|
Post by A Platypus Rave is Correct on Apr 12, 2023 17:31:55 GMT -5
No especially not the way WWE does them which is full of padding just for paddings sake to get to an arbitrary number.
If there's an interesting story being told is far more important than number of days as champion.
None of the WWE's current long term champions have a story that's interesting enough to be anywhere near as long as they are.
|
|
Jonathan Michaels
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Archduke of Levity
Here since TNA was still kinda okay
Posts: 18,552
|
Post by Jonathan Michaels on Apr 12, 2023 17:34:16 GMT -5
It depends.
Although the most interesting stories you could tell in terms of records are the ones they aren’t telling.
|
|
|
Post by cassonova on Apr 12, 2023 17:54:00 GMT -5
It depends on the number of defenses and overall quality of said reign. I don't think length matters if the champ doesn't defend the title often at all and no one references the title.
|
|
The Gallus Mark
Unicron
Watching Icelandic Women’s Soccer Highlights
Posts: 2,589
|
Post by The Gallus Mark on Apr 12, 2023 21:37:32 GMT -5
I do care about the amount of reigns or at least successful title defenses
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2023 22:00:05 GMT -5
Nope
Wrestling is pre-determined so the records mean nothing and so it always just comes off as irritating more than anything when WWE especially use it as a constant crutch to extend reigns that should have ended or trying revolve most of their feuds around numbers and statistics the audience could not give less a shit about.
The quality of that title reign whether it be the quality of the stories or the matches that make up that reign means more to me than having to hear them drone on about someone holding a title for however long or how many times someone has held it.
|
|
El Pollo Guerrera
Grimlock
His name has chicken in it, and he is good at makin' .gifs, so that's cool.
Status: Runner
Posts: 14,899
|
Post by El Pollo Guerrera on Apr 12, 2023 22:01:47 GMT -5
In the "kinda" category... depends on the quality of title matches and the number of defences.
I do wish the WWE (or everyone) kept track of the number of title defences like they do in Japan. Of course you can have someone pad the numbers by having a bunch of 'title matches' against jobbers with no chance of winning, but that would be a story in itself, wouldn't it?
|
|
A Little Doo Doo
Salacious Crumb
An unconventional man with unconventional methods.
Posts: 71,337
|
Post by A Little Doo Doo on Apr 12, 2023 22:04:13 GMT -5
I only care about stories and matches.
|
|
FinalGwen
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Particularly fond of muffins.
Posts: 16,529
|
Post by FinalGwen on Apr 12, 2023 22:06:46 GMT -5
Everyone knows that Booker T is a 5 Time WCW Champion. Does anyone care that those reigns added up to less than 250 days? No.
Is Mick Foley any less memorable because he spent less than 50 days as WWF champion, with one of his reigns being only a day long? Of course not.
Ultimately it's fun for looking at stats and can lead to storytelling opportunities with someone competent at the wheel, but it's not what makes things interesting.
|
|
tirtefaa
Unicron
If you wanna know the truth, you gotta dig up Johnny Booth.
Posts: 3,270
|
Post by tirtefaa on Apr 12, 2023 22:51:56 GMT -5
I like long reigns in general, but the reign has to be of high quality in terms of opponents, matches, and most importantly STORY.
If you're just holding a belt without defending it very often or you don't have a storyline to benefit from, then it's a waste. It's like when Shelton Benjamin had the IC title the first time and they didn't do anything with him.
Or if you're Miz and you go out there and put on stinkers night after night, it makes your entire division look terrible. This isn't as apparent if someone like Miz has a title for a short period.
Or if you keep repeating yourself with your feuds, it gets redundant. This is like when the New Day were breaking the tag title reign record by losing a non titles match, having a title match where they lose by DQ, then win the third match where they retain the titles.
If you don't fall into one of those traps, then it should work.
|
|
|
Post by Feargus McReddit on Apr 13, 2023 3:15:22 GMT -5
Like a lot of things in wrestling, if you tell the right story with it, that's fine to care about records and days. If the story with Roman was that he was desperate to chase the 1000 days by manipulating people and cheating to get wins, that's something you can tell. Except that's not how WWE works where the canon is only based on the month build on TV and whatever happens before doesn't matter as much.
|
|
|
Post by government mule on Apr 13, 2023 6:10:37 GMT -5
I only really like the legacy of the WWE Title lineage - don't care for number of reigns but the people that have held that championship matter to me. Couldn't give a shit about the Universal title in the slightest.
And I would download a car, but I'm on a 56k dial up. How long will it take?
|
|
|
Post by willywonka666 on Apr 13, 2023 6:53:30 GMT -5
It's just foreshadowing that they'll either set or surpass a previous record, so I don't care for the blatant hints at what's to come.
|
|
|
Post by Hurbster on Apr 13, 2023 8:42:57 GMT -5
Not not really, if I'm bored of a run, then I'm bored of it regardless of the time.
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Apr 13, 2023 10:34:46 GMT -5
I'm not one for hotshotting the belts around the way they were during the Monday Night Wars but title reigns longer than a year or so always start reeking of stagnation and boredom to me.
|
|