Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

SDL is The Kings of Queens - 10/8/2021


 Share

Recommended Posts

Show will be on FS1 next week because of baseball.  Expect plenty of monarchy related titles for the next few weeks.  

Also, I pray the Hell in a Cell stip for Edge/Seth will mean this interminable feud to finally fucking end.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carmella & Zelina over Toni and Liv was kind of dumb & pretty disappointing. Both of the matches were also on the forgettable side though not bad I suppose.

Sami/Rey was fun. Feels weird to have Sami be such a big part of the dissension between the Mysterios when they will be on separate shows soon.

Finn/Cesaro was good. Feels like this tournament ends with King Balor or King Ricochet. 

The Becky, Bianca, Sasha opening was fun and probably should have been the main event segment.

The Blood Line segment was solid. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ricochet has been doing repeated jobs for Kross on Main Event - if they were going to push him he'd be on Smackdown. I don't see him going over Woods tbh. If anything I could see Jinder going over both New Day members so that it sets up a later match with Big E.

Though tbh it wouldn't surprise me to see Xavier vs Kofi either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Eivion said:

 

 

Btw @Elvion, not trolling but genuinely feel like I have to ask, with Smackdown stacking the FS1 show and putting in a 30 minute overrun - do you now accept that WWE are reacting to AEW above and beyond financial reasons i.e. Vince really doesn't want to have Smackdown outrated by Rampage, just because?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RunningFromAmerica said:

Btw @Elvion, not trolling but genuinely feel like I have to ask, with Smackdown stacking the FS1 show and putting in a 30 minute overrun - do you now accept that WWE are reacting to AEW above and beyond financial reasons i.e. Vince really doesn't want to have Smackdown outrated by Rampage, just because?

Not really. I would imagine they are stacking it because its not on the usual network and its the final Smackdown before Crown Jewel. Rampage hasn't come close to Smackdown's ratings so it would be kind of weird to assume they are worried about it beating them even with the move unless Rampage is stacking their next show. Are they?

Edited by Eivion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most Rampage shows are fairly stacked. They have Junior Dos Santos, but they're also having a match with Allie The Bunny so nothing ridiculous.

You are ignoring the decision to overrun.....and the hit Smackdown has taken when it has moved to FS1 previously, in your analysis. But you answered the question so I guess we'll see what the rating difference is.

For background: https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-smackdown-tops-one-million-viewers-fs1-328201

 

Edited by RunningFromAmerica
Added link
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the KotR finals are at Crown Jewel. And the Smackdown semi-final is Finn Balor vs Sami Zayn.

Sami doesn't go to Saudi, does he? He never has. Bit of a giveaway as to who is winning. And if Babyface Finn is the Smackdown finalist, the RAW finalist has to be a heel. And there's only one heel on the Raw bracket, Jinder Mahal.

So yeah. Finn vs Jinder for the KotR finals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sami is banned from going to Saudi Arabia, due to being Syrian. Aleister Black was also banned when with the company.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Ace said:

Sami is banned from going to Saudi Arabia, due to being Syrian. Aleister Black was also banned when with the company.

 

This. Daniel Bryan only went to one, Greatest Royal Rumble. Same as Kevin Owens because Sami Zayn's banned from going to Saudi Arabia.

Edited by The Natural
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RunningFromAmerica said:

You are ignoring the decision to overrun.....and the hit Smackdown has taken when it has moved to FS1 previously, in your analysis. But you answered the question so I guess we'll see what the rating difference is.

I took both into account when I made my earlier comments even if not mentioned directly. That said, I didn't know Smackdown's last rating so I guess I was partially wrong there. Still with Rampage's average it doesn't feel like there is a real reason WWE to worry. Even with the overrun its not like most who watch Rampage are watching Smackdown so I doubt it will eat in Rampage's ratings much if at all.

What I don't get is what does WWE seeing AEW as major competition do for you? It won't improve WWE shows, and it won't legitimatize AEW as major anymore than it already is. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Eivion said:

I took both into account when I made my earlier comments even if not mentioned directly. That said, I didn't know Smackdown's last rating so I guess I was partially wrong there. Still with Rampage's average it doesn't feel like there is a real reason WWE to worry. Even with the overrun its not like most who watch Rampage are watching Smackdown so I doubt it will eat in Rampage's ratings much if at all.

What I don't get is what does WWE seeing AEW as major competition do for you? It won't improve WWE shows, and it won't legitimatize AEW as major anymore than it already is. 

I haven't made the claim that it would do anything for me.

I'm not sure how you know what the crossover audience with regards the key demo is - I suspect you don't. And ultimately the key demo is what counts here, specifically the two quarter hours they will go head-to-head. If they are going to be within 20% for the key demo (sounds realistic), then actually a relatively small amount of viewers will make a difference to who wins during that 30 minutes.

When WWE were on FS1 last October, against the World Series, they were 0.25 average in the 18-49. Same as last week's Rampage, which is on at a later time. So your analysis is suspect.

It's actually worth pointing out that this week's Smackdown overnights in the key demo for hour 2 was 0.4. Like yeah, AEW Rampage isn't likely to get 'close' to that regularly anytime soon (note again the timeslot) - but let's not act like it's exponentially bigger or anything. WWE isn't doing a good job of pulling in the audience the advertisers want. 

