Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 0:37:23 GMT -5
The angle is hot and the characters involved are in a very compelling spot so in cases like this I don't mind being a passenger. There are good arguments for a singles match, as well as a triple threat, all three deserve the spot and it makes sense for them to be there. Whatever happens I am on board.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 1:13:33 GMT -5
The angle is hot and the characters involved are in a very compelling spot so in cases like this I don't mind being a passenger. There are good arguments for a singles match, as well as a triple threat, all three deserve the spot and it makes sense for them to be there. Whatever happens I am on board. Basically where I’m at with this. Whatever the outcome, singles or triple threat, I’ll enjoy the ride for what it is. Three damn good women’s wrestlers in WWE telling a story and giving it their all with every line, every buildup match, and every segment.
|
|
|
Post by Final Countdown Jones on Jan 31, 2019 4:13:24 GMT -5
May as well dress Charlotte up in grunge at this point. "What about me? What about Charlotte?!" WHAT about her, really? Why does it matter to you people so much that she just HAS to be in the Main Event at Wrestlemania? Can the other ladies on the roster not have one singles accolades that doesn't include her in it? You want a triple threat third wheel, let it wait til Backlash. Adding her to the Ronda/Becky match muddies the waters where the two losers can claim they need individual matches to prove they were better, and doesn't resolve anything. I'm so tired of WrestleMania no longer being the "season finale" of the WWE, and is becoming nothing more than a more expensive random PPV. Let there be some closure here for once in this company and let The Man have her moment without Charlotte hanging around for the 8th month in a f***ing row for crying out loud. I don't think you're getting quite the right read on it. It's not "Charlotte needs to be there for it to be good because Charlotte is the coolestest". This is by all accounts the direction of the program, people are talking about the sense it makes for everyone's stories going in and how the characters are so intertwined in their motivations and their goals now that all three of them in there paints the complete story. It's explaining why this is happening and why that's not necessarily a bad thing for the program when the story makes sense and the match will be fire. It's also jumping the gun to say the Mania match can't be closure. Whether or not there are rematches or follow-ups has zero to do with how many people are in this match, and in fact a triple threat would be the tidiest way to resolve the problems involved. It's baffling to see a proposition to make a triple threat follow-up at Backlash after just complaining about Mania being a "tune in next time" episode. Becky having her moment standing over two people instead of one would wrap her story up way more completely.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 4:26:04 GMT -5
Honestly the thing that most confuses me is the, "Winning a triple threat match means more!" viewpoint. Like... I'm really not convinced it does on any level? Winning a triple threat doesn't really prove anything beyond that you're the one who was in the right place at the end of the match. Curt Hawkins could feasibly win a triple threat with Triple H and Undertaker if he got lucky which he sure as hell isn't doing in a singles match.
|
|
|
Post by Feargus McReddit on Jan 31, 2019 4:31:11 GMT -5
The angle is hot and the characters involved are in a very compelling spot so in cases like this I don't mind being a passenger. There are good arguments for a singles match, as well as a triple threat, all three deserve the spot and it makes sense for them to be there. Whatever happens I am on board. Yeah, pretty much. I’m not 100% invested in a triple threat but 95% isn’t bad because it makes sense for the story and it’d be a banger. Now, if they have two Charlotte/Becky matches on the next two shows that the rumor seems to be...yeah, not really down for that since it takes away from the potential appeal of a triple threat.
|
|
|
Post by Final Countdown Jones on Jan 31, 2019 4:32:43 GMT -5
Honestly the thing that most confuses me is the, "Winning a triple threat match means more!" viewpoint. Like... I'm really not convinced it does on any level? Winning a triple threat doesn't really prove anything beyond that you're the one who was in the right place at the end of the match. Curt Hawkins could feasibly win a triple threat with Triple H and Undertaker if he got lucky which he sure as hell isn't doing in a singles match. But a Wrestlemania (possibly) main event isn't going to be a weird clumsy fluke win. You could easily say a singles match doesn't mean a lot because matches have ended on a quick roll-up or nut punch. B Team were tag champs last year and they won matches with shit like "they tripped over into a pin". Wasn't one of the reasons Daniel Bryan triumphed so hard was that he overcome three people in two matches and stood tall against everything? I've seen people talk about how insanely over they put him and that in some ways it was kind of excessive, the idea he won a triple threat didn't feel like less of a win because the other two dudes totally fought each other too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 13:08:49 GMT -5
Honestly the thing that most confuses me is the, "Winning a triple threat match means more!" viewpoint. Like... I'm really not convinced it does on any level? Winning a triple threat doesn't really prove anything beyond that you're the one who was in the right place at the end of the match. Curt Hawkins could feasibly win a triple threat with Triple H and Undertaker if he got lucky which he sure as hell isn't doing in a singles match. You're looking at it too deeply. It's no different than a free for all, a melee, a huge bar fight with 1 person standing tall, it's no different than a huge fight at a house party or even no different than food fight where 1 person doesn't get hit compared to everyone who does get hit. It's in so many different works of non-fiction and fiction. You're trying to break it down in wrestling terms when really anytime they bring up the multi-person match it's never seen that way. It's even said in every single multi-person feud in this company that there's a harder chance of winning those types of matches compared to single's matches. Actually Becky herself mentioned something like that not that long ago when the TLC build was going on, she knows it's more difficult to win and in turn her winning it means she's accomplished a harder task. We can pick out others saying this for decades because it's a concept that extends beyond wrestling. It's no different than it being harder to eat 2 pizzas than 1, like, it's just more difficult.
I think you're looking too deep into it when the average casual viewer doesn't see it that way nor does the WWE imply it being that way. Given it's more difficult to win a triple threat compared to a single's match when the person wins a triple threat it's seen as a bigger accomplishment.
|
|
|
Post by theironyuppie on Jan 31, 2019 13:28:42 GMT -5
There's some good points in this thread and I'm looking forward to seeing the story play out. I'd add that the angry online response to the proposed triple threat is part of the story, and Becky herself is leaning into and encouraging it with her #ShoehornCharlotte social media posts. It helps Becky too because Charlotte being around makes fans oblivious to how strongly Becky is actually being pushed, as no matter how many times Becky wins or how strongly she gets put over (she's been in multiple moments in the last three months that sound like they'd be bad fanfiction if they hadn't actually happened, like 'Becky clowns John Cena for ten minutes', or 'Becky Lynch no-sells Ronda threatening to kill her*', or 'Becky Lynch wins the Royal Rumble on one leg and after a 15-minute match earlier in the night'), it seems that based on reputation alone even 'smart' fans fear that this time Charlotte will ruin Becky's push. And that is a very useful dynamic for WWE as it makes the match feel less predictable. Plus the 'You don't add HHH to Rock/Austin' analogy ignores the fact that both Rock and Austin were successful and experienced pro wrestlers, while Ronda has had very little experience, as good as she is, and we still don't know what her and Becky's ring chemistry is like while knowing Charlotte's is great with both.
* I liked the dynamic on this week's SDL where while Charlotte's being an asshole about it, there's truth in what she's saying, and its enough to get into Becky's head. If Becky was completely unflappable, she wouldn't have lashed out to punch her, and she definitely wouldn't have driven away rather than get medically tested. If anything, its the first time The Man has backed down from anything in a long time, and it makes psychological sense.
|
|