Pro Wrestling Discussion Thread **Spoilers Possible**

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

CM Punks chance to main event WM? Interesting by Meltzer.

Still would be 2nd on the card just because Vince would enjoy the shit out of pissing off Phil.

If I had to guess here's my top 3:

1) Stone Cold. It's in Texas and the timing seems weird as reports started coming out after Monday night and he was there to interview Big Show (which might have been my favorite so far because it was a straight shoot on everyone). You could have Stone Cold wrestle him on Sunday and then have the podcast the following Monday Night after RAW.

2) Shawn Michaels. Once again, would it be the big draw in Texas? Let's just forget that he had a career match. Would feel rushed but they've probably set up with some Michael talking to HHH and Undertaker gets pissed he is there and offers to finish him off for good. Could see DX corner vs Brothers of Destruction corner like NWO v DX last year.

3) Kurt Angle. 99% sure he didn't sign with TNA to wrestle, just as an ambassador. Think he has match with Rey Mysterio coming up. IF (and this is a huge if) they could keep this a secret until Mania could there be a bigger pop minus Shane or Punk coming back?

[Toddzilla]

It's gotta be Angle

[JonInMiddleGA]

Someone remind me .... is there a historical context for an Angle/Taker match?

[SirFozzie]

This is my favorite. Five years ago.

The Most Illegal Move in the History of Wrestling - YouTube

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Someone remind me .... is there a historical context for an Angle/Taker match?

Rumor a long time ago was the Undertaker wanted to main event Mania versus Angle but Vince refused to let it happen because he felt the Undertaker's streak was more important. Supposedly Taker didn't care about the streak and wanted the big match since he usually got booked in horrible matches.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

This is my favorite. Five years ago.

The Most Illegal Move in the History of Wrestling - YouTube

I like this one.



Joey Ryan uses his penis to win a test of strength over Danshoku Dino at DDT Pro Wrestling! - YouTube

[murrayyyyy]

Shocked we made it this far without mention of Kenny Omega in his toughest match ever against Yoshihiko.

DDT- Kenny Omega VS. YOSHIHIKO_土豆_高清视频在线观看

[SirFozzie]

... Ok, you force me to bring out the strangest thing regarding Kenny Omega.

There was a cross promotion between DDT and STAR*DOM saw Kenny Omega take on Haruka in an exhibition battle.

The strange thing was

A) That Haruka was female.
B) That Haruka was NINE YEARS OLD.

Kenny Omega vs 9 Year Old Haruka - YouTube

edit: Apparently, four years later, Haruka has challenged Omega to a rematch:

https://twitter.com/kennyomegamanx/s...15118803013633

[murrayyyyy]

March 14th RAW is in Pittsburgh? Can I change my order?

[molson]

Angle can still work a great match but I wonder if he could get cleared by the WWE. Though, he seems to be in a much better place than he was a view years ago, so I think it'd just be the "his neck and head are fucked" concern v. "Vince doesn't want an Olympic medalist dropping dead on his watch" which apparently was the reason for cutting him lose.

Edit: I also think Cena could end up being the guy relatively last-second if he miraculously recovers months ahead of schedule (which he's done before.)

[murrayyyyy]

[CU Tiger]

Austin?
Michales?
Angle?

Nope Shane McMahon... Wtf.

I guess the good news is this guarantees another taker wrestlemania, cause no way he goes out wrestling Shane

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Austin?
Michales?
Angle?

Nope Shane McMahon... Wtf.

I guess the good news is this guarantees another taker wrestlemania, cause no way he goes out wrestling Shane

At least it has an interesting story behind it. More than I can say about most of the general matchups lately.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Austin?
Michales?
Angle?

Nope Shane McMahon... Wtf.

I guess the good news is this guarantees another taker wrestlemania, cause no way he goes out wrestling Shane

I mean, we can all agree that this match isn't actually happening, right?

Shane coming back was a great surprise, but having him face Taker just doesn't work. Your talking about a 50-year-old who can barely move against a 40-something non-wrestler. The match would be awful, and we'd all just be waiting for Shane to pull off some ridiculous stunt that would have a decent chance of legit injuring one or both of them.

Plus, the whole thing makes no sense, even by WWE standards. Taker isn't a bad guy, so why would he help Vince? And considering he's almost unbeatable at Mania, he should destroy Shane easily, except that they're both good guys, so he can't. And if Shane loses, the stipulation was pointless, but if he wins, then Taker's Mania aura is basically dead forever, and it ended at the hands of the boss's kid.

Luckily we have six weeks or whatever for them to bait-and-switch to something else. My guess is they do something where Shane gets to pick Taker's opponent, maybe even as a surprise at the PPV, since that gives Cena time to make his miracle comeback (or, if he can't go, you can go get Angle or whoever). Or maybe we find out Shane and Taker were already aligned and Vince finds the opponent, which would explain why Shane basically had no reaction to the idea of facing him.

