Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

AEW R-Evolution II - 3/7/2021


Dolfan in NYC

Recommended Posts

On 2/19/2021 at 4:05 PM, A_K said:

Trio Titles feels super unnecessary but yes without doubt if they appear, they should be the first champions

I feel like with the bloated roster at this point AEW needs either Trio titles or another mens singles title because you are getting to a point where to many character's are aimless 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, zendragon said:

I feel like with the bloated roster at this point AEW needs either Trio titles or another mens singles title because you are getting to a point where to many character's are aimless 

Yeah I still think a light heavyweight / cruiser weight belt has value in that respect. Comparisons have been made between Riho / Rey Mysterio in other threads and how Rey had the benefit of competing for several seasons against other great workers his size; similarly there are a lot of great male workers in that bracket who as you say are verging towards aimlessness and could probably create great programs between themselves over a belt. I don’t see what leverage a trios belt provides over single tag. Very limited use cases and very cluttered. Transition TV title into more of an exhibition/midcard belt and reserve explosive action for young light heavyweights who can move up to heavyweight as they fill out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the Trios thing is that you have a lot of fractions, Jurassic Express, Best Friends, Dark Order, Eddie Kingston's family ect. The problem with a LHW belt would be that so many of their stars are closer to 200lbs than 300lbs so it could feel redundant. I'd like to see a US title maybe and have one midcard belt be more storyline/angle oriented and one be more work rate oriented kinda like how the WWF booked the World and IC belts in the 80's.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, A_K said:

Is creating a sole belt for a bunch of novelty factions really the way to go though?

I look to New Japan with their trios title and it seems to work out well.  I take it as whoever has them can lay claim to being the best faction around.  And if they get a singles title to add to it then all the better.

Now if the factions were very short-lived then I get what you're saying.  But most of them have been around for a while so if they did eventually do a trios title I think it would work out.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, A_K said:

Yeah I still think a light heavyweight / cruiser weight belt has value in that respect. Comparisons have been made between Riho / Rey Mysterio in other threads and how Rey had the benefit of competing for several seasons against other great workers his size; similarly there are a lot of great male workers in that bracket who as you say are verging towards aimlessness and could probably create great programs between themselves over a belt. I don’t see what leverage a trios belt provides over single tag. Very limited use cases and very cluttered. Transition TV title into more of an exhibition/midcard belt and reserve explosive action for young light heavyweights who can move up to heavyweight as they fill out.

I really think the cruiserweight championships (along with Hardcore titles) are a best forgotten throwback to the 90s. You don't need a lower weight title when you are more than willing to put your main belts on someone the size of Darby Allin. This isn't WCW where they were locked in on keeping the title around guys 250 pounds plus. Your smaller guys that could get over are going to get over regardless of locking them into a division that subliminally sends the message that they can't get up the card. If you want a "fast paced title", create a title that emphasizes short matches so there is a reason that everyone picks up the pace. 

This would be different if you were starting from scratch with a Pure Sports Build and want to establish weight divisions like MMA and maybe have an Unlimited Weight Title be your big title belt at the top of the card.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a cruiser belt could be useful for the reasons @A_K outlined. I was thinking of this recently as a potential vehicle for Silver as he really looks tiny in there at times, but I’d buy him more as the powerhouse of a cruiser division. It could work if you established a clear hierarchy around it and emphasise that it requires a different skillset compared to wrestling heavyweights, with cruisers having to work up and adapt to fighting heavyweights. But @Goodear covers why it probably wouldn’t work at this point.

I’d like to see them establish a kind of identity for the TNT belt, I think the format that Cody was leaning towards was good, have it as more of an open challenge not really tied to the rankings, with regular defences (maybe fortnightly) to play into the face of TNT thing. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also would love for the TNT belt to be defended the way that Cody was doing it.  It really did give some great interest in the title and seeing who would step up to go for it.  I also think if they're going to have Cage with the FTW belt instead of it being a prop they may as well have hosses challenge him for it.  To kill two birds with one stone that could also be the 10-minute sprint that y'all were referring to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Goodear said:

I really think the cruiserweight championships (along with Hardcore titles) are a best forgotten throwback to the 90s. You don't need a lower weight title when you are more than willing to put your main belts on someone the size of Darby Allin. This isn't WCW where they were locked in on keeping the title around guys 250 pounds plus. Your smaller guys that could get over are going to get over regardless of locking them into a division that subliminally sends the message that they can't get up the card. 

