Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,163 Excellent

About SorceressKnight

  • Rank
    Evansville Crimson Giant

Recent Profile Visitors

1,774 profile views
  1. I don't even know if the Ascension wouldn't be good picks for AEW. Their NXT Tag Title run is enough to get some people excited by them there, AEW loves tag teams and angsty dark "goffik" gimmicks, and they'd be a better Dark Order than the Dark Order are (the Dark Order's been one of the turds in the punchbowl for AEW for a while now.) It's the weakness with how good the WWE roster is- The Ascension were the low team on the totem pole, and even they could potentially make WWE rue the day they let them walk away.
  2. With the ACH thing, one thing to be mentioned...WWE, like most pro wrestling companies, run something that hits into the ground, and then keep running it until absolutely no one cares about it. It's just how pro wrestling does. You just don't see one-hit wonders in pro wrestling, and if there is a one-hit wonder, something had to be seriously wrong there. Jordan Myles ended up as a one-hit wonder in WWE- showed up, won the Breakout tournament, got a big match with Adam Cole, and was never seen again. This is virtually unprecedented in WWE history- the only other wrestler I can think of who counts as a one-hit wonder like that was Muhammad Hassan, and he also had things outside of WWE's control cause him to be a one-hit wonder. I'd defer to something being seriously wrong just because this does not happen in WWE.
  3. On the opposite side, I think that a big Morrison push would be worse for WWE than it would be good. Probably the end moment for WWE would be if WWE took someone who was a midcarder in the company when they were there, saw them leave the company, and then come back to get a huge push. That'd change the dynamic to what it was by the end of TNA of "You're worthless. If you really want to be a star, leave the company, come back, and THEN we'll push you."
  4. The bigger problem with kayfabe not existing is...quite frankly, there has to be a little kayfabe around. Kayfabe exists in every other TV show on the planet. They call it "the writing". That's the whole point of the show- the kayfabe is basically how you're writing it. You're dictating the rules of the universe and saying "this is how the show runs". And by an astonishing coincidence- if the rules of kayfabe are done, the fans actually PLAY ALONG WITH IT. Even the new indies have that- CHIKARA's been trying to redefine kayfabe for the modern era, and CHIKARA fans play along with those rules. If I blame too much on the fans, the lack of kayfabe has caused it to happen more than anything- if you don't actually write a show and dictate the rules of it, dictate how the plans go- then how else are the fans going to react besides making the story of the show "this is the story of my favorite wrestler, a plucky young talent who's trying to navigate all the backstage politics of WWE to make their way to the top and win the title in the main event of Wrestlemania."
  5. And by the same token. if you're enough of a fan to want this person to have a merch check and get your money, but you're not enough of a fan to wear their merchandise and admit "yes, I'm a fan of this person", something is out of wack there.
  6. Again, my work has a chill dress code and looks the other way for me wearing them, so I wear whatever I have. I mean, if you are willing to buy a shirt and not wear it, what's the point of owning it? Better to wear the shirt and own that shit.
  7. These are the reasons that Southpaw Regional Wrestling worked for the same problem with IPWF: With Southpaw, they did the same thing IPWF did, but they never made any overtures to it being a real show. It was just a bunch of the wrestlers putting on costumes and making a particularly fun set of commercials for WWE sponsors...which somehow works a bit better than if you got an actual payoff in-ring. IPWF also had the same problem that they had managed to try and claim the wrestlers got the memo for a throwback show where they played different characters, but also had their actual people play a role in it...for instance, using the same "you could never get a girl like her" joke for the character Josh Mathews played about the character Madison Rayne played...and in the process using the same "ha ha, they're married in real life" joke Impact would normally use for the characters. It explained a bigger problem- if IPWF is such an in-depth one night joke the World Champion of the promotion can play a generic manager, and yet somehow the announcer can't make you forget who they are in real life, you're inherently saying "the announcer is a more important cog on the show than our World Champion.".
  8. My contention is: Developmental and Creative are two entirely different things, and this is the whole problem. Jack Swagger had all the tools to be a good worker on paper before going to WWE developmental. He ended up a shitty worker and a channel-changer when he talks. That is an indictment on developmental. Jack Swagger also happened to be booked like a superstar by Creative even when it was obvious he just didn't have it as a worker. That is a separate indictment on Creative, but it's not related to developmental failing there. Cody Rhodes ended up a very good worker through developmental, and even in WWE he was always a very good worker. That's actually a success for developmental, because he ended up a good worker (and it's not like Cody suddenly learned to wrestle the day he put a Bullet Club shirt on either-even in WWE, he was ALWAYS pretty good.) Cody Rhodes not getting the big push in WWE is not an indictment on developmental failing him. It had nothing to do with developmental. And honestly, given the timing Cody Rhodes had when he was realistically good enough to be a World Champion, it wasn't even that much of an indictment on Creative (Cody was good, but there was always someone just a little BETTER above him on the totem pole. Again, you can't really point to one moment that Cody deserved to be the World Champion above the person who was the champion.) Creative and Developmental are two different things,