Or maybe the message here is that WWE stars are so scary that middle aged executives aren't remotely afraid of fighting them. I guess that works too.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

I mean, we can all agree that this match isn't actually happening, right?

I would agree ... but in the back of my mind I seem to recall a number of workers talking over the years about how much respect they have for both Shane's ability & willingness to do pretty much anything in a match.

I've gotten the impression that he's at least regarded better than virtually all non-wrestlers & probably better than some full-time workers.

It still feels highly unlikely ... but I wouldn't say it's 100% absolutely no.

[jbergey22]

Its HIAC right? Shanes type of match.

I cant see that type of match for Angle or HBK right now. So unless it is Austin/UT the match type would fit the situation.

[molson]

Shane is a great WWE-style main event performer. He's older, but he was never a great athlete anyway. I'm they will both be protected, they'll be some sports entertainment shenanigans, probably some interference, and lots of violence. And I do think Shane will work the match unless Cena can come back in time.

[Toddzilla]

any match where there is no possibility for a DQ pretty much opens it up for anyone and everyone becoming involved

[molson]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I would agree ... but in the back of my mind I seem to recall a number of workers talking over the years about how much respect they have for both Shane's ability & willingness to do pretty much anything in a match.

Kurt Angle loves him and was marking out on twitter last night when he came back. That Angle v. Shane match from around 2001 was ridiculous.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

I mean, we can all agree that this match isn't actually happening, right?

Shane coming back was a great surprise, but having him face Taker just doesn't work. Your talking about a 50-year-old who can barely move against a 40-something non-wrestler. The match would be awful, and we'd all just be waiting for Shane to pull off some ridiculous stunt that would have a decent chance of legit injuring one or both of them.

Plus, the whole thing makes no sense, even by WWE standards. Taker isn't a bad guy, so why would he help Vince? And considering he's almost unbeatable at Mania, he should destroy Shane easily, except that they're both good guys, so he can't. And if Shane loses, the stipulation was pointless, but if he wins, then Taker's Mania aura is basically dead forever, and it ended at the hands of the boss's kid.

Luckily we have six weeks or whatever for them to bait-and-switch to something else. My guess is they do something where Shane gets to pick Taker's opponent, maybe even as a surprise at the PPV, since that gives Cena time to make his miracle comeback (or, if he can't go, you can go get Angle or whoever). Or maybe we find out Shane and Taker were already aligned and Vince finds the opponent, which would explain why Shane basically had no reaction to the idea of facing him.

Or maybe the message here is that WWE stars are so scary that middle aged executives aren't remotely afraid of fighting them. I guess that works too.

I think it'll happen but just have a lot of interference and shennanigans. Wouldn't be surprised if this is a spot they use Austin in to save the day or something. Or maybe Taker beats the tar out of everyone and lays down at the end for the good of the company.

[RainMaker]

The HHH-Reigns feud/match is going to be high on the unintentional comedy scale. Raws leading up to Wrestlemania are in cities with smarkier crowds that will boo Reigns and cheer HHH. And that Wrestlemania crowd is likely going to be behind HHH.

If Reigns wins and they maintain the babyface persona it will get ugly.

[PilotMan]

I missed the whole Shane era. When I saw him it was before he started working in the ring and I always had the impression that he was just out there because his old man had done it and he needed to do it in order to get some ring cred. Can someone point me to anything that shows his skill or psychology in the ring? I still just see him as the bosses kid who is always trying too hard.

[molson]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I missed the whole Shane era. When I saw him it was before he started working in the ring and I always had the impression that he was just out there because his old man had done it and he needed to do it in order to get some ring cred. Can someone point me to anything that shows his skill or psychology in the ring? I still just see him as the bosses kid who is always trying too hard.

His match V. Kurt Angle at King of the Ring 2001 is definitely his most famous one. There's some very cringe-worthy violence and head trauma, especially in hindsight. Shane v. Vince at Mania 17 is probably the other big one that shows off that "WWE Main event style" that worked so well for them and that they can break out on occasion with the right storyline now - and it doesn't require great wrestling.

His feud with Kane in 2003 was goofy, but I remember the matches (looking it up now, at Survivor Series and Unforgiven) were pretty entertaining too.

And really, he was a pretty huge part of the late-attitude era beyond those matches, he wrestled a ton, was always in the big storylines, cut good promos, and is pretty well-remembered for the beatings he was willing to take and his crazy high-risk spots. If you check out any of those matches on the network if you have it, make sure you get in a few minutes before the match is tagged to see the feud recaps packages, etc.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I missed the whole Shane era. When I saw him it was before he started working in the ring and I always had the impression that he was just out there because his old man had done it and he needed to do it in order to get some ring cred. Can someone point me to anything that shows his skill or psychology in the ring? I still just see him as the bosses kid who is always trying too hard.

