FEBRUARY 2024 Wrestling Talk

[Nice Guy Eddie]

20 minutes ago, BloodyChamp said:

I read that it was a neighbor who heard Frankie, and tried to get in but couldn’t. Frankie was saying “let me out.” Ugh…but I promise that bird’s in heaven and will be there to tell Koko that it’s ok. I had a small animal for a long time and I won’t explain but I promise.

Fuck, it just got dusty in here...and who decided it was a good time to start chopping onions?

[Curt McGirt]

I could have really fucking done without reading that. Spoiler next time for something like that, please.

[username]

14 hours ago, Just Dave said:

Maybe it's a matter of personal preference, but I'm not sure I need to know why Bronson Reed and say, Giovanni Vinci are having a match.

It's funny this is the example you went with as Vinci has been in one of the sneaky best TV wrestling feuds of the current year that started off via a fluke accident/injury but was booked into a full on hate-filled feud. Most interesting stuff he's been involved in his whole run, that's what booking (and actually stopping matches due to head injuries) will get you

[Zakk_Sabbath]

10 hours ago, Curt McGirt said:

I could have really fucking done without reading that. Spoiler next time for something like that, please.

I would've tagged it "Dead bird, do not open"

[Just Dave]

9 hours ago, username said:

It's funny this is the example you went with as Vinci has been in one of the sneaky best TV wrestling feuds of the current year that started off via a fluke accident/injury but was booked into a full on hate-filled feud. Most interesting stuff he's been involved in his whole run, that's what booking (and actually stopping matches due to head injuries) will get you

I just went with the two first mid carders I could think of. I don't watch much WWE for this reason. I don't need overly elaborate stories for every match. There's some dudes from CMLL who take exception to how one of theirs was treated by Jon Moxley? Dope. Let's fight it out. That's all I need. And I like the booking of the Three Way title match because 1)it's (probably) gonna allow them to take the belt off of Joe without him dropping a fall and 2) It's another chapter in Hangman's "descent into madness." I'll take that over whatever inning we're in of Cody trying to "finish the story." Shit was played out six months ago. 

 

I guess I've just always watched wrestling with the mindset of someone who's competed most of his life. If I find myself in a game/match, winning is stakes enough. Winning feels awesome. Losing feels shitty. Like Billy Beane said; "I hate losing. I hate losing more than I like winning." You don't become a professional athlete without being wired that way. Unless you're Anthony Rendon. I'd be ok with the commentators saying something like "winning pays more than losing" or "these guys are both trying to get themselves in better position for a future title match," but the undercard is exactly that. Just like in MMA, there should be an inherent understanding that the goal of being in the under/mid card is getting out and into the main event. 

[Peck]

12 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Doesn't the story go that firefighters thought they heard a child inside, but it actually turned out to be Frankie? I don't want to think about what an awful death that bird suffered. 

 

Brain: The good news is that you could stick a skewer in him and have some kabobs.

Gorilla: WILL YOU STOP?

[Log]

A couple of my favorite all-time matches were just matches that got booked because it would be cool if the two wrestlers faced each other. Kobashi/Joe and Necro/Joe jump to mind immediately. Hell, in Japan there for a while, we got all kinds of great shit because someone decided that Hashimoto wrestling Kawada would be cool and stuff like that.

I'll take "Danielson vs random Japanese legend announced two days before a show" any day over "guys fighting because of a fake shampoo commercial snub" or "week 189 of one of the Usos feeling conflicted about Roman Reigns", personally.

[BloodyChamp]

31 minutes ago, Log said:

A couple of my favorite all-time matches were just matches that got booked because it would be cool if the two wrestlers faced each other. Kobashi/Joe and Necro/Joe jump to mind immediately. Hell, in Japan there for a while, we got all kinds of great shit because someone decided that Hashimoto wrestling Kawada would be cool and stuff like that.

I'll take "Danielson vs random Japanese legend announced two days before a show" any day over "guys fighting because of a fake shampoo commercial snub" or "week 189 of one of the Usos feeling conflicted about Roman Reigns", personally.

WCW could have got by filling 3 hours doing just this if the wrestlers were behind it. That would have involved selling and doing business so that obviously wasn’t happening. Furthermore it never occurred to anybody in the first place. Whenever it did happen it was for some other reason like to punish Flair or to give Goldberg another one for the streak.

