Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 19:40:29 GMT -5
Rollins winning the Rumble was a complete waste of time.
This is a guy that didn’t need the Rumble win to face Lesnar. Same goes for Strowman.
This was their chance to do something fresh. They keep going on about how we’re not gonna see the same thing every week anymore... well how many times are we gonna have to watch this Rollins/Braun/Balor vs Corbin/Drew/Lashley/Dean merry go round? I’m sick of it man.
Nobody has ever debuted in the Rumble and WON the Rumble. They could have done that with someone like Black, Ricochet or hell... even EC3. Ricochet vs Bryan at WM would have tore the house down.
Another idea I had was... Angle wins the Rumble and they do a whole “Can he win it ONE MORE TIME?” story. We get Angle vs Bryan at Mania. Yeah it might not be as great as it would have been 10 years ago but still. It would be a good story in my opinion.
What are we gonna get now... this fresh shit about how NOBODY CAN BEAT THE BEAST!!! We’ve had this crap about 20 times now. We’ve had it with Strowman, Balor, Joe, Roman, Ambrose... this feud with Brock is gonna be no different. All his feuds are the f***ing same. No doubt they’ll talk about how much smaller Rollins is aswell. Cause we haven’t had that before!
Sigh. This Rumble was disappointing. I was hoping anyone but Rollins or Strowman would win. And that’s largely because they were the obvious choices. But also because I had no desire to see either of them face Brock. Now Rollins vs Styles or Bryan? Yeah I’d dig that.
I’m just so over this whole Lesnar thing. Bring in Batista, do your big money match and be done with it. They bottled it with Lashley by chumping him out and turning him heel. At one point, that COULD have been a money match. Not now. Batista vs Brock is pretty much the only match I’d want to see Lesnar in these days.
|
|
Matt
Vegeta
Posts: 9,163
|
Post by Matt on Jan 28, 2019 19:41:17 GMT -5
I’m not a fan of either match but the most important title should always close the show and that’s the Universal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 19:42:08 GMT -5
Beyond that the women main eventing with a triple threat makes 2 stars rather than just 1. Some of the comments towards it not being a triple threat aren't looking towards the future of the division. If you've got Becky and Charlotte as stars you can use them to make other women stars. If it's just Becky then hey that's only 1 person who's only got so much she can do. That kind of booking is what gets you 50/50 booking. Not really, it makes complete sense. If you want the division to be built around 1 woman then yeah the main event makes more sense as a single's match since Ronda's leaving soon but you gotta think about the future of the division here. We need more people rising up than just having 1 person. Charlotte's not at her peak yet, Becky's definitely getting raised, makes more sense to elevate multiple people.
Beyond that the women main eventing with a triple threat makes 2 stars rather than just 1. Some of the comments towards it not being a triple threat aren't looking towards the future of the division. If you've got Becky and Charlotte as stars you can use them to make other women stars. If it's just Becky then hey that's only 1 person who's only got so much she can do. What? No. Only one person wins a triple threat. Mania main events are better when they're one on one. Becky vs Ronda is the better story. Charlotte has had her turn and share of "history making moments". Nah, you're off base here. It doesn't matter if it's only 1 woman who wins the match because the match as a whole will make the stars involved, the win solely doesn't make a star. We've had numerous situations in this company's history where people who don't win matches becomes stars through either the match or the feud itself and this applies as well. They don't become stars because "they won", just look through this company's history with Foley, the Hardyz, people's comments with the "Ambrose can lose to Lesnar but he could be a star through it" situation if they went with that. They don't have to win the match to be a star. And nah, it'll be better with the triple threat. Each multi-woman match Charlotte's been apart of has been dope at WM and you can track that back to her NXT days. She's arguably the best woman wrestler on the roster right now. Hell, Meltzer himself commented on this just the other week when he said the triple threat will be the better match and it'll make 2 stars (Becky and Charlotte) instead of if it were a single's match it would be just 1 star (Becky). Lastly, Charlotte's "history making moments" don't mean a thing when she's not a star which goes back to my initial point. If Charlotte was a star already then you wouldn't have people saying "Charlotte's wins and history moments don't mean a thing" like everyone says. Those accolades didn't help her to the highest level she can be. That's something people don't address, they only mention she got them rather than why they wanted her to have them. If they meant something she'd be way higher than she is now but she's not because she's not a star. She can elevate higher which is what the triple threat will do for her.
That goes back to what I said about people not looking into the triple threat positives. More than 1 person can elevate here. Just because Charlotte's had moments doesn't mean she's on the highest level possible. There's the future of the division to be thought about here, it's not just 1 person's rise. You can debate if the single's match is the "better story" all you want but I don't think that one story goes above them planning Charlotte/Ronda at WM for an entire year nor do I think that goes above making as many stars as possible.
|
|
salz4life
Grimlock
Prichard is a guy who gets that his job is to service his boss.
Posts: 14,160
|
Post by salz4life on Jan 28, 2019 19:42:44 GMT -5
I was actually thinking about Ricochet/Brian or even Gargano/Bryan. I think either of these would be amazing. Gargano probably isn't ready (for a Mania Main Event level match)... but I think Ricochet definitely is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 19:43:02 GMT -5
I'm interested in Seth vs. Brock and I think Seth should win, but the women should close the show. Becky deserves that moment more than anyone and Ronda and Charlotte have been killing it right there with her.
|
|
salz4life
Grimlock
Prichard is a guy who gets that his job is to service his boss.
Posts: 14,160
|
Post by salz4life on Jan 28, 2019 19:43:13 GMT -5
I’m not a fan of either match but the most important title should always close the show and that’s the Universal. You mean the title that isn't on the show but once a month if that? Bahahahahahaha
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 19:44:44 GMT -5
I’m not a fan of either match but the most important title should always close the show and that’s the Universal. You mean the title that isn't on the show but once a month if that? Bahahahahahaha I'd argue the SDL Women's Championship has been the most important title on either show since SummerSlam.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on Jan 28, 2019 19:45:23 GMT -5
Who says Mania can’t be main evented by a triple threat? The hottest act in the company Vs a mainstream star Vs the best woman wrestler on the roster. That’s a huge match. Not a rule. A historic first time should be a real match low on gimmicks, maybe those loose No-Dq rules that tend to find there way into main events sometimes could be ok. Plus I personally think 3 way, 4 way, etc Mania main events kinda suck and lose a lot of the big match feel. The very first Mania main event was crammed to the bursting point with gimmicks. The event itself is the biggest gimmick the company has. Gimme a big glitzy car crash over a SERIOUS WRESTLING Mania main event any day of the week.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor No on Jan 28, 2019 19:48:44 GMT -5
Not a rule. A historic first time should be a real match low on gimmicks, maybe those loose No-Dq rules that tend to find there way into main events sometimes could be ok. Plus I personally think 3 way, 4 way, etc Mania main events kinda suck and lose a lot of the big match feel. The very first Mania main event was crammed to the bursting point with gimmicks. The event itself is the biggest gimmick the company has. Gimme a big glitzy car crash over a SERIOUS WRESTLING Mania main event any day of the week. And it sucks. There’s a reason Mania 3 became more of the template for Manias to come.
|
|
|
Post by The Heartbreak TWERK on Jan 28, 2019 19:48:53 GMT -5
That kind of booking is what gets you 50/50 booking. Not really, it makes complete sense. If you want the division to be built around 1 woman then yeah the main event makes more sense as a single's match since Ronda's leaving soon but you gotta think about the future of the division here. We need more people rising up than just having 1 person.
What? No. Only one person wins a triple threat. Mania main events are better when they're one on one. Becky vs Ronda is the better story. Charlotte has had her turn and share of "history making moments". Nah, you're off base here. It doesn't matter if it's only 1 woman who wins the match because the match as a whole will make the stars involved, the win solely doesn't make a star. We've had numerous situations in this company's history where people who don't win matches becomes stars through either the match or the feud itself and this applies as well. They don't become stars because "they won", just look through this company's history with Foley, the Hardyz, people's comments with the "Ambrose can lose to Lesnar but he could be a star through it" situation if they went with that. They don't have to win the match to be a star. And nah, it'll be better with the triple threat. Each multi-woman match Charlotte's been apart of has been dope at WM and you can track that back to her NXT days. She's arguably the best woman wrestler on the roster right now. Hell, Meltzer himself commented on this just the other week when he said the triple threat will be the better match and it'll make 2 stars (Becky and Charlotte) instead of if it were a single's match it would be just 1 star (Becky). Lastly, Charlotte's "history making moments" don't mean a thing when she's not a star which goes back to my initial point. If Charlotte was a star already then you wouldn't have people saying "Charlotte's wins and history moments don't mean a thing" like everyone says. That's something people don't address. If they meant something she'd be way higher than she is now but she's not because she's not a star. She can elevate higher which is what the triple threat will be.
That goes back to what I said about people not looking into the triple threat positives. More than 1 person can elevate here. Just because Charlotte's had moments doesn't mean she's on the highest level possible. There's the future of the division to be thought about her, it's not just 1 person's rise. You can debate if the single's match is the "better story" all you want but I don't think that one story goes above them planning Charlotte/Ronda at WM for an entire year nor do I think that goes above making as many stars as possible.
There are no positives to a triple threat. It's just putting over that "CHARLOTTE IS THE ONE WE WANT". Charlotte has had enough firsts. Becky vs Ronda has a better look and feel. You can twist it any which way and explain it any way you want, Charlotte's had her fill and it's time for someone else to get to f***ing shine on the big stage without Charlotte looming over them.
|
|
FinalGwen
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Particularly fond of muffins.
Posts: 16,465
|
Post by FinalGwen on Jan 28, 2019 19:49:13 GMT -5
Yeah, it's about time we had a fresh moment like Seth Rollins closing out Wrestlemania with a world title he just won from Brock Lesnar. That's never been done before. Maybe they could shoot off a ton of fireworks while he twirls the title over his head on the rampway?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 19:51:37 GMT -5
I love Seth and if Brock has his working boots on for that match it should be damn good, just not seeing how it's more compelling than Becky vs. Ronda or even the triple threat, especially if they have Seth go the Reignsploitation route. Maybe it's just the Becky fanboy in me talking.
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 42,091
Member is Online
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Jan 28, 2019 19:52:51 GMT -5
By the time Mania weekend ends on f***ing Tuesday, who cares?!
|
|
|
Post by blissified on Jan 28, 2019 19:54:07 GMT -5
I’m not a fan of either match but the most important title should always close the show and that’s the Universal. I think WM 18/25 proved that the championship doesn't always need to finish the show.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 19:57:53 GMT -5
God no. Even if I actually had any real faith or interest in the match, it still just feels like a complete formality compared to Becky / Rousey / maybe Charlotte.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 20:00:53 GMT -5
Not really, it makes complete sense. If you want the division to be built around 1 woman then yeah the main event makes more sense as a single's match since Ronda's leaving soon but you gotta think about the future of the division here. We need more people rising up than just having 1 person.
Nah, you're off base here. It doesn't matter if it's only 1 woman who wins the match because the match as a whole will make the stars involved, the win solely doesn't make a star. We've had numerous situations in this company's history where people who don't win matches becomes stars through either the match or the feud itself and this applies as well. They don't become stars because "they won", just look through this company's history with Foley, the Hardyz, people's comments with the "Ambrose can lose to Lesnar but he could be a star through it" situation if they went with that. They don't have to win the match to be a star. And nah, it'll be better with the triple threat. Each multi-woman match Charlotte's been apart of has been dope at WM and you can track that back to her NXT days. She's arguably the best woman wrestler on the roster right now. Hell, Meltzer himself commented on this just the other week when he said the triple threat will be the better match and it'll make 2 stars (Becky and Charlotte) instead of if it were a single's match it would be just 1 star (Becky). Lastly, Charlotte's "history making moments" don't mean a thing when she's not a star which goes back to my initial point. If Charlotte was a star already then you wouldn't have people saying "Charlotte's wins and history moments don't mean a thing" like everyone says. That's something people don't address. If they meant something she'd be way higher than she is now but she's not because she's not a star. She can elevate higher which is what the triple threat will be.
That goes back to what I said about people not looking into the triple threat positives. More than 1 person can elevate here. Just because Charlotte's had moments doesn't mean she's on the highest level possible. There's the future of the division to be thought about her, it's not just 1 person's rise. You can debate if the single's match is the "better story" all you want but I don't think that one story goes above them planning Charlotte/Ronda at WM for an entire year nor do I think that goes above making as many stars as possible.
There are no positives to a triple threat. It's just putting over that "CHARLOTTE IS THE ONE WE WANT". Charlotte has had enough firsts. Becky vs Ronda has a better look and feel. You can twist it any which way and explain it any way you want, Charlotte's had her fill and it's time for someone else to get to f***ing shine on the big stage without Charlotte looming over them. And this is what I said in the other thread. There's this anti-Charlotte bias going on that's preventing people from seeing the positives to a triple threat. Every single Charlotte multi-woman match has been great to the point where even Carmella looked dope in one, she's great in them, she doesn't fail. The match will probably be a better match because Charlotte literally doesn't have bad matches, she specializes in these matches so to say there's no positives in having a better match is false. It'll be a better match so yeah, that's a positive. The only way you can deny that is you saying "well Charlotte will somehow have a worse match now even though she doesn't have bad multi-woman matches, even though it's Becky and Ronda in there-" which wouldn't make any sense.
Next, you saying she's "had enough firsts" is the biggest problem with this. You're not looking into how many superstars can be elevated to benefit the entire division (Charlotte and Becky can both help those on both respective brands) but you're only looking at it as "Charlotte's done too much" even though the one who will win (Becky) will be elevated regardless. It's not about who's had their fill, it's about helping other superstars out and the fact you think she's had "too many firsts" doesn't throw off what I said earlier: Charlotte's accolades don't mean a thing when you've got everyone saying they didn't help her out, when she's not bigger than she is now and when she's not at her peak.
It's about making superstars elevate and this just goes back to the "anti-Charlotte" thing because the reality is because Charlotte's done a lot people think her being in anything else is a negative when the reality is she needs to be elevated like everyone else still because she's a focal point of the division.
Charlotte's accolades are you being handed 5 shit sandwiches. Your friend's getting a Pizza Hut pizza. Are you really going to say "nah, he needs to get that, I've got 5 shit sandwiches here" or are you saying to say "no, I can have better than this, give me a pizza too."
Tell me which one you'll pick.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Jan 28, 2019 20:04:03 GMT -5
Lynch and Rousey are currently bigger stars than Rollins and Lesnar. That's not a knock against the men, but it's true. IMO it's a no brainer what should main event.
|
|
|
Post by BatPunk on Jan 28, 2019 20:05:30 GMT -5
I want to start off by saying that I like Lesnar and I actually quite like his reign.
But no.
And it doesn’t matter who he faces. He should not Main Event this years Wrestlemania. The act with the hottest story and the one that people really want to see should close the show. And this year, it’s Ronda/Becky (and maybe Charlotte).
If they don’t want to see people leaving with 2 or 3 matches to go on the card (like last year), then this is their best course of action.
|
|
|
Post by blissified on Jan 28, 2019 20:11:18 GMT -5
Yeah, it's about time we had a fresh moment like Seth Rollins closing out Wrestlemania with a world title he just won from Brock Lesnar. That's never been done before. Maybe they could shoot off a ton of fireworks while he twirls the title over his head on the rampway? Hope you aren't for Rollins vs Balor if that's the case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 20:19:19 GMT -5
Becky/Rousey should close, but get the F out of here with the crying and hugging afterwards. That needs to go already.
|
|