|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Jul 21, 2023 2:10:24 GMT -5
I don't know why so many discussions of this topic come down like you have to do one or the other.
I think part of what makes a long reign interesting is following a short one.
Part of what makes a short reign interesting is following a long one.
In late 98 and early 99, the passing of the belt between Mick and Rocky made them seem like hyper competitive rivals neither of whom was definitively superior, then Rocky held onto it to Mania for slightly longer.
It's all about not doing any one thing too much.
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Jul 21, 2023 3:01:19 GMT -5
I don't know why so many discussions of this topic come down like you have to do one or the other. Speaking for myself, I find wrestling fandom very exhausting these days (probably because my IRL job is actually exhausting so my tolerance has gone down massively), so there’s a lot of focus going towards “What’s the thing that’ll please actually everyone and just shut off the noise for a bit?”. Plus you add in the increased demand on as many talents as possible getting the push (because everyone has different favourites), the fact that a lot of it is based on outside factors unrelated to the on-screen narrative (the “They deserve it” sentiment), the growing “stan” culture mindset that basically makes it so that some of those fans are literally unwilling to compromise and it’s just… I end up generalising a lot as a result. Of course there’s more than one way to crack the metaphorical egg. But when one method is chosen over the other, and their cons are magnified by the people who don’t like that method, and the same would be true for the other method if it was chosen… Like, what is the wrestling promotion meant to do at that point?
|
|
|
Post by Feargus McReddit on Jul 21, 2023 3:34:45 GMT -5
I think a lot of us forget that pro wrestling is a storytelling medium. The matches tell stories (and yes, all matches tell stories. Doesn't mean they're good or fully fleshed out stories but they do), the segments and angles tell stories. These all combine together to tell a wider story of the promotion and what it stands for.
The problem is some of us think it's a switch we can do like, "Oh, now we're going to switch belts more often" and that's just not how it works, or at least should work. The issue comes when you're doing one thing and it might not suit what you have. My personal issue with Roman's title reign now is that you're telling a bunch of stories where he doesn't need to be champion and the stronger one is having Roman tried to keep the Bloodline together after he lost the title and that's how you build towards Jey/Roman that they're blinded. The difference between Gunther's IC title reign and, say, Bianca Belair's Women's title reign (or even Rhea's, arguably) is that whilst Gunther is both capable of looking like an imposing threat and making you feel this is the one who'll stop his reign, Bianca was facing people nobody brought into because the stars weren't facing her. Besides Asuka, there was no reason to think Carmella or Zelina was going to be the one to win.
It needs to be a process, the method needs to work depending on what you want to tell and an issue WWE has had for years is that they use one storytelling method on everyone at one time and it not only makes them less unique but it makes people think that switching will change things when if everyone had shorter reigns, someone would be posting "Longer reigns need a comeback" and we'd be back to where we started.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jul 21, 2023 5:54:41 GMT -5
The key here is moderation. Look at ROH for instance. Joe was champion for two whole years, then 2005 rolls around and you have no less than 3 world title changes, then after Danielson’s title run in 06 you got a short one for Homicide, and a decent size run for Morishima before Mcguinness wins it. Having a title hot potatoed can serve to show how competitive things are at the top when you have a really stacked main event scene. Having a long dominant title reign can be used to emphasize somebody’s status as the top guy during periods where you need to take the time to build the next crop of stars. Some wrestlers also don't lend themselves to really long reigns. Stone Cold for instance was a guy that was all about the chase... his stories when he was the champion were never nearly as good as the road to the show. Yeah, that’s a discussion NJPW fans have about Tetsuya Naito; a lot of people want him to win the big title and have a long, “clear top guy” reign, but despite being a two time world champion neither of his reigns lasted very long. But there’s a reason for that: Naito’s whole Ingobernable character is built off having a chip on his shoulder over some legitimate grievances in his career. If he scales the mountain and does everything a bonafide promotional ace does as champ, then what’s left for him after that? Even when he won the biggest possible match, the double title main event in the Tokyo Dome, they made sure to have KENTA attack him and cut off his post match celebration and LIJ roll call with the crowd, which he expressly says is something he wants to do after a January 4 show…because it means his character still has a goal he needs to fulfill. Some characters work better with a title, some without, some work better with long reigns, some with shorter ones, some work as the target/goal being chased while some work better as the chasers. Again, no shade on cheering one’s favorites and wanting them to do as well as possible, but some people need to learn there’s no shame in this.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
HaHa U FaLL 4 LaVa TriK
Posts: 46,852
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Jul 21, 2023 6:11:07 GMT -5
Some wrestlers also don't lend themselves to really long reigns. Stone Cold for instance was a guy that was all about the chase... his stories when he was the champion were never nearly as good as the road to the show. Yeah, that’s a discussion NJPW fans have about Tetsuya Naito; a lot of people want him to win the big title and have a long, “clear top guy” reign, but despite being a two time world champion neither of his reigns lasted very long. But there’s a reason for that: Naito’s whole Ingobernable character is built off having a chip on his shoulder over some legitimate grievances in his career. If he scales the mountain and does everything a bone fire promotional ace does as champ, then what’s left for him after that? Even when he won the biggest possible match, the double title main event in the Tokyo Dome, they made sure to have KENTA attack him and cut off his post match celebration and LIJ roll call with the crowd, which he expressly says is something he wants to do after a January 4 show…because it means his character still has a goal he needs to fulfill. Some characters work better with a title, some without, some work better with long reigns, some with shorter ones, some work as the target/goal being chased while some work better as the chasers. Again, no shade on cheering one’s favorites and wanting them to do as well as possible, but some people need to learn there’s no shame in this. Three-time, isn't he? (Or is it a reference to how EVIL's reign shouldn't have happened, in hindsight?)