I completely agree.  

I would love it if AEW did not ever in their history add another title belt(s).  I’ve always preferred a simple set of titles.  And don’t feel belts are necessary for direction.  

Re: direction.  I’d be happy, and I think it would solve any aimlessness, to just have talent cut more and more and more promos.  They oughta litter their YouTube feed and Dark with promos.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In total agreement that segmenting your roster by weight class is an outdated concept. Now New Japan makes it work still with the IWGP Jr Title. But the main difference in why I consider their process vastly different than US wrestling is they force Jrs that move up the card to add on incredible amounts of size. When Kenny Omega moved up he bulked up. When Ibushi moved up he bilked up. When Osprey moved up he bulked up. We don't do that here. And because of that, visually, there's no real distinction between a Junior / Light Heavyweight / Cruiserweight vs Heavyweights. Finn Balor's billed weight is 175. But he's the NXT World / Heavyweight Champion. AJ Styles is billed at 225 and he's been WWE World / Heavyweight Champion twice. Same with Bryan, Rollins, and a bunch of other guys that would be classified as Cruiserweights if they were in 1990s WCW.

Buddy Murphy was Cruiserweight Champion for a good stretch. Then he lost the belt and went to the main roster. What changed? He's still at the same billed weight. Still wrestles the same style. Still has the same physique. What makes him not a Cruiserweight anymore? That's why it doesn't work here in this era. Cruiserweights were my favorite part of the 90s. But had WCW put their World / Heavyweight Title on Rey Mysterio at the same time there was a Cruiserweight Division that wouldn't have made sense either. The glass ceiling broke and smaller workers and now seen as capable top draws if they get over. If places only put their World Titles on giants like they did in the 80s and 90s I'd get it. But how is Escobar more of a Cruiserweight than Balor right now, ya know?

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cruiserweight and LHW titles in the US always make the title holder look like either a jobber or someone who won't be at the level of the guys competing for other titles. Listen to any wrestler talk about lower weight titles and you'll understand why it's a terrible idea. I'd wager to say that anyone advocating for a lower weight title doesn't have the best understanding of wrestling in the US. 

While a trios title would add another title to the picture, it makes a ton of sense. Tag wrestling, whether it's 2v2 or 3v3, is a huge part of this company's identity. Another big part of AEW's identity are the number of factions that is borrowed from NJPW. Being the top faction actually means something and a trios title would add credibility to those groups.

There's practically no point or use in having the FTW title around. It's dumb. It's a title that doesn't get defended and it's not a recognized title anyway. However, a champion Team Taz trio of Cage, Starks, and Hobbs could main event Dynamites against other groups with a decent enough build. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FTW title is more a prop than a title, so, who cares anyway. I'd reimagine the TNT title and give it some special set of rules to make it different to the AEW title. Why should I aim for the TNT title when there's the AEW title (Cody aside...)? I really like the Pure title in ROH back in days when I was till watching ROH and would opt for some kind of distinction to make it clear that this title is something different and not just the second best belt you could get around your waist.

And I will second @Craig H and say that a Trios title is the only belt worth thinking about to add. AEW has so many factions and trios with Hangman/Reynold/Silver, the Dark Order members, Gunn Club, Team Taz, SCU, Inner Circle, Nightmare Family, Eddie/Butcher/Blade, Hardy Party, Jurassic Express, Best Friends, Death Triangle and there'd still be Top Flight, FTR, Young Bucks, Janela/Kiss, TH2, Sabian/Miro and Acclaimed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Goodear said:

I really think the cruiserweight championships (along with Hardcore titles) are a best forgotten throwback to the 90s. You don't need a lower weight title when you are more than willing to put your main belts on someone the size of Darby Allin. This isn't WCW where they were locked in on keeping the title around guys 250 pounds plus. Your smaller guys that could get over are going to get over regardless of locking them into a division that subliminally sends the message that they can't get up the card. If you want a "fast paced title", create a title that emphasizes short matches so there is a reason that everyone picks up the pace. 

