Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

Raw 3-2-15


MGFanJay

Recommended Posts

 

 

But it's not really presented as a big deal.  It's not being presented as "Wade Barrett is a terrible wrestler, he's losing to all these guys", so much as "Wade Barrett is being distracted by all the insanity around him and is losing because of it".  

 

As much as it's an internet talking point, WWE wrestlers aren't really hurt by wins/losses.

 

This is just wrong, and short-sighted. A year ago Brock pinning Taker at WrestleMania stunned everyone watching into silence because Taker's win-loss record was so well protected, and Brock beating him and then Cena the way he did rebuilt him as an unstoppable monster after ill-advised 50/50 booking with HHH and Punk. Now they're trying to legitimize Reigns as a main eventer using a win over Brock.

 

Just because Bryan and Sandow's careers weren't over doesn't mean those losses didn't hurt them. Remember that Sandow was a former MITB winner before all that - he is far below where he was.

 

To be fair, though, the Undertaker thing was a complete fluke that they lucked into by accident.  If his record had been 10-1 or something nobody would have bought it.  It's also a singular thing that worked for just one wrestler, and will never be anything like it (Anyone remember Edge's "streak"?).  I mean, by the same token you can say "No wrestler should ever shoot lightning and be repeatedly "killed" in storylines and have a complicated family backstory that includes a brother who's two years his junior but fathered by his only 13 years older manager" to which someone can fire back "But it worked for the Undertaker!"  

 

And I'm not trying to say wins-losses are meaningless, I don't mean all match outcomes are meaningless.  You can build somebody up by a big win, or change their character by a big loss, and I totally believe that.  But random losses on Raw/Smackdown in the middle of the card aren't going to influence most fans.  What I'm trying to say is if Wade Barrett wins the big ladder match at WM, or gets crushed off a ladder; or hits himself in the face with a ladder and knocks himself out, it's a big stage, people are going to remember that and you can build up or change his character accordingly, but nobody really cares in the audience if he loses a few non-title Raw or Smackdown matches.  I mean, Jack Swagger has not even come close to defeating Rusev once, he's been crushed by him repeatedly, but the audience still pops when he comes out to challenge him, because the random wins or losses don't really matter.  Would he be more over if he beat Rusev? Sure.  But the frequent losses haven't really hurt him, the crowd still pops for him, and still buys him as a challenger for Rusev, or a guy to take down another heel they dislike.

 

I think Sandow's reactions are way louder and better now than they ever were when he had the MITB suitcase.  Aside from the automatic pop you get for teasing a cash-in (And everyone gets that...even The Miz!), he wasn't demonstrably more over than he is now, and will be when he finally turns on the Miz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He really does need new gear. I still think he's going to have to go shirtless before he can be seen as a real top guy, just because that's how EVERY top guy in WWE has always wrestled and guys who wear shirts and vests and other gear are midcard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Undertaker?   He wore a shirt much of his career.   Foley?

Undertaker and Foley I didn't think about. Bret & Diesel don't count because they were wearing wrestling singlets not a damn flak jacket. The vest just feels like one of those things guys evolve out of once they go from midcard to main event. And I say this as a guy who has never been on the Hate Roman bandwagon and have been totally ok with them wanting to make him the next top guy. I just think they have done a shitty job. They have done a much better job protecting Rusev than Roman Reigns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reigns wears the Flak jacket and baggy trousers to hide the fact that his chest and legs are skinnier than you'd think. Put him in trunks and nobody buys him as a Powerhouse.

 

As someone who's always been very high on the fact that crowd participation is an important part of wrestling and fans should (for the most part) be able to cheer and boo however they want and have the right to show displeasure to workers being shoved down their throat, the Jersey crowd for Cena/Axel annoyed the living bejesus out of me. To the point I had the change the channel in disgust. It wasn't showing the WWE what they wanted, it was honestly just them being dicks for the sake of being dicks.

 

 

The company reaps what the company sows. You can't antagonise your audience for months years decades and not expect them to antagonise you back from time to time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, though, the Undertaker thing was a complete fluke that they lucked into by accident. If his record had been 10-1 or something nobody would have bought it. It's also a singular thing that worked for just one wrestler, and will never be anything like it (Anyone remember Edge's "streak"?). I mean, by the same token you can say "No wrestler should ever shoot lightning and be repeatedly "killed" in storylines and have a complicated family backstory that includes a brother who's two years his junior but fathered by his only 13 years older manager" to which someone can fire back "But it worked for the Undertaker!"

Yes, *lightning from the fingertips* is the same as a well-built win-loss record. Point conceded.