[Log]

Oh, man. The cool shit that could've been done with that 96-98 or so with that WCW roster is mind-boggling. We got little tastes of it on Worldwide and Saturday Night, but the possibilities there were nearly endless.

[Godfrey]

1 hour ago, Log said:

I'll take "Danielson vs random Japanese legend announced two days before a show" any day over "guys fighting because of a fake shampoo commercial snub" or "week 189 of one of the Usos feeling conflicted about Roman Reigns", personally.

I get that totally. For me, a match like Danielson/Akiyama is just a waste. It could be so much more if you added any kind of build but instead it's just there. It wouldn't matter if Akiyama won, he basically doesn't count for the rankings. So why not give it something, ANYTHING, to make it matter just a little more? Audiences are way more forgiving if there is a compelling storyline to get the match over, then wrestlers don't have to kill themselves just to get a reaction

It's not a binary, if you don't like the WWE angles that doesn't mean having no angles is better. Also the shampoo angle was over 20 years ago so maybe let that one go

[Log]

I didn't say "no angles". It's just that sometimes a match can exist on it's own and be awesome.

The story can be in the match itself. Simple things like one guy in a tag being less experienced can make for a compelling story. Can he survive the more-experienced team? Can his partner carry enough of the load to pull out a win? Stuff like that. That's one thing that TK has done well, booking-wise, is to have a clear hierarchy in the promotion. That can lend itself to inter-match stories when there's really no lead-up to a match.

IMO, putting a legend like Akiyama in the ring with Danielson doesn't need an angle or a build. It's two all-time greats in the ring. That's enough for me. They can tell a story within the match and I find that compelling on it's own.

Yeah, the shampoo thing is old, but I think it's a good example of having a story just for the sake of having a story. I think when you get tv writers, etc. involved, it can over-complicate things. There was a period where WWE was forcing stories and it just didn't work.

[odessasteps]

On the other hand, does booking Danielson versus random legend do anything for your ratings for the casual fan? Or do we just presume there are no casual fans watching that TV show, especially the B and C show? 

[Log]

2 minutes ago, odessasteps said:

On the other hand, does booking Danielson versus random legend do anything for your ratings for the casual fan? Or do we just presume there are no casual fans watching that TV show, especially the B and C show? 

I could not give less of a shit about how the casual fan feels about that.

This isn't a shot at you odessasteps. I just cannot understand why I, as a wrestling fan, have to tie my fandom to the financial interests of the promotion I choose to watch.

I watch wrestling for my own enjoyment. That's literally the only reason. I would like the promotions I like to be successful and be able to continue to produce wrestling that I like so that I can watch it, but that's it.

I was happy to see Jun Akiyama on my tv wrestling Bryan Danielson on a random Saturday night, and that's as far as I go with it.

[Matt D]

So I wrote a bunch of words about the story. Not to cross-post my stuff but...

http://segundacaida.blogspot.com/2024/02/aew-five-fingers-of-death-219-225.html

Now, that said, I only spend about a paragraph on the match itself because the story isn't Danielson vs Akiyama, it's Danielson vs Kingston, and having an Akiyama/Danielson match is a cog in the machine. AEW does that a lot. Danielson vs Thatcher was a cog in the machine on the road to Danielson vs MJF, for instance. It's, to a degree, how AEW books outside talent when they're on the run up to a PPV and a PPV match. I think this was a pretty important match in the ongoing Danielson vs Kingston story, however.

Sometimes you will get a throwaway match, like Orange Cassidy vs Kushida or Shibata, for instance (and you could argue those were to help define the nature of the International Belt, but.. eh). This was different than that.

Does that mean that maybe there could have been a moment to build up Akiyama vs Danielson as a legendary dream match instead of a match that served a purpose of supporting two regulars about to wrestle? Yeah, probably, but they can come back to it now that there's some track laid. More than that, they're just running out of time with Danielson so there's only so much you can do and so many masters you can serve. I though that this navigated things pretty well, all things considered. It wasn't a cold match. It served a purpose. It was essential to the overarching story heading towards the PPV a week later.

