Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

AEW Dynamite - 1/13/2021


Dolfan in NYC

Recommended Posts

Nobody asked, but I'll beat that dead horse: AEW (read, Tony) need to remember that matches can end on disqualification, countout, rollup (as stated above), any other way then somebody hitting their finisher and getting a pin. Give it some surprise and spontaneity. I understand that they wanna do the ROH clean match, always a fair winner thing, but it's frankly boring. Piss the fans off every once in awhile, have them crave a rematch, cheat someone for heat. I'd even take a Dusty Finish if it's done with the right people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2021 at 4:21 PM, Log said:

I totally agree with @El Gran Gordithat any promotion that hopes to compete on a national level needs to stop aping WWE and become their own thing. That was what hurt TNA for so long. A lot of casual fans just saw them as a second-tier knockoff of WWE with their “has-been” stars.

 

One little thing that AEW has done so far that I like is announcing the lineup for their show ahead of time. Too many WWE shows start with a promo that leads to another promo that leads to the main event or a featured match later. What was the plan of that “surprise” promo never happens? Was there not a scheduled main event? I love the Memphis approach of having a format and either it happening or things go off the rails. But at least there’s a format. 

Exactly.  "Surprise main event" style is so stupid from a logic standpoint.  What show was booked before the surprise happened?  If the opening match promo guys didn't challenge each other to fight in the main event, what was the main going to be?

On 1/16/2021 at 3:25 PM, El Gran Gordi said:

I like the idea of "All of these wrestlers are good (even Brandon and Joey and Luther)" way more than I like the idea that "This tiny handful of wrestlers are elite and nobody else is close to that level." Maybe that is what is meant by "All Elite."

THIS.  If this is supposed to be a sport and these wrestlers are competitors in that sport, then why would any company (in kayfabe) hire someone who consistently can't last more than a minute with another wrestler?  That would be like a football team keeping a running back, who always runs for negative yardage, on the roster.  I'd much rather have a wrestling company whose kayfabe approach is "you have to be good just to get to this level."

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

1 hour ago, Technico Support said:

Exactly.  "Surprise main event" style is so stupid from a logic standpoint.  What show was booked before the surprise happened?  If the opening match promo guys didn't challenge each other to fight in the main event, what was the main going to be?

This has annoyed me since day one. It's also sort of I think conditioned the audience to expect some kind of contrived beef for no reason. When AEW started last year, a frequent question from my girlfriend was "Why are these two guys fighting?" As though there had to be some silly WWF-ass "it's PERSONAL now!" sentiment behind it, rather than two guys wrestling because they're booked to wrestle on the wrestling show. The Giants didn't need to feed the Steelers laxative filled burritos to hype their game, they just go out and play. It's a great approach.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Echoing a few comments but for me AEW has done well to achieve a different feel around the product, which I think was really important as a new company. I remember @El Gran Gordimaking a point recently about a community type of feeling (probably butchering what he actually said), which is definitely part of it.

But mainly for me, it’s just that they’ve created a mostly believable ‘universe’ - meaningful matches, logical show structures, friendships/alliances which aren’t established purely for specific storylines, etc. This should be obvious stuff but it’s refreshing to actually see it done well (mostly) and not feel like your intelligence is being insulted.

They’re maybe getting a bit more ambitious now with another show and the inter-promotional stuff, which will be a different challenge but I think getting some of these basics right early on gives them a good foundation to build on.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Zakk_Sabbath said:

This has annoyed me since day one. It's also sort of I think conditioned the audience to expect some kind of contrived beef for no reason. When AEW started last year, a frequent question from my girlfriend was "Why are these two guys fighting?" As though there had to be some silly WWF-ass "it's PERSONAL now!" sentiment behind it, rather than two guys wrestling because they're booked to wrestle on the wrestling show. The Giants didn't need to feed the Steelers laxative filled burritos to hype their game, they just go out and play. It's a great approach.

