Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

AUGUST 2019 WRESTLING CHAT.


Recommended Posts

On 8/22/2019 at 4:23 PM, AxB said:

Vince watching a Denzel movie: "This Denzel kid, he's pretty charismatic. I'm not saying he could necessarily be a wrestler, but he could certainly be a wrestler's friend".

Nah...it’d be more like, “I didn’t know Shelton had such acting chops!” 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LoneWolf&Subs said:

That F&F isn’t a guaranteed success after Hobbs & Shaw underperformed. 

I think the Fast franchise is gonna need another Tokyo Drift soft reboot. The movies have escalated the scenarios to outrageous levels. 

I wouldn't be so quick to say it underperformed. The movie just opened in China yesterday and is projected to make well over $100 million this weekend.

 

 

Edited by Overly Critical Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Overly Critical Man said:

I wouldn't be so quick to say it underperformed. The movie just opened in China yesterday and is projected to make well over $100 million this weekend.

It's going to break even based on the success in China and elsewhere, but it's probably not the walk off grand slam Universal anticipated at that budget. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

During the beginning of the WWF expansion, Vince was really nice to Fritz's territory , featuring the Von Erichs in his magazines. He wanted the Von Erichs in the beginning but I can't see him using anyone but Kerry in those early years. I'm sure he knew that If he was to get the Von Erich boys he would've had to push Mike and Kevin too, probably as a tag team. I see Kerry either taking Hogans spot or atleast headlining the B shows. They probably would've been a little better behavior wise in WWF at that point rather than later on when Kerry finally did signed  which is saying something because the New York Locker room was crazy. The Dallas territory could have been what Stu and Calgary became to Vince I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, JohnnyJ said:

Fans did everything in their power to voice that the crop of stars WWE stubbornly kept on trying to market were not clicking.  They basically stopped showing up outside of the major shows. 

So now you have a generation of top guys  who nobody wants to pay to see and have limited mainstream appeal. 

But even those tie into another problem that kills making true top guys: The hipster mindset for part of this.

The current era of wrestling is the first one that really has to deal with the fact there is a subsection of fans who will hate the top star in the WWE, solely because they are the top star in the WWE. 

This hurts making top mainstream stars, because by and large to make top mainstream stars, wrestling fans have to tell non-fans "You have to see this person, they're awesome!"...and if those fans keep telling the non-fans the top stars in the company suck, then eventually it's going to hinder them crossing over. After all, we know what we're talking about. If WE think Cena/Roman suck, why would the non-fans want anything to do with them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not the fans' fault that the company first kayfabe and then legit openly made itself the top heel of the company while at the same time becoming so creatively bankrupt that only hardcore fans remain.

Make yourselves the heel and then push your dudes over the dudes the hardcores want to see on top and wonder why you can't get your hand-picked stars over. 

And the worst part of it is that Reigns probably had enough charisma to overcome even that if they had just pushed him as a machine with killer moves. Push him something like Goldberg, though with maybe a touch more vulnerability to give his character and his character's journey some depth and dimension, and I bet he overcomes it. Instead, they let Seth Rollins and Brock Lesnar steal all his shine.

If I'm booking Reigns, he's beating the Undertaker at WM 31 and Brock is losing at WM 30, at the very least. Beating 'Taker at WM after Brock already did it means less than nothing. I'm also not letting Seth Rollins win a cash-in during a Brock/Reigns title match that should be meant to make Reigns. This is basic booking 101 that literally anyone on this board could easily follow, but you're out here blaming the fans for the company's ineptitude.

  1. They present themselves as the top heel of the shows.
  2. They've driven away the casual fans that would be more likely to accept their preferred pushed stars and have been left with only hardcores who won't, especially because of #1.
  3. They've booked their preferred pushed male star into oblivion. 

Your "it's the fans" narrative doesn't ever hold up after about five seconds of scrutiny. 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Ziggy said:

During the beginning of the WWF expansion, Vince was really nice to Fritz's territory , featuring the Von Erichs in his magazines. He wanted the Von Erichs in the beginning but I can't see him using anyone but Kerry in those early years. I'm sure he knew that If he was to get the Von Erich boys he would've had to push Mike and Kevin too, probably as a tag team. I see Kerry either taking Hogans spot or atleast headlining the B shows. They probably would've been a little better behavior wise in WWF at that point rather than later on when Kerry finally did signed  which is saying something because the New York Locker room was crazy. The Dallas territory could have been what Stu and Calgary became to Vince I believe.

Well, if you watch the WCCW tv from 82-83 you'll see so many things that Vince cribbed when he took over. I think he respected Fritz. I like to think he also got along with Fritz because they were both "Fuck the NWA."  Fritz's dislike of the NWA was evident in the booking back then. Before the Freebirds showed up, the NWA was one of the top heels, be it bad decisions or incompetent NWA referees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Smelly McUgly said:

If I'm booking Reigns, he's beating the Undertaker at WM 31 and Brock is losing at WM 30, at the very least. Beating 'Taker at WM after Brock already did it means less than nothing. I'm also not letting Seth Rollins win a cash-in during a Brock/Reigns title match that should be meant to make Reigns. This is basic booking 101 that literally anyone on this board could easily follow, but you're out here blaming the fans for the company's ineptitude.

 

SK is often wrong about blaming the fans, but that Mania finish was *absolutely* a response to fan backlash. It may have been a stupid response, but without the fans' rejection of Reigns he would have gone over there. The booking clearly led there, but the loudest portion of the fans had no interest in seeing Reigns "made" as soon as he won the Rumble instead of Bryan. 

And your Undertaker fantasy booking is really only effective if you're trying to make him top heel, not top face. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's still bad booking though. If the Shield break up had Roman turning on the other two and becoming the Authority's chosen one, then becoming Corporate Champion, he would have been made as a heel. Heel of the century. The people wanted to boo him. Let them. Encourage them.

And then when the time came to turn him face, if the angle was right and they hadn't rushed into it, he'd have gotten over on his work and having been a top heel for a while.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MORELOCK said:

 

SK is often wrong about blaming the fans, but that Mania finish was *absolutely* a response to fan backlash. It may have been a stupid response, but without the fans' rejection of Reigns he would have gone over there. The booking clearly led there, but the loudest portion of the fans had no interest in seeing Reigns "made" as soon as he won the Rumble instead of Bryan. 

And your Undertaker fantasy booking is really only effective if you're trying to make him top heel, not top face. 

The company worked themselves into that WM 31 situation in the first place by turning Reigns face and then pitting him against Daniel Bryan. 

They should know by now that you lead the WWE hardcores where you want by turning the chosen star into an edgy heel first before turning them face. It worked for Austin, Rock, Cena. In a post-Attitude era world, the formula is pretty clear with the last three big stars they've had since that era began. As @AxB rightly points out, turning Rollins instead and letting him get the heel ---> face long-term booking as champ means that Rollins was given the exact sort of long-term development and push that Reigns should have received without having nearly the star power that Reigns does. 

(It still staggers me that they had Reigns, who fit that "cool heel" trope, and Rollins, who fit that "underneath fiery fighting babyface" trope, and then proceeded to turn Rollins and make him a heel ace and simultaneously book Reigns as a dopey '80s babyface. It's like the most counter-intuitive thing to do with them, and that's not hindsight because most people here were saying this at the time of the Shield breakup.)

And of course, had the company not primed the pump for the crowd rejecting Reigns in the first place after years and years of "the company itself is the lead heel" booking, it's possible that having Reigns win that Rumble could have worked, even in a post-Attitude Era company. Everywhere you turn, the root cause of the issue is WWE's booking, its presentation, and its general direction as a company. 

Edited by Smelly McUgly
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, not only did they have the wrong guy turn heel, they had their chosen one (looks, size, lineage), shortly after Punk's interview on Cabana's podcast where he highlighted the "make Roman look strong" mentality, play surrogate Daniel Bryan. This after they tried to co-opt the Bryan fandom with that ridiculous Big Show storyline. Completely ass-backwards booking.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think their handling of Ambrose/Moxley is more egregious than either of the other two shield guys. They had a babyface who acted like a babyface, albeit an eccentric one, who was at least pretty over with most of the demographics they were trying to service, and they had him do goofy shit while Reigns and Rollins floundered. Rollins can't promo, and they shoved him out to drone on at the top of every show. Roman got over in the Shield by spearing the shit out of people and never talking, and then the day after they broke the Shield up they expected us to believe he was ready. And it STILL might've worked if not for all that weird shit they did after that with Sheamus/MITB and that Royal Rumble where he got wheeled out and we were supposed to feel sorry for him. That night killed him. Having League of Nations destroy him and then him making the "Cena comeback" later on was just so contrived. They actually got it right the year before. He eliminated a bunch of dudes and looked unfuckwithable. So of course by the next year he was a standard issue babyface. The failure on WWE's end regarding Reigns is multifold.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That first Rollins/Ambrose PPV match where Dean hit the diving elbow to a standing Rollins somewhere in the crowd was so great at establishing Ambrose as their fiery babyface and then they fucked him up seemingly at every turn from there on out. I remember thinking he was going to be a huge star after that show. He still yet maybe a huge star in AEW but they botched each of those Shield members in unique ways.

Edited by Oyaji
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Smelly McUgly said:

The company worked themselves into that WM 31 situation in the first place by turning Reigns face and then pitting him against Daniel Bryan. 


Sure - but you said you would have had Reigns go over in the Mania match against Brock to "make" him, and that's really easy to say in hindsight. It would have been a universally unpopular decision at the time to the point that the plans were changed. The fans do bear some responsibility for that particular booking decision because it was based on their reactions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think about that Ambrose/HHH match at Fastlane right before 'Mania. How cool would it have been to have Ambrose win the title there and then  do Reigns/Ambrose at 'Mania with a hot crowd? Save the Reigns heel turn for the next night when he lays Ambrose out on Raw.. Maybe have the Rollins cash-in. Now Ambrose is even more over as a babyface because (in theory) fans want to see him get his hands on the guy(s) who screwed him. But WWE would rather have a tepid babyface that they anointed than a guy who got over on his own. We've seen that a bunch of times.

Edited by just drew
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's wild that the only Reign-Ambrose match we ever got was a somewhat flat finish to the tournament after Seth injured his knee. They mixed it up occasionally in three or four ways, but not much beyond that. You gotta figure they'd have run that match into the ground if Mox didn't make it clear before Roman returned that he was leaving. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MORELOCK said:


Sure - but you said you would have had Reigns go over in the Mania match against Brock to "make" him, and that's really easy to say in hindsight. It would have been a universally unpopular decision at the time to the point that the plans were changed. The fans do bear some responsibility for that particular booking decision because it was based on their reactions.

Which booking decision are you talking about? Your pronouns are unclear.

Either way, 1980s Vince McMahon was a good manipulator of crowd reactions. Late-1990s Vince was as well. If 2010s Vince isn't getting the reaction he's shooting for, that's on him, not the crowd. Blaming the audience because they didn't react the way that the artist hoped they would is extremely weak beer.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...