Edited February 27 by Matt D

[Technico Support]

1 hour ago, Godfrey said:

I get that totally. For me, a match like Danielson/Akiyama is just a waste. It could be so much more if you added any kind of build but instead it's just there. It wouldn't matter if Akiyama won, he basically doesn't count for the rankings. So why not give it something, ANYTHING, to make it matter just a little more? Audiences are way more forgiving if there is a compelling storyline to get the match over, then wrestlers don't have to kill themselves just to get a reaction

It's not a binary, if you don't like the WWE angles that doesn't mean having no angles is better. Also the shampoo angle was over 20 years ago so maybe let that one go

The story was that Eddie, who is in a program with Danielson, idolizes Akiyama.  Danielson wants to beat one of Eddie's idols in front of him to fuck with him.

39 minutes ago, Log said:

I could not give less of a shit about how the casual fan feels about that.

This isn't a shot at you odessasteps. I just cannot understand why I, as a wrestling fan, have to tie my fandom to the financial interests of the promotion I choose to watch.

I watch wrestling for my own enjoyment. That's literally the only reason. I would like the promotions I like to be successful and be able to continue to produce wrestling that I like so that I can watch it, but that's it.

I was happy to see Jun Akiyama on my tv wrestling Bryan Danielson on a random Saturday night, and that's as far as I go with it.

THIS.  Holy shit I don't care about the business of this stuff.  Oh noes will someone who doesn't really like wrestling all that much not be attracted to this match?  Who cares?  How does it affect your enjoyment?   I think we're in a post-chasing-casuals era, anyway.  Just about every form of entertainment, except the NFL, is niche.  Is TK up all night worrying about grabbing viewers from the 4th or 5th Chicago-themed drama on broadcast networks?  This hand wringing over whether or not wrestling can gain "casuals," by people with no skin in the game, is kind of ridiculous.  Like if a good match airs on TV, is your enjoyment lessened because, in the back of your mind, you're worried that people watching CSI:NCIS:SVU aren't tuning in?  No offense intended toward anyone here.

Edited February 27 by Technico Support

[HarryArchieGus]

51 minutes ago, Log said:

I could not give less of a shit about how the casual fan feels about that.

This isn't a shot at you odessasteps. I just cannot understand why I, as a wrestling fan, have to tie my fandom to the financial interests of the promotion I choose to watch.

I watch wrestling for my own enjoyment. That's literally the only reason. I would like the promotions I like to be successful and be able to continue to produce wrestling that I like so that I can watch it, but that's it.

I was happy to see Jun Akiyama on my tv wrestling Bryan Danielson on a random Saturday night, and that's as far as I go with it.

Is Casual fans not another term for ‘lowest common denominator’? 

Im with you, and Technico’s on the money with that match’s more than adequate story, but I don’t think it would’ve hurt to put some production into a proper video package. A little more promotional sell would go a long way in AEDub. But the positive is, it’s happening more and more.

Edited February 27 by HarryArchieGus

[AxB]

The thing about the myth of the Casual Fan is, social media exists. And you can see when Wrestling things go viral outside of Wrestling Twitter.

And usually when that happens, it's a feat of outstanding athleticism, a woman wrestler looking very attractive, or deathmatch wrestling being gross. It's almost never a promo. Promos will go viral within Wrestling fandom, not beyond it.

[JLowe]

3 hours ago, Log said:

A couple of my favorite all-time matches were just matches that got booked because it would be cool if the two wrestlers faced each other. Kobashi/Joe and Necro/Joe jump to mind immediately. Hell, in Japan there for a while, we got all kinds of great shit because someone decided that Hashimoto wrestling Kawada would be cool and stuff like that.

I'll take "Danielson vs random Japanese legend announced two days before a show" any day over "guys fighting because of a fake shampoo commercial snub" or "week 189 of one of the Usos feeling conflicted about Roman Reigns", personally.

Whenever I hear about great WWE booking all I can think of is that last bit and how just about all their champions are on multi-year runs. 

[JLowe]

1 hour ago, Godfrey said:

I get that totally. For me, a match like Danielson/Akiyama is just a waste. It could be so much more if you added any kind of build but instead it's just there. It wouldn't matter if Akiyama won, he basically doesn't count for the rankings. So why not give it something, ANYTHING, to make it matter just a little more? Audiences are way more forgiving if there is a compelling storyline to get the match over, then wrestlers don't have to kill themselves just to get a reaction

It's not a binary, if you don't like the WWE angles that doesn't mean having no angles is better. Also the shampoo angle was over 20 years ago so maybe let that one go

The booking made it pretty clear, as did the announcers, that it was all about Danielson’s feud with Eddie Kingston. Yes it was announced out of the blue but by the end of the match it was well presented that Danielson wanted to show up Kingston by beating one of his idols, followed by the low blow and disrespect angle. Just because everything isn’t spelled out in weeks of 15-minute long promos doesn’t mean there aren’t stakes or angles.