Fans have been so mistreated by WWE booking that they just expect bullshit now.  Before AEW's last PPV people on this very board were speculating on possible screwy finishes because there was just no way they'd have, for example, the Bucks (who had swore the never team again if they lost) beat FTR for the belts.  People were even trying to figure out how AEW would screw us on the Mox/Kingston I Quit Match and Cody/Darby.  And we got clean finishes in all three.  It's like when someone goes from a bad relationship to a good, healthy one but keeps expecting their new significant other to do something shitty.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Technico Support said:

Exactly.  "Surprise main event" style is so stupid from a logic standpoint.  What show was booked before the surprise happened?  If the opening match promo guys didn't challenge each other to fight in the main event, what was the main going to be?

THIS.  If this is supposed to be a sport and these wrestlers are competitors in that sport, then why would any company (in kayfabe) hire someone who consistently can't last more than a minute with another wrestler?  That would be like a football team keeping a running back, who always runs for negative yardage, on the roster.  I'd much rather have a wrestling company whose kayfabe approach is "you have to be good just to get to this level."

Agreed on the first point. I think you could add to your announced main event through an opening promo (make it a gimmick or add participants to a holla holla tag match). Or run an angle that replaces an existing match with a worked injury or something. The idea that management is scrambling to put together a main event is not a terrible one and certainly not something that never happens in real sports as MMA guys get replaced in the days up to the card and players are 'questionable' up to game time all the time.

On your second point, boxing is full of instances of tomato cans getting shots at main eventers in order to sell tickets off the draw. We have to remember that wrestling is part athletic contest and part manipulated narrative. I'm not adverse to throwing upsets out there now and again, but not every player in a story is of equal importance. Sometimes you just need a short term obstacle or someone to show off the terror of the threat. In Dragon Ball Z terms, sometimes you need a Krillin to set someone up for Goku. 

Quote

This has annoyed me since day one. It's also sort of I think conditioned the audience to expect some kind of contrived beef for no reason. When AEW started last year, a frequent question from my girlfriend was "Why are these two guys fighting?" As though there had to be some silly WWF-ass "it's PERSONAL now!" sentiment behind it, rather than two guys wrestling because they're booked to wrestle on the wrestling show. The Giants didn't need to feed the Steelers laxative filled burritos to hype their game, they just go out and play. It's a great approach.

People care more about the reason behind the fight than the fight itself. This is why selling the fight is a thing. This is why the Olympics broadcasts spend so much of their time telling your about the athletes rather than showing you the contests. This is why sports rivalries draw. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Technico Support said:

THIS.  If this is supposed to be a sport and these wrestlers are competitors in that sport, then why would any company (in kayfabe) hire someone who consistently can't last more than a minute with another wrestler?  That would be like a football team keeping a running back, who always runs for negative yardage, on the roster.  I'd much rather have a wrestling company whose kayfabe approach is "you have to be good just to get to this level."

Because it isn't a sport and it gives you a lot more narrative room to work with. Nobody is suggesting there should be wrestlers who lose to everyone in 2 minutes, I'm saying that lower card guys should lose to upper card guys faster and more definitively than they do to mid-card guys so that I, the viewer, am presented with a understanding of the relative skill levels of the wrestlers involved. If there isn't a ladder to climb, I'm less invested in a wrestler's progress. I'm enjoying watching people like Red Velvet work their way onto Dynamite from being nobodies and it will be even more satisfying when they win the big one someday because I've seen that progress. That was half the appeal of NXT back in the day and one of the reasons I like Rhea Ripley so much, I still remember ponytail Rhea in the first Mae Young.

Or let me put it this way, when Top Flight came in and had their match with the Bucks, it was refreshing to see a new team and we were all impressed because of how good they looked in the match, not how well they did against the tag team champions because every team does kind of the same against the champs unless it's PPV time, then they go triple the time. Are Top Flight any better than TH2 or SCU or Private Party or Jurassic Express? They're about the same. The end result is the same as WWE's 50/50 booking, nobody ever has a climb it's just their turn to go on a winning streak and be champs one day. Not to mention that it lacks variety too. Check out the past several Dynamites, every non-title tag team match averages at 10 minutes, FTR goes 8 with jobbers and occasionally other matches hit the 11 or 12 minute mark. A title match tends to add 5 minutes, again regardless of who that opponent is it's just title match time and title matches go longer than other matches. I also respect that it's a matter of booking philosophies at this point, I just find it predictable and less interesting to watch.