This would be different if you were starting from scratch with a Pure Sports Build and want to establish weight divisions like MMA and maybe have an Unlimited Weight Title be your big title belt at the top of the card.

Some of the most engaging and commercially successful narratives in MMA/Boxing have been the chronicles of fighters going up through the weight classes as they mature/become more experienced. I don't see why this wouldn't apply here. Without harking too much back to WCW, physically & in terms of approach the likes of Eddie Guerrero & Jericho were different animals by the time it came to their WWF pinnacle. They grew up through the systems, progressed through the singles title ranges (Cruiser->TV/European->Intercontinental->World), and the journey meant something. TNA was at its best when the X Division was prominent, and that division of course was the springboard for the likes of Style & Samoa Joe who'd go on to be main event PPV leads. I should add that I'm not actually so fixated on the weight presentation as to how you narratively-square off having a lot of the younger, lighter guys who are the future of the company being locked into programs with something to play for in the here and now.

I don't think having a conceptually-lighter class suggests these guys cannot be at the top of the card (and after all, this is wrestling. the lines are always very blurred in terms of title definitions). There is no locking into a division, more so a meaningful springboard for the guys early on in their journeys. And frankly, a Darby Allin, Guevara or Starks shouldn't be a convincing opponent for someone like Moxley or Omega at this stage. They're far younger, far less experienced, have graced far less stages. Personally I prefer an element of realism in depicting journeys upwards, and I think they need another low/mid card title to segment some of the guys & eventually legitimise them through. The TNT Title feasibly could be that title, but its been something of a joke of a belt so far in its booking (or lack thereof).

A trios title, on the other hand, just adds a whole lot more noise and I don't see where it elevates the product & their leading draws into a 1+million viewer proposition when time is already at a premium. If anything there is already too much interweaving, individual stories are lost in the noise & a lot of chaff can probably be cut to start acutely defining the brands/characters of the guys on the roster who actually mean something and will eventually draw for them.

Edited by A_K
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MrKothoga said:

And I will second @Craig H and say that a Trios title is the only belt worth thinking about to add. AEW has so many factions and trios with Hangman/Reynold/Silver, the Dark Order members, Gunn Club, Team Taz, SCU, Inner Circle, Nightmare Family, Eddie/Butcher/Blade, Hardy Party, Jurassic Express, Best Friends, Death Triangle and there'd still be Top Flight, FTR, Young Bucks, Janela/Kiss, TH2, Sabian/Miro and Acclaimed.

OK, but out of all those names (and there are probably going on 30 there), do any more than 5 or 6 have sincere, genuine potential to be anything other than jobbers or soon-to-be-retirees in the grand scheme of things? Do the ones who actually have any chance of drawing a dime for them (think Starks, Perry, MJF etc.) have anything whatsoever to be gained by being locked into these programs? And given so many of these are novelty acts anyway, do they really need a belt to build their shtick? Why submerge the gems when you can instead focus in on them in competitive singles actions? Leave the rest to the tag division, which has always been the preserve of a solid mid card for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The WCW cruiser belt was both a blessing and a curse. It gave smaller guys an opportunity and exposure, who never got it in the US big leagues before. I don't think guyss like Malenko, Guerrero, Rey, etc ever get signed without the division.

But it became a ghetto for them at the same time. When the same guys were having the same matches with the same opponents in the same slot on the card 3 years later, they grew to deeply loathe the belt and division.

If you treat a World Cruiserweight Championship as an equal world championship, or if you constantly move the top guys out of the division and they succeed against heavies, it might work. But we have no real history of that happening in this country.

Plus, 60-70% of the roster are cruisers.

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

'Cruiserweight' is also a bit of a misnomer in terms of its wrestling perception via WCW. In the classical boxing sense, the cruiserweight title sits directly below heavyweight & actually above light heavyweight/middle/welter etc. So it is not uncommon for top cruiserweights to go on to be very competitive world-title contending heavyweights (think Hay, Usyk).