  9. It's so interesting that "this person had all the tools to be a big star, but WWE developmental turned them into a shitty worker , even though the bookers pushed them like they were something special and made them the World Champ" is somehow not an indictment about developmental, and yet "this person had went through training and developed into into a pretty good worker and ended up becoming pretty talented as a performer, but the big mean bookers didn't let them be World Champion because they were so mean to them" is somehow indicting about developmental failing.
  10. Moxley is weird. He should have been at least as big as Rollins and Reigns are, and came close to that role...but his AEW run and all the deathmatch stuff he does there would put that closer to "play stupid games, win stupid prizes" than an indictment of the WWE system. No matter how good the booking is, WWE's just not going to LET you run deathmatches to get your skill over (and really, WWE shouldn't be doing deathmatches.)
  11. But that's also my point for badly missing on the talent. The best way to put it would be that Cody is this decade's version of Steve Austin. Their gimmicks are nothing alike, but with both Cody and Austin the same refrain was there: They were good, and their original company KNEW they were good...but at the same time, if their original promotion knew what they had and gave them the push, they never would have made it to the heights they did. If WCW pushed Steve Austin to the top in 1994, then you'd get the decent-but-forgettable Stunning Steve and not the iconic Stone Cold- because Stone Cold could only become Stone Cold if he was shitcanned by WCW. Likewise with Cody, he was good in WWE, very good...but he never would have become CODY unless he went off on his own and left the WWE. Even if WWE gave Cody a World Title push, he would have just been...well, Cody Rhodes.
  12. Honestly, I'd account for that for why I claim Hager's an example for it: Booking and development are two different things. If it's going to indict the whole system, I'd sooner use as an indictment "on paper, this guy was a blue-chip prospect and ended up forgettable" over a Cody/Juice Robinson where it was "this guy was good, and it was obvious they were good even if WWE didn't book them as superstars." In the latter case, it was an example of them being lost in the shuffle and it's not a fault of development (CJ Parker was talented...but he came in as indie darlings started to get pushed by WWE over the homegrowns, and even if it didn't let's not forget Parker was despised by the NXT crowds. Likewise, Cody was very good...but can you really think of any moment in time when Cody should have been pushed to the top and was held back in WWE? The only good moment to vault Cody to the uppercard/main event was that run with the Rhodes Family in 2013...and even then the crowd made their choice in Daniel Bryan and made it clear no one else would do.)
  13. The weird thing is- you can make an argument that Cody Rhodes isn't even the biggest indictment of the modern WWE system on the AEW roster. At least Cody was always notably good at working in that late 2000s-early 2010s WWE style, with that run where he was one of the few generic WWE trained guys who always seemed to find a spot on the Wrestlemania card when getting a Mania match meant you MATTERED that year. Even if he seemed bland and was the same as everyone else, there was a good chance that Cody was going to break out one of these days and become something special. Jake Hager, on the other hand? If you could pick a list of what you wanted the next top star in WWE to have in 2007, Hager would have ticked every single box on the list. The fact that he turned out to be forgettable and just another guy was probably a bigger indictment of the style than Cody not making it in the WWE was.
  14. But the exact opposite is true as well- the modern American way of forging identity is also "the things that you like and consume are YOU", so that leads to the problem as well. As such, people who like Cornette can't just say "yeah, he's shit, but I enjoy his work" or "yeah, what he said was too much, but I like his commentary/podcast in general" because the response will become inevitably "You like Cornette and he's a shithead? Well, by liking Cornette, you agree with everything he says and you are a shithead too!"
  15. But honestly that's WHY Bray should be champ- because he's like the Undertaker. Undertaker was always in the "He's not The Guy. But quite frankly, you don't HAVE The Guy right now. No one on the roster has anything resembling the momentum to be The Guy. So, it's not a bad idea to put the strap on someone the fans believe in as a badass monster and have them murk people until somebody catches fire and can be The Guy."
  • Create New...