Edited by RunningFromAmerica
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, RunningFromAmerica said:

I haven't made the claim that it would do anything for me.

You really don't need to make a claim when you bothered to ask me that question in the first place and went on an explanation of ratings and demographics for me. Clearly it does something for you. Otherwise you would have had no need to bring it up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to Death Valley Driver Video Review Message Board. 

I just think it's a little weird that you dismiss the idea that anyone in WWE is interested in direct competition with AEW as 'smark fantasy' and 'opposed to common sense' when it's pretty obvious that's what's going on and you have Dave Meltzer being really clear that's exactly what is going on. Whether I have a personal stake in this being the case is really by the by, as I suspect you know. Ultimately you have attempted to try to sustain your own narrative using an analysis that even by your own reckoning was based on some misunderstandings of the facts. Of course, we can all question eachother's motivations but it usually says more about the person doing the questioning in my view. Ultimately yes, we could all be doing something more morally worthy than hanging out on a pro wrestling messageboard I am sure.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that just comes across as you purposefully misunderstanding my point and ignoring WWE's history for the last 2 decades for whatever reason. Please don't bother me with this crap if you can't even be honest about it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Asserting that I am purposely misunderstanding your point and being dishonest without really explaining why is pretty questionable behaviour, and I think says more about you than me. I think you need to be honest with yourself as to why you have made this so personal at every stage. Enjoy your evening.

Edit: When you talk about 'your point' you are somewhat in denial about how language works but I think you mean that the crux of your argument is that 'it doesn't matter anyway, since WWE won't change'. But this isn't where your argument started and I haven't really addressed that because you did infact make other points I was more interested in. Now if I was to address that, I could point out that talking about the last two decades is pretty much missing the point since you have to go back before that to a time when WWE had direct competition, and from that came the Attitude Era - which had its positive and negative traits but did lead to some pretty memorable TV and PPV matches, and a lot of money was made. So um yeah that point isn't very good either.

Edited by RunningFromAmerica
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, RunningFromAmerica said:

Asserting that I am purposely misunderstanding your point and being dishonest without really explaining why is pretty questionable behaviour, and I think says more about you than me. I think you need to be honest with yourself as to why you have made this so personal at every stage. Enjoy your evening.

Edit: When you talk about 'your point' you are somewhat in denial about how language works but I think you mean that the crux of your argument is that 'it doesn't matter anyway, since WWE won't change'. But this isn't where your argument started and I haven't really addressed that because you did infact make other points I was more interested in. Now if I was to address that, I could point out that talking about the last two decades is pretty much missing the point since you have to go back before that to a time when WWE had direct competition, and from that came the Attitude Era - which had its positive and negative traits but did lead to some pretty memorable TV and PPV matches, and a lot of money was made. So um yeah that point isn't very good either.

My point back when this started was that I doubt WWE as a whole sees AEW as major competition. Sure, you have some who probably do and want to fight tooth and nail, but as a whole its doubtful. They are the most financially successful they have ever been. TV ratings in general are down, and AEW hasn't really hit them where it hurts yet despite the demo arguments. 

My other point in not getting why people think competition will make WWE better still stands. Most go back and admit the Attitude era was crap in a lot of ways as it was mostly crash tv. The last two decades still provided memorable moments and matches.  Lots of money was still made, and the past few years of big tv contracts has probably done nothing to humble them enough to make them rethink their strategy. I mean by your own thought process here WWE should already be better than it is if they are taking AEW more seriously as competition.

As to asserting you purposely misunderstanding my points. Its rather hard not to as I explained them back then. Its also hard not to see it as personal when you are the one who specifically called me out to bring this shit back up. To claim you have no stake or that it shouldn't matter is kind of bullshit as you are the one bothering me about in the first damn place.

Edited by Eivion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Ultimately what really matters is whether Vince cares or not, and the intel we have is that yes he really does and he's gone head-to-head so that AEW doesn't outdraw his Smackdown (or the second hour) in the key demo.

2. Ultimately we won't know for sure if AEW is hitting them financially until WWE's TV rights deals some up for renewal. 

3. You are comparing 20 years to 5, and even that is besides the point as what really matters is what was happening before that was a Wrestling Plumber vs Wrestling Garbageman.

4. I was not purposely misunderstanding your points at all, I was just focussing on the particular point that interest me. I'm allowed to do that.

5. I think if you look back at those posts from a few weeks ago you were really being quite aggy, and so you shouldn't be surprised to get called on it when WWE starts doing weird 30 minute extensions not to look bad vs AEW on World Series nights.

6. Your last sentence really makes no sense, and is just needlessly personalising things. It's not bullshit to ask if an opinion is still your opinion, and what's kind of bullshit is you quite obviously rowing back on it after being so aggy about it a few weeks ago, whilst refusing to really acknowledge it. Ok, we're done now mos def.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you basically just admitted you did do this to be an ass because you thought I was being aggy. So yeah it was personal. There is a difference between asking a question out of curiosity and going back to a topic you thought got heated just to annoy someone by hoping they had egg on their face and would admit they were wrong.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...