[Technico Support]

11 minutes ago, AxB said:

The thing about the myth of the Casual Fan is, social media exists. And you can see when Wrestling things go viral outside of Wrestling Twitter.

And usually when that happens, it's a feat of outstanding athleticism, a woman wrestler looking very attractive, or deathmatch wrestling being gross. It's almost never a promo. Promos will go viral within Wrestling fandom, not beyond it.

Right, and I'd guess the number of those casuals who watch this week's viral wrestling video and then decide to start watching wrestling is somewhere between 0 and 1%, and I'm being charitable here. 

What makes new wrestling fans?  I don't even know.  Maybe parents who are fans passing it on to their kids?  Maybe little kids happening to see it and thinking it's cool?  But I find it hard to believe a fully-formed adult just sees guys pretending to fight and is like "damn, that's for me."  I know there a degree of self-loathing here but wrestling still hasn't shed the stigma it's always had enough to be at the point where someone can go from zero interest to watching weekly. 

[odessasteps]

 Not sure when long title reigns became a bad thing. I mean, the Roman one is silly, but having someone be a champion for more than six months or a year. Is it just the need for instant gratification for the short attention span generation of fans raised on the Attitude Era and later? 

[AxB]

9 minutes ago, Technico Support said:

 

What makes new wrestling fans?  I don't even know.  Maybe parents who are fans passing it on to their kids?  Maybe little kids happening to see it and thinking it's cool?  But I find it hard to believe a fully-formed adult just sees guys pretending to fight and is like "damn, that's for me." 

Boom periods make Wrestling fans. You ask a bunch of wrestling fans who their favourite wrestler is, and they'll give you a lot of different answers. But if you ask them who their first favourite Wrestler is, depending on what generation they're from, they'll probably say Hogan, Austin, or whoever was on top of their local territory where they grew up.

Unless they grew up outside of the USA/ Canada/ Europe post-WoS, obviously. Like thousands of Japanese women in their 50s were big Crush Gals fans, and a lot of them probably stopped watching once Chigusa retired (the first time).

[HarryArchieGus]

31 minutes ago, AxB said:

The thing about the myth of the Casual Fan is, social media exists. And you can see when Wrestling things go viral outside of Wrestling Twitter.

And usually when that happens, it's a feat of outstanding athleticism, a woman wrestler looking very attractive, or deathmatch wrestling being gross. It's almost never a promo. Promos will go viral within Wrestling fandom, not beyond it.

Looking at the Wednesday rating, it's safe to assume there are ppl watching Dynamite who don't automatically watch Saturday Collision. A well produced video package has good potential to add viewers in pretty much any content based industry. There's a reason every movie has a trailer running well ahead of the release. 

17 minutes ago, Technico Support said:

Right, and I'd guess the number of those casuals who watch this week's viral wrestling video and then decide to start watching wrestling is somewhere between 0 and 1%, and I'm being charitable here. 

What makes new wrestling fans?  I don't even know.  Maybe parents who are fans passing it on to their kids?  Maybe little kids happening to see it and thinking it's cool?  But I find it hard to believe a fully-formed adult just sees guys pretending to fight and is like "damn, that's for me."  I know there a degree of self-loathing here but wrestling still hasn't shed the stigma it's always had enough to be at the point where someone can go from zero interest to watching weekly. 

If WWE is any indication, which it oughtta be, catchphrases and repeating talking points ad nauseum might be part of the equation. 

[Cobra Commander]

1 hour ago, odessasteps said:

does booking Danielson versus random legend do anything for your ratings for the casual fan?

Collision ratings for last weekend would say “no” (385k viewers for Collision)

It’s very possible that the only way to make Collision work is to make Dynamite more popular too so that if Collision gets 50% of Dynamite’s ratings, it’s a higher number.

Feels like asking for people to watch a Saturday night show for a promotion whose main show is kinda stagnant in ratings is a tough ask.

[Matt D]

Also "random legend" being Akiyama probably isn't a draw for whatever a casual fan might be. They have Scott Taylor coaching now. I imagine Scotty 2 Hotty vs Danielson would have been more of a draw to "casual fans" than Akiyama was. But I don't know if this is a productive conversation really.