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Jul 21, 2023 7:27:48 GMT -5
I don't know why so many discussions of this topic come down like you have to do one or the other. Speaking for myself, I find wrestling fandom very exhausting these days (probably because my IRL job is actually exhausting so my tolerance has gone down massively), so there’s a lot of focus going towards “What’s the thing that’ll please actually everyone and just shut off the noise for a bit?”. Plus you add in the increased demand on as many talents as possible getting the push (because everyone has different favourites), the fact that a lot of it is based on outside factors unrelated to the on-screen narrative (the “They deserve it” sentiment), the growing “stan” culture mindset that basically makes it so that some of those fans are literally unwilling to compromise and it’s just… I end up generalising a lot as a result. Of course there’s more than one way to crack the metaphorical egg. But when one method is chosen over the other, and their cons are magnified by the people who don’t like that method, and the same would be true for the other method if it was chosen… Like, what is the wrestling promotion meant to do at that point? It does seem like the whole of discourse in any community now is that Twitter meme about 'I love pancakes' 'SO YOU HATE WAFFLES?'
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jul 21, 2023 8:52:14 GMT -5
Yeah, that’s a discussion NJPW fans have about Tetsuya Naito; a lot of people want him to win the big title and have a long, “clear top guy” reign, but despite being a two time world champion neither of his reigns lasted very long. But there’s a reason for that: Naito’s whole Ingobernable character is built off having a chip on his shoulder over some legitimate grievances in his career. If he scales the mountain and does everything a bone fire promotional ace does as champ, then what’s left for him after that? Even when he won the biggest possible match, the double title main event in the Tokyo Dome, they made sure to have KENTA attack him and cut off his post match celebration and LIJ roll call with the crowd, which he expressly says is something he wants to do after a January 4 show…because it means his character still has a goal he needs to fulfill. Some characters work better with a title, some without, some work better with long reigns, some with shorter ones, some work as the target/goal being chased while some work better as the chasers. Again, no shade on cheering one’s favorites and wanting them to do as well as possible, but some people need to learn there’s no shame in this. Three-time, isn't he? (Or is it a reference to how EVIL's reign shouldn't have happened, in hindsight?) Yep, you're right, I wasn't thinking about their rematch. I knew Naito was champ going into WK 15 after that, but I think the pandemic cutting off a chunk of what would've been his other title defenses makes my brain kind of short circuit when I try to piece that reign back together in my memory.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
HaHa U FaLL 4 LaVa TriK
Posts: 46,852
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Jul 21, 2023 9:14:08 GMT -5
Speaking for myself, I find wrestling fandom very exhausting these days (probably because my IRL job is actually exhausting so my tolerance has gone down massively), so there’s a lot of focus going towards “What’s the thing that’ll please actually everyone and just shut off the noise for a bit?”. Plus you add in the increased demand on as many talents as possible getting the push (because everyone has different favourites), the fact that a lot of it is based on outside factors unrelated to the on-screen narrative (the “They deserve it” sentiment), the growing “stan” culture mindset that basically makes it so that some of those fans are literally unwilling to compromise and it’s just… I end up generalising a lot as a result. Of course there’s more than one way to crack the metaphorical egg. But when one method is chosen over the other, and their cons are magnified by the people who don’t like that method, and the same would be true for the other method if it was chosen… Like, what is the wrestling promotion meant to do at that point? It does seem like the whole of discourse in any community now is that Twitter meme about 'I love pancakes' 'SO YOU HATE WAFFLES?' Everyone wants an enemy to vanquish.
|
|
schma
El Dandy
Who are you to doubt me?
Posts: 7,547
|
Post by schma on Jul 21, 2023 22:13:03 GMT -5
It does feel like a lot of folks in this thread are acknowledging that hot potato vs long runs doesn't need to be an either/or and that there should be some mix. I can see value in both at the right time.
For me though, I kinda miss that 'anything can happen in the WWE' feeling. That's simply not true right now. There is basically zero chance that Gunther loses his title before September, that Roman loses his title before Wrestlemania, etc. It doesn't matter how good a video package might be, it's simply not happening. Hell, WWE has us trained that big moments belong on Wrestlemania and only Wrestlemania (well maybe a couple on Summerslam). The thing is, that's only 2 events in a year filled with them. Give us a reason to tune in. For all the faults of the Monday Night Wars era, both WCW and WWE really did have a feeling of anything can happen.
If you got someone who can have a long meaningful run, awesome, give it to them. However, don't overstay the welcome, don't just pad it out. One of my favourite types of champions is the take on all comers, fighting champion. However, to do that right you need to let yourself appear vulnerable, to give the sense that yeah, maybe, just maybe this guy has a chance. When Taka Michinoku of all people nearly pinned HHH in an impromptu world title match, people were going nuts because they made us believe for a moment that anything truly could happen. Someone like Bianca never had moments like that, never looked vulnerable, there was never a question that she was winning.
Right now it's more, when is the title defence? Oh it's not Summerslam or Wrestlemania? Yeah, the title probably isn't changing hands. I miss 'anything can happen' but I acknowledge that there can be value in longer title runs and there should be some title runs that have some legs in them. All long or all short is not the answer. Mix it up. As other posters have said though, make those reigns serve a purpose, further a story.
|
|
UN PLOMBIER NIGHTMARE #blm
Fry's dog Seymour
Sponsored by Arizona Green Tea/Peanuts But Only At Baseball Stadiums/Biscuits Cat Adoption Agency
Posts: 24,505
|
Post by UN PLOMBIER NIGHTMARE #blm on Jul 22, 2023 3:24:12 GMT -5
Even the US title is staying on Theory forever. This is just stupid lol.
|
|
A Little Doo Doo
Salacious Crumb
An unconventional man with unconventional methods.
Posts: 71,187
Member is Online
|
Post by A Little Doo Doo on Jul 22, 2023 8:44:43 GMT -5
I almost miss the days of Charlotte and Sasha trading the Raw Women's Title back and forth. Almost.
|
|
J is Justice
Patti Mayonnaise
Will now be grateful.
Hi.
Posts: 31,841
Member is Online
|
Post by J is Justice on Jul 22, 2023 9:28:11 GMT -5
I almost miss the days of Charlotte and Sasha trading the Raw Women's Title back and forth. Almost. Me too and I wasn't watching at the time.
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Jul 22, 2023 14:16:47 GMT -5
It all depends on the character/story.
If it drives the story, change titles. Same if keeping it helps push story.
|
|
nisidhe
Hank Scorpio
O Superman....O judge....O Mom and Dad....
Posts: 5,768
|
Post by nisidhe on Jul 22, 2023 20:47:07 GMT -5
Extraordinary. Absolutely extraordinary.
I'm probably the first to bring this little matter up because it's been so long forgotten and yet might solve the issue for all sides.
I seem to recall that a champion had to defend their title every 30 days. There appears to be a dearth of so-called "fighting champions" in most promotions these days, and it has occurred to me that seeing one of these beltracks actually defend their belts on TV might do something to build up both the titles and their holders. While we're at it, let's start waiving the disqualification rule once in a while so that these people actually (in kayfabe) have to prove their worthiness of these titles.
Let's crunch the numbers between, say, Hogan's reign and Roman's current run - Hogan was defending the title on most of the pay-per-views _plus_ once a month on _Saturday Night's Main Event_ _plus_ on the road as Mean Gene or Billy Red Lyons or whoever else was touting during the breaks where they'd shill the next house show. Pretty bloody often, if memory serves. Now, His Nibs Roman Reigns has defended his title maybe, what, a dozen times in the past three years? I have my own theories on why he's not defending it more often, but really, if he can't or won't defend it more often than that, what's the point of having him hold the belt?
There is money involved in keeping Roman strapped up, I get it: but we're talking about a unique athletic and cultural endeavor whose top accolate goes back nearly two hundred years, and whose raison d'etre is predicated on a set of rules that one breaks or ignores at the peril of that endeavor. Roman is not the only man who can hold that title and garner that prestige, and there are many on those rosters willing to defend that title every night of their runs because, to them, that title, its history and the fans matter. If he can still generate the big bucks he can do it without the title, as a "special attraction."
The problem isn't long-term champions or hot-potato champions - it's idle champions who aren't creating the tension of "will he keep it or lose it?" because they're going months between title defenses. This isn't UFC.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo Is Broken on Jul 23, 2023 1:57:55 GMT -5
What about a Hot Pocket Title Change instead?
I have no idea how something like that would go, but I am already hungry for Hot Pockets now.
|
|