I'm not sure anyone is saying that Shane is a great technical wrestler, but his willingness to sacrifice his health and well being and go balls out led people to appreciate his efforts. Best example would probably be his match against Angle at KOTR. There are others though that argue the reason he can take such big bumps is that he works such a limited schedule and in turn it is a slight to the rest of the regular talent.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

There are others though that argue the reason he can take such big bumps is that he works such a limited schedule and in turn it is a slight to the rest of the regular talent.

Then again, we're talking about him working against a guy who now works once a year ... for a company where the longest title reign in the past five years (since CM Punk) is owned a part-timer.

[RainMaker]

Shane Mcmahon jump from Titantron - YouTube

[Suicane75]

This has got to be a swerve, or the first WM promoted as a comedy. Maybe 3rd from the top is Ziggler doing a 10 minute set.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

There are others though that argue the reason he can take such big bumps is that he works such a limited schedule and in turn it is a slight to the rest of the regular talent.

Yeah, I remember reading somewhere that some of the full-time guys resented his big spots. They figured he could grab the spotlight with his crazy stunts and then have plenty of time off and full medical benefits, while they knew if they got hurt they'd be off the road and maybe out of a job.

I still don't understand why they'd bring him back for the Undertaker match. Put him in the exact same angle, but against Sheamus or Del Rio. Not only would it make actually sense in terms of the storyline, but you get a semi-main event match with real stakes out of a guy nobody really cares about. And you save your big Taker match for someone else.

[molson]

I want more part-time guys. Sheamus wrestles on TV and PPV over 100 times a year. That's the thing I dislike about the modern product, the staleness of the roster and the over-exposure of everyone on it. The last thing I'd want Mania to be is matches with the same guys we see the other 100+ shows a year. Undertaker v. Sheamus would be an OK match, but Shane v. Undertaker sends me the signal that this will be over-the-top sports entertainment shenanigan-fest that we don't see every week, and I want to see at least one match like that at every big show.

[PilotMan]

Watched the Angle/Shane match from this morning and the thing that stood out besides unbreakable glass, is that Shane is a pretty athletic guy. He played the superfan type gimmick where he can use other guys finishers and he was able to pull off some of the high spots really well. I can see where he and Taker could have a hot match.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by molson

I want more part-time guys. Sheamus wrestles on TV and PPV over 100 times a year. That's the thing I dislike about the modern product, the staleness of the roster and the over-exposure of everyone on it. The last thing I'd want Mania to be is matches with the same guys we see the other 100+ shows a year. Undertaker v. Sheamus would be an OK match, but Shane v. Undertaker sends me the signal that this will be over-the-top sports entertainment shenanigan-fest that we don't see every week, and I want to see at least one match like that at every big show.

I don't think it's over exposure as much as it's an inability to use the roster correctly. The Wyatt family has 1 title between the 4 of them and they are the "monsters"? You have a roster of 40-50 healthy guys and you can only figure out something for 10 people. What's even worse is that the WWE is .500 matches. You win today, I win tomorrow on TV. I think this is the bigger problem with the WWE.

[molson]

When everyone wrestles 100+ times a year, and they only wrestler other main roster guys, everybody is going to lose a lot except for the very top protected guys. I don't think it's statistically possible to have more than 10 guys winning the vast majority of their matches.

I read many more complaints about guys losing too much than winning too much. But for every win, there has to be a loss. There's just SO many losses over a year to distribute on the roster. People complain about "50/50" booking, so does that mean there should be more losses distributed to the bottom, and more wins given to the top guys? Guys like Neville, Ziggler, and Jericho are kind of semi-protected now because they don't have to lose ALL the time, but if they didn't get occasional wins, they'd be total jobbers. I think a well-balanced roster needs some guys like that - who will win 1 out of 3 against AJ Styles or Kevin Owens instead of 0 out of 3.

Promotions used to get around this numbers problem with jobber squash matches and more roster fluidity. Both of which are taboo now for some reason. Jobber squashes can be fun and they increase everyone's win %. And when guys leave the company more often (usually taking losing records with them), new guys can come in without that history of losing on TV and win most of their matches for a while. Jobber squashes and roster fluidity create the illusion that your current roster guys win more often than they lose. But when it's basically the same roster, year after year, and everyone has lost dozens and dozens of times on TV (or more), and more than half your roster necessarily loses most of their matches (because of math), everybody is less of a star.

Edit: And I don't think any promotion could stay fresh with the WWE's schedule and static roster. If the stars of New Japan or Ring of Honor all wrestled 100+ times on TV a year, necessarily against the same opponents over and over again, year after year (instead of the new guys that those promