till our necks get soft.

It's their claim to face.

[mizerable]

I think a lot of people are confusing angle with overall character.

Has Bryan been wasted by WWE during his entire run? Absolutely not.

Have they come up short with multiple storylines involving Bryan? You bet your ass they did. And they did it during his most important angle.

Punk wasn't wasted, but his biggest angle was. It's hindsight, but I know a lot of people who were intrigued by "the summer of Punk", only to go back to not watching after it petered out. Punk won the title again? Big deal. Doesn't mean much after the carpet has already been pulled out in front of you before. Do you think these schmucks are going to sit around for 14 months before they "get it"?

They could give Daniel Bryan a 2 year WWE title reign at Wrestlemania and it wouldn't matter! They're already slowly losing interest because they decided to douse the flames to control it. It might still go over well with the audience, but you've already lost some potential interest by shitting on the fans from the beginning. Fans don't like getting shit on. Any other outlet of entertainment gets this notion...and will do everything they can do please their fanbase. Not WWE. They'd rather please themselves.

[Deleted]

Nov 27, 2013 0:33:52 GMT -5 mizerable said:

I think a lot of people are confusing angle with overall character.

Has Bryan been wasted by WWE during his entire run? Absolutely not.

Have they come up short with multiple storylines involving Bryan? You bet your ass they did. And they did it during his most important angle.

Punk wasn't wasted, but his biggest angle was. It's hindsight, but I know a lot of people who were intrigued by "the summer of Punk", only to go back to not watching after it petered out. Punk won the title again? Big deal. Doesn't mean much after the carpet has already been pulled out in front of you before. Do you think these schmucks are going to sit around for 14 months before they "get it"?

They could give Daniel Bryan a 2 year WWE title reign at Wrestlemania and it wouldn't matter! They're already slowly losing interest because they decided to douse the flames to control it. It might still go over well with the audience, but you've already lost some potential interest by shitting on the fans from the beginning. Fans don't like getting shit on. Any other outlet of entertainment gets this notion...and will do everything they can do please their fanbase. Not WWE. They'd rather please themselves.

If only there was a way to please yourself while shitting on someone...

[Deleted]

Three things I can think of this year:

-DB as the weakest link storyline. Everyone was hated on how he was jobbed out constantly and thought he was going to do a forced heel turn that will ruin him like Ryback. Instead they build up his momentum until he was the first man to defeat The Shield in a six man tag team match which ignited the spark that made him the most overman guy in the company.

-The Shield losing to the Uso's and Christian. That match saved the Uso's careers and they are still feuding with The Shield months later.

-Cody Rhodes firing which got Cody more over then he ever was, got Goldust to return, and defeat The Shield for the tag team championship.

Funny how they all involved The Shield who have been booked perfect since they debuted. Not once have they made a mistake with The Shield. If one of them does indeed become the next franchise of the company and the other two are also successful, they'll be WWE's greatest booking masterpiece.

[Heartbreaker]

[saintpat]

I remember when the Real Americans got nothing but criticism (after about three weeks) and how they were going to be disbanded after Swagger's arrest.

They are quite over on the midcard.

I'm in the "18 seconds turned out to be a good thing for Bryan" crowd. Some deny it, but it was the first domino in a sequence that took him to where he is now, and most of those sequences (Anger Management being one) were crapped upon when they first started.

The one I never got was how Summer of Punk was supposed to work in the long run.

Yeah, I agree on the Kevin Nash thing but I still think it sparked Punk to true main event status.

But I digress: back to Summer of Punk.

He comes out and does a "shoot" promo that basically says how bad everything in the WWE is and, well, how HHH and McMahon are bad for business.

Now forget about the taking the title with him, going to indy shows with it (never was that going to happen): where was that supposed to go? He comes out every week and talks about how things still stink, how the product is so bad that no one should watch it, how they better do things the way he wants, etc.

And what? WWE changes to everything he suggests and he wins and the entire wrestling fan community is happy? Well were they going to put him change of creative, or were the things he cut kayfabe promos about wanting to do in reality be coming from the same power structure he was supposed to be opposing? Were the McMahons going to relinquish control of their company to new "authority" figures? And if so, in kayfabe, umm, wouldn't those people be acting out exactly what the McMahons scripted?

The other thing that bugs me: pretty much the same people who applauded the pipe bomb -- which buried WWE and said the product was crap -- are the same people who got upset that the heel Authority said that Daniel Bryan wasn't an A-plus player and couldn't be the Face of WWE. To me, that's a heel putting down a babyface, but the reaction was as if it had been put in the WWE's annual report to stockholders. Yet Punk put down the entire product, in effect saying 'don't watch this,' and it was the best thing ever.

I don't get it.

[Deleted]

Is that where we're at now? Someone saying "Eh, I'll wait and see where it goes" is a problem? Wtf.

Like what's the end game for this? Having everyone as pissy and frustrated about the product as a lot of you? Call it delusional or even trolling, I welcome anyone with that "Wait and see" mindset to continue expressing their opinion because at the very least it's a nice change of pace.

[Starshine]

Nov 27, 2013 2:25:49 GMT -5 @mdoggdx316 said:

Is that where we're at now? Someone saying "Eh, I'll wait and see where it goes" is a problem? Wtf.

Like what's the end game for this? Having everyone as pissy and frustrated about the product as a lot of you? Call it delusional or even trolling, I welcome anyone with that "Wait and see" mindset to continue expressing their opinion because at the very least it's a nice change of pace.

It's because almost anytime someone gripes about an angle, or something that happened that they didn't like, you always have 'that guy' come in and say "wait and see" as if it's some profound statement that adds nothing of substance and alludes to negating his right to gripe.

Plus they're not saying "they'll" wait and see, they're telling the complainer that he/she have no patience. But what does that have to do with their current problems with what's going on? When people complain about political, or economic, or life issues, who says "wait and see?" Jerks [or inside traders], that's who.

[SEAN CARLESS]

Nov 27, 2013 2:25:49 GMT -5 @mdoggdx316 said:

Is that where we're at now? Someone saying "Eh, I'll wait and see where it goes" is a problem? Wtf.

Like what's the end game for this? Having everyone as pissy and frustrated about the product as a lot of you? Call it delusional or even trolling, I welcome anyone with that "Wait and see" mindset to continue expressing their opinion because at the very least it's a nice change of pace.

I want the opposite. I want the people who say it to not attempt to "defend" certain things that cannot be rationally defended and instead say: "I personally don't care if it goes anywhere. I'm entertained regardless." At least it's honest, and not annoyingly naive and passive aggressive.

[Deleted]

Nov 26, 2013 23:02:07 GMT -5 BV said:

I think a decent one would be Punk as WWE champ not main eventing PPVs initially. Cue the heel turn and boom.

A heel turn that didn't remotely catch on with live crowds, even got people around here posting complaints about how grating Punk's character throughout was, and served no real purpose besides setting up Cena winning the title for the bajillionth time before it was promptly undone entirely leading to the Punk / Heyman feud that if there's any justice in this world will get the Gooker? That worked out great.

Nov 26, 2013 18:41:09 GMT -5 wisdomwizard said:

Triple H putting over Batista, Sheamus, and Brock Lesnar.

The Lesnar thing's already been addressed, but he sure put over Sheamus, having to be sneak-attacked then hit with his finisher like five times for Sheamus to beat him and then on returning he promptly effortlessly beat Sheamus to a stain on the floor without being touched. Sure made him look fantastic.

[Deleted]

People really need to stop parroting Stroud's points. I like the guy a lot, but he's just a fan like any of us and gets a lot wrong.

[Deleted]

Nov 27, 2013 5:06:11 GMT -5 @rrnew said:

People really need to stop parroting Stroud's points. I like the guy a lot, but he's just a fan like any of us and gets a lot wrong.

I don't even know who that is.

["Trickster Dogg" James Jesse]

Having fans "wait and see" is a terrible approach to producing television content. That's why Lost ended up sucking. "Wait and see, guys, this will all pay off." Yeah, okay.

Make your TV show "must see TV." You're the showrunners. You write the shows. You feature the talent. You make the show interesting for people to WANT to come back next week to watch it. You're the ones responsible for 'entertainment', it's not my job to entertain myself (because I can do that without having to watch your boring, repetitive show or having to pay for your shoddy, overpriced PPVs or having to wear your ugly merchandise at all).

Don't expect fans to simply 'wait and see' where things go when you crank out rerun matches from the show you expected people to pay $50 for, when the show itself feels like a rerun of a rerun of things we saw four years ago.

The last time Raw felt like it was "must see TV" was the night after Wrestlemania 28 when I thought that maybe the company would pull the trigger on a Cena heel turn. What I got was the Miami audience saving Daniel Bryan's career, a completely baffled Sheamus, a pretty decent CM Punk/Mark Henry match, and the return of Brock Lesnar, who kicked Cena's hat after he F5'd him. THAT was must see TV.

[Chip]

Tag division would probably somewhat fall under this. We all read dirtsheets about WWE being interested in reviving the tag division and most of us were of a negative mindset. It was either they won't bother, it'll last two months or Cena and the heel he was feuding with would have the belts. It started off a little rocky but eventually team by team were introduced and brick by brick was laid with every tag match and now it's the highlight of any RAW or PPV.

[saintpat]

Nov 27, 2013 4:46:26 GMT -5 SEAN CARLESS said:

Nov 27, 2013 2:25:49 GMT -5 @mdoggdx316 said:

Is that where we're at now? Someone saying "Eh, I'll wait and see where it goes" is a problem? Wtf.

Like what's the end game for this? Having everyone as pissy and frustrated about the product as a lot of you? Call it delusional or even trolling, I welcome anyone with that "Wait and see" mindset to continue expressing their opinion because at the very least it's a nice change of pace.

I want the opposite. I want the people who say it to not attempt to "defend" certain things that cannot be rationally defended and instead say: "I personally don't care if it goes anywhere. I'm entertained regardless." At least it's honest, and not annoyingly naive and passive aggressive.

No more naive or passive aggresive than taking a "this better turn out the way I want" or WWE screwed the pooch stance, IMO.

[SEAN CARLESS]

Nov 27, 2013 8:19:09 GMT -5 saintpat said:

Nov 27, 2013 4:46:26 GMT -5 SEAN CARLESS said:

I want the opposite. I want the people who say it to not attempt to "defend" certain things that cannot be rationally defended and instead say: "I personally don't care if it goes anywhere. I'm entertained regardless." At least it's honest, and not annoyingly naive and passive aggressive.

No more naive or passive aggresive than taking a "this better turn out the way I want" or WWE screwed the pooch stance, IMO.

People aren't mad that it isn't turning out "how they want." They're angry that its not following the logical conclusion of the story being told, or out and out being dropped or blundered. And the "wait and see" people are using that line in lieu of just calling a spade a spade and admitting that they don't care how it turns out, because they're entertained regardless. Their version is trying to create justification and defense for proverbial dropped balls when there isn't any in most cases. Its annoying. And untrue.

[FinalGwen]

Nov 26, 2013 16:31:11 GMT -5 molson5 said:

I wouldn't watch wrestling or anything else if I didn't want to see want to see what was going to happen next. That's kind of point. It's shocking to me how many people not only have abandoned that general premise of entertainment consumption when it comes to wrestling, but still watch it, and also actively mock others who look forward to seeing what will happen next.

In other words, I find "wait and see" to be one of the more annoyingly over-cynical shticks this board has come up with.

I do though, kind of wonder what the majority here actually wanted out of these storylines. Like the nexus. I thought it was a fine angle with a limited shelf life. But what was everyone else clamoring for? WWE champion Wade Barrett and years of nexus run-ins?

Yeah, the Nexus wasn't going to last forever, but wouldn't it have been far more productive to actually make them the focus of Raw and the title scene by virtue of the numbers game? Couldn't they have continued to make them look dangerous, rather than having Cena and Orton throw them all through tables with ease, or have Cena attack them off screen pre-TLC single handedly? Couldn't the New Nexus have been handled better and made to look at least a tiny bit like a threat, rather than the repetitive booking of Orton punting each of them one by one every week while CM Punk looked on slightly annoyed? The Shield will have a limited run too, but by making them look competent and important while it's going on, everyone does better as a result.

Heck, while I'm sure there'd be complaints about shooting him to the top so soon, Wade Barrett as champion would have at least led to some interesting angles at the time. It would have solidified the Nexus at the top for a while, and you could make a lot out of Cena being forced to help Wade defend his title - Maybe leading to a rebellious moment where he attacks Barrett to get the DQ and save the title, but also using the chance to relieve some of his frustrations, hit Barrett over and over, etc. It'd also have the side benefit of making NXT2 seem a lot more important: "The winner gets a title shot of their choice! Wade Barrett is the WWE Champion right now thanks to this clause! Could one of these men get the same opportunity?" Instead, they shifted the title onto Randy Orton so he could do literally nothing with it for months, aside from have one of the worst HIAC matches of all time with Sheamus. Who did that benefit?

It's quite fascinating who the WWE primarily made look good with each angle:
Original Nexus - Randy Orton is WWE champion! John Cena overcomes the odds and saves his job!
New Nexus - Randy Orton just defeated them all single handedly! Punt! RKO! Punt!
Corre - The Big Show and his team beat the Corre at Wrestlemania! Look at the Big Show punching people!

Is that honestly what we should look at as the best case scenario?

[saintpat]

I would add Jeff Hardy's title chase just before he left the company as a wait-and-see that also worked out.

Cynicism ruled the IWC with "they will never let him get over" stuff, but after several frustrating near-misses he did, indeed, get a payoff -- which carried into a nice feud with Punk.

Apart from the sad ending where his meth lab burned down, killing his dog and sending him into a downward spiral that ended in Sting having to shoot-pin him in TNA ... well, there was a wait-and-see payoff.

[Deleted]

Nov 27, 2013 8:53:47 GMT -5 FinalGwen said:

Nov 26, 2013 16:31:11 GMT -5 molson5 said:

I wouldn't watch wrestling or anything else if I didn't want to see want to see what was going to happen next. That's kind of point. It's shocking to me how many people not only have abandoned that general premise of entertainment consumption when it comes to wrestling, but still watch it, and also actively mock others who look forward to seeing what will happen next.

In other words, I find "wait and see" to be one of the more annoyingly over-cynical shticks this board has come up with.

I do though, kind of wonder what the majority here actually wanted out of these storylines. Like the nexus. I thought it was a fine angle with a limited shelf life. But what was everyone else clamoring for? WWE champion Wade Barrett and years of nexus run-ins?

Yeah, the Nexus wasn't going to last forever, but wouldn't it have been far more productive to actually make them the focus of Raw and the title scene by virtue of the numbers game? Couldn't they have continued to make them look dangerous, rather than having Cena and Orton throw them all through tables with ease, or have Cena attack them off screen pre-TLC single handedly? Couldn't the New Nexus have been handled better and made to look at least a tiny bit like a threat, rather than the repetitive booking of Orton punting each of them one by one every week while CM Punk looked on slightly annoyed? The Shield will have a limited run too, but by making them look competent and important while it's going on, everyone does better as a result.

Heck, while I'm sure there'd be complaints about shooting him to the top so soon, Wade Barrett as champion would have at least led to some interesting angles at the time. It would have solidified the Nexus at the top for a while, and you could make a lot out of Cena being forced to help Wade defend his title - Maybe leading to a rebellious moment where he attacks Barrett to get the DQ and save the title, but also using the chance to relieve some of his frustrations, hit Barrett over and over, etc. It'd also have the side benefit of making NXT2 seem a lot more important: "The winner gets a title shot of their choice! Wade Barrett is the WWE Champion right now thanks to this clause! Could one of these men get the same opportunity?" Instead, they shifted the title onto Randy Orton so he could do literally nothing with it for months, aside from have one of the worst HIAC matches of all time with Sheamus. Who did that benefit?

It's quite fascinating who the WWE primarily made look good with each angle:
Original Nexus - Randy Orton is WWE champion! John Cena overcomes the odds and saves his job!
New Nexus - Randy Orton just defeated them all single handedly! Punt! RKO! Punt!
Corre - The Big Show and his team beat the Corre at Wrestlemania! Look at the Big Show punching people!

Is that honestly what we should look at as the best case scenario?

I still remain amazed at how the whole Nexus situation played out. What they should have done was had Barrett win the title at Survivor Series (or even in the match the next night), have him come up with some reason to fire Cena anyway, then do a storyline where Cena has to go through NXT himself to get his job back (with the side prize being a spot in the Rumble), suffering the same indignities that Nexus did and maybe having one of them as his manager, all while no one can overcome the rest of the group to beat Barrett. Cena wins NXT, wins the Rumble, then takes the title from Barrett to end Mania 27 and you can segment the group up in the draft afterward.

Then, if you still want to tie Rock and Miz into things, have Rock attack Cena on the Raw after Mania, Miz promptly cashes in. Cena suddenly has a reason beyond, "I haven't had the title in nine months!" to be desperate to get his hands on Miz, Rock and Cena has heat to it from the start without having to sacrifice a whole Mania to make it happen, and you can have a few months of Barrett, Miz, and Cena trading the title back and forth which could also probably pretty comfortably segue into Punk's angle breaking everything up and Miz's role in that.