Edited by A_K
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with everyone about the Cruiser title being passe. Pigeonholing guys as "too small" is never a good idea, plus many of the cruisers on the roster would perfectly capable, credible TNT/World champipns.

Trios titles, while a fun idea, I don't think will work long term. They'll eventually run out of teams and fresh matchups, and if you keep hiring new guys in sets of three, you'll burn through your budget pretty damn quickly. I think right now the best thing for the company is to keep the identity wrapped in the idea of "bringing tag teams back."

I said it in another thread, or maybe earlier in this one, but the best thing would be to drop the FTW title and come up with something else. I could see women's tags being a logical choice, but at the same time, the singles division still needs work. 

Ultimately, I do think another title is probably a good idea with the 2nd show in the pipeline, and because it would be good to have a title match on Dark once in a blue moon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, A_K said:

Some of the most engaging and commercially successful narratives in MMA/Boxing have been the chronicles of fighters going up through the weight classes as they mature/become more experienced.

Personally I prefer an element of realism in depicting journeys upwards, and I think they need another low/mid card title to segment some of the guys & eventually legitimise them through. The TNT Title feasibly could be that title, but its been something of a joke of a belt so far in its booking (or lack thereof).

It works in MMA because of the realism. The journey is real. Guys are maturing growing and learning just like wrestlers, but very differently from wrestlers their size gain is legitimate. They really are moving up those weight classes. Gaining mass, and the mass gain changes thier style. That's not what happens in US wrestling. Is AJ Styles any bigger now than he was in 2001? He was a Cruiserweight in WCW. Why is he not a Cruiserweight now?

Now your moving up the ranks "(Cruiser->TV/European->Intercontinental->World)" is not lost on me. But why does that first rung have to be a title that's name is dedicated to size? You get the exact same effect if you don't classify the title by a fake weight limit that isn't based on realism. The word Cruiserweight has a specific connotation in wrestling. You're not going to reverse 30 years of learned history. You get the exact same journey if you pick a low card title that isn't based on weight, without the negatives that the word "Cruiserwight" comes with.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an idea: I read a few weeks ago that NJPW was looking to get rid of their IC title. Why not have an AEW guy win it, bring it over, start calling it the AEW IC title, and achieve three things at once: NJPW gets rid of their redundant belt, AEW gains one they need, and now you have Sammy or whoever getting some of that sweet forbidden door heat.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NoFistsJustFlips said:

It works in MMA because of the realism. The journey is real. Guys are maturing growing and learning just like wrestlers, but very differently from wrestlers their size gain is legitimate. They really are moving up those weight classes. Gaining mass, and the mass gain changes thier style. That's not what happens in US wrestling. Is AJ Styles any bigger now than he was in 2001? He was a Cruiserweight in WCW. Why is he not a Cruiserweight now?

Now your moving up the ranks "(Cruiser->TV/European->Intercontinental->World)" is not lost on me. But why does that first rung have to be a title that's name is dedicated to size? You get the exact same effect if you don't classify the title by a fake weight limit that isn't based on realism. The word Cruiserweight has a specific connotation in wrestling. You're not going to reverse 30 years of learned history. You get the exact same journey if you pick a low card title that isn't based on weight, without the negatives that the word "Cruiserwight" comes with.

Yes I think the term “cruiserweight” may have somewhat been lost in translation here; I define it in the way boxing would define it, as penultimate class that remains often potentially competitive with heavyweight with the right push up rather than implying the inherently and ever-much smaller athletes.

 

You’ve hit my point exactly whereby MMA denotes more realism: personally I feel achieving a realistically believable product is how they make major headway in terms of audience -grab from WWE, and therefore having a “prize” title for the upcoming mid/upper card stars is the way to achieve it. The TNT Title theoretically should be that but it’s presentation has been absolutely all over the place to the point where we’re approaching its 1 year birthday and there has not been a single focused singles program beyond a good couple of weeks leading up to Brodie’s squash of Cody.

Edited by A_K
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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