And I maybe shouldn't make this comparison because I am truly uniformed on mma but while football may not have dud players on the bench, mma leagues definitely have some guys who can go with the champ and some who will get washed in a second.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Technico Support said:

Fans have been so mistreated by WWE booking that they just expect bullshit now.  Before AEW's last PPV people on this very board were speculating on possible screwy finishes because there was just no way they'd have, for example, the Bucks (who had swore the never team again if they lost) beat FTR for the belts.  People were even trying to figure out how AEW would screw us on the Mox/Kingston I Quit Match and Cody/Darby.  And we got clean finishes in all three.  It's like when someone goes from a bad relationship to a good, healthy one but keeps expecting their new significant other to do something shitty.

Okay, but they blew out The Bucks-FTR feud for one match when careful booking could have them have an actual drawing feud for months of programming instead of doing a one and done. Kingston-Moxley was ready to end so that was fine. Cody-Darby was promoted in two weeks due to questions we don't need answers to. Sometimes clean as a sheet finishes aren't the best thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't tell you how happy I would be if AEW never had a DQ outside of the Kenny/Pac ironman match. DQs and countouts fucking sucked. They sucked to see as a kid, they sucked to see as a teen, they sucked to see as a young adult, and they still suck to see. The only time I don't hate a countout is when Yano is involved. Although, I wouldn't mind a rare DQ when one wrestler is so frustrated they can't win that they resort to just beating the shit out of their opponent with a weapon or illegal move until they're DQed.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Count outs and disqualifications should be used for the express purpose of continuing your narratives. AEW actually didn't do a terrible job of doing that in the Avalon-Cutler angle.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Goodear said:

Count outs and disqualifications should be used for the express purpose of continuing your narratives.

Sure, but when the worldwide leader and standard bearer for all that is pro wrestling has prostituted the DQ as a storytelling device to the point where it means nothing except as a crutch and a cheap way to get wrestlers in a program on TV this week, any company striving to be "not WWE" would be well served to avoid them.  To put it another way...WWE does a lot of really dumb shit with regard to how their product is booked and how their stories are told.  If you want to be an alternative, you avoid the stuff they do.  You just avoid the everlovin' shit out of it.  ?

Also, maybe not doing DQs except in very rare cases is a way to modernize wrestling.  For a large section of the audience, especially smarter fans that AEW caters to, DQs put the heat on the booker, not the heel.  People know this isn't real and getting a shit finish to a good match doesn't add the right kind of heat anymore. 

 

2 hours ago, Goodear said:

People care more about the reason behind the fight than the fight itself. This is why selling the fight is a thing. This is why the Olympics broadcasts spend so much of their time telling your about the athletes rather than showing you the contests. This is why sports rivalries draw. 

This is true, but rivalries in real sports are usually either "these teams have always been divisional rivals" or "this guy or team really wants to prove something by beating this guy or team."  Wrestling, on the other hand, typically has convoluted bullshit for their rivalries.  I never saw the Ravens burn down the Browns' haunted shack before the game, nor did the Red Sox ever steal the Yankees' Japanese shampoo commercial.

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

Guest Jimbo_Tsuruta

I'm glad AEW has avoided falling back on weak DQs/countouts. I'd rather they focused on stuff like actually getting the refs to officiate and cutting down to a two-man commentary team with Kingston joining occasionally.  

Edited by Jimbo_Tsuruta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jimbo_Tsuruta said:

I'm glad AEW has avoided falling back on DQs/countouts. I'd rather they focused on stuff like actually getting the refs to officiate and cutting down to a two-man commentary team with Kingston joining occasionally.  

Any solution that involves moving JR to strictly storyline-building sitdown segments, and no more four man booths where everyone is trying to get their shit in and Jericho is YELLING ABOUT EVERYTHING, would be just wonderful! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus I think some of your heads really would explode if there was a DQ finish. 

It's all in how you do it: Cheating win into restart from Tony. Brawl out to a countout and a pull-apart and then run the revancha at the next show or the PPV. Absolutely nothing wrong with rollups. Just because WWE uses it doesn't mean you CAN'T use it as long as you do it right.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jimbo_Tsuruta
1 minute ago, Curt McGirt said:

Jesus I think some of your heads really would explode if there was a DQ finish. 

It's all in how you do it: Cheating win into restart from Tony. Brawl out to a countout and a pull-apart and then run the revancha at the next show or the PPV. Absolutely nothing wrong with rollups. Just because WWE uses it doesn't mean you CAN'T use it as long as you do it right.

Agree, done well they are effective, I meant not falling back on bullshit finishes week in week out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Curt McGirt said:

Jesus I think some of your heads really would explode if there was a DQ finish. 

It's all in how you do it: Cheating win into restart from Tony. Brawl out to a countout and a pull-apart and then run the revancha at the next show or the PPV. Absolutely nothing wrong with rollups. Just because WWE uses it doesn't mean you CAN'T use it as long as you do it right.

 

12 minutes ago, Jimbo_Tsuruta said:

Agree, done well they are effective, I meant not falling back on bullshit finishes week in week out.

Absolutely on both counts!  I just feel like AEW is well served so far avoiding anything that could be similar to WWE Bullshit  so they can establish their own style.  I don't think I said anywhere that it shouldn't be done.  It's just that I can absolutely understand why they don't at this time.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Goodear said:

Right. Cody punching through glass to get at the Inner Circle... good! Miro feuding with Best Friends over broken arcade cabinet... bad.

To be fair, the broken arcade cabinet started it, but it quickly shifted to how Miro doesn't like Chuck, Trent, and OC because none of them act seriously and are jerks.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of match length, @Goodear and @Godfreyhave touched on this but I think some matches could be used to better establish character traits and the wider hierarchy in the company. I think the talk of match length is a bit of a red herring, if you want to fill 10-15 mins with Omega v Janella or The Bucks v TH2 that’s fine, but there could be more variation in the stories being told. For me, it too often feels like guys are just fitting their opponents into their standard template, which is kind of a condensed version of their epics. They could also be using these sort of matches to give some credibility to some secondary finishers, e.g. I’d like to see Omega finish with the tiger driver sometimes as that’s a killer move. 
The example that comes to mind is Angle, he’d often be quite generous and try to make guys lower on the card look good, but he would pretty much just wrestle the same match every time - opponent shocks him early by out-grappling him, Angle slam kick out, escape of the ankle lock, etc. - I’m not sure anyone really got much rub from this as it was just a typical Angle match. If everyone is special then nobody is special.

I’d agree with others that this was the best Cage has looked, him spamming all these big moves actually makes sense in the context of him fighting the never-say-die underdog. The GMSI in concept could actually be quite clever in that it gives him a built-in vulnerability while still being a beast, but nothing in the way he wrestles ever puts across any particular stories around this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Curt McGirt said:

Jesus I think some of your heads really would explode if there was a DQ finish. 

It's all in how you do it: Cheating win into restart from Tony. Brawl out to a countout and a pull-apart and then run the revancha at the next show or the PPV. Absolutely nothing wrong with rollups. Just because WWE uses it doesn't mean you CAN'T use it as long as you do it right.

The problem is that a modern audience is more savvy to how things work (especially the AEW audience) and the heat will go on the promotion for the lame finish and not the heel. In other words you get the wrong kind of heat.

The only wrestler on Earth where a countout finish is perfectly acceptable is, of course Yano.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Zakk_Sabbath said:

 The Giants didn't need to feed the Steelers laxative filled burritos to hype their game, they just go out and play. It's a great approach.

The fact that they DID feed them to Steelers is neither here nor there, but they sure didn't NEED to do it. The game would have happened regardless. Very good point.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Goodear said:

Okay, but they blew out The Bucks-FTR feud for one match when careful booking could have them have an actual drawing feud for months of programming instead of doing a one and done. Kingston-Moxley was ready to end so that was fine. Cody-Darby was promoted in two weeks due to questions we don't need answers to. Sometimes clean as a sheet finishes aren't the best thing. 

IIRC, part of that was FTR's desire not to be tied down long-term. That might have changed since the match took place, but both guys were vocal on podcasts about wanting to hit several companies for short-term angles before settling in (presumably to AEW) for a long run. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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