The only reason another streak angle couldn't happen is they don't have the patience or faith in anyone to build it up. I would have sworn off wrestling forever if they had tried to do that with fucking Edge of all people, but it could have been done.

And I'm not trying to say wins-losses are meaningless, I don't mean all match outcomes are meaningless. You can build somebody up by a big win, or change their character by a big loss, and I totally believe that. But random losses on Raw/Smackdown in the middle of the card aren't going to influence most fans.

This just isn't true. You think Rusev would be as over as he is if he had been trading wins with Swagger, Henry, and Show on his way to get to Cena? Ridiculous.

I mean, Jack Swagger has not even come close to defeating Rusev once, he's been crushed by him repeatedly, but the audience still pops when he comes out to challenge him, because the random wins or losses don't really matter. Would he be more over if he beat Rusev? Sure. But the frequent losses haven't really hurt him, the crowd still pops for him, and still buys him as a challenger for Rusev, or a guy to take down another heel they dislike.

The crowd cheering for a guy with a catchphrase wrapped in the American flag doesn't mean they buy that he's going to beat anyone. He hasn't had a notable victory since his arrest. Nobody sees Jack Swagger now and thinks he's going out there to win a match unless he's wrestling Titus on Main Event or something. Nobody expects a Jack Swagger storyline anytime soon. He's a JTTS. *Because he never wins.*

He'd be more over if he had beaten Rusev, yeah, but more importantly, Rusev would be less over. The whole point of Rusev's buildup is that nobody could beat him and it's made him huge. If he's dropping falls to Big E on SmackDown, he has to be rehabbed extensively to be bought as a threat to Cena.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm biased with regards to Curtis Axel, but it's cool to see him get some traction with his current character.  Was always a huge Mr. Perfect fan, plus Joe Hennig trained at Harley Race's WLW in the beginning and I saw his sister Amy wrestle in my area a few times.  Will never get why he didn't just use the Perfectplex as his finisher, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm biased with regards to Curtis Axel, but it's cool to see him get some traction with his current character.  Was always a huge Mr. Perfect fan, plus Joe Hennig trained at Harley Race's WLW in the beginning and I saw his sister Amy wrestle in my area a few times.  Will never get why he didn't just use the Perfectplex as his finisher, though.

 

I assume it's the same reason, why he wasn't able to use his own surname. He was probably told he had to earn it first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume it's the same reason, why he wasn't able to use his own surname. He was probably told he had to earn it first.

 

I would assume it has more to do with WWE wanting to own the rights to Michael McGillicitty/Curtis Axel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re:  the fan participation and/or consumer revolt:

 

I've been paying more attention to internet chatter about wrestling in the wake of the Roman Reigns backlash than I have in years (both here on the board and podcasts/columns, etc.) even though I haven't started actually watching again.

 

Maybe this has already been talked to death and I just wasn't following/participating with you guys but I'm just now getting around to what Lance Storm's assessment has been in his website column and on podcasts (especially the first 6 minutes of this), and his theory seems to make a lot of sense to me.

In summary "Nearly 20 years of WWE Bosses are evil and don't care what you think, then almost 2 years of WWE owners pick the face of the company not you fans, and now the guy they have win the Rumble and hope will be cheered, is someone most fans know is the chosen face of the company, handpicked by those very same Evil Owners. What do you expect to happen? It's almost a Pavlovian response at this point, isn't it? "

 

I think that's a good point as well, and something I was thinking of during Cena's segment on RAW where they were talking about how he "wasn't going to get a Mania match".  Same with Bryan. We all know they are both going to be in high profile matches at Mania, but for them to actually not be on the card is unthinkable....so why would WWE run angles where they would even suggest that Cena or Bryan (the top 2 babyfaces) won't be at Mania?  It just makes all of this seem like very blurred reality booking designed to rile up both casual and internet fans.  And contrary to what people here may believe, based on network subscriptions being up, and the heightened level of discussion over Bryan/Reigns/Cena/Lesnar etc it's definitely working. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reality is very blurred. Look at Stewart's promo. He makes the point that if Rollins truly was the chosen one then he would be headlining Mania. And he's right. 

 

The reason why Reigns is in the main event is because corporate, who they've spent that last decade plus telling the audience is a heel faction is behind him. 

 

I'll agree that it's working after seeing the mania numbers. Last I checked the Raw rating just dropped almost 10% from last week. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally got around to watching the show. REALLY enjoyed Bray's promo. Thought it was the best one he's done in months, in terms of being "Bray Wyatt" while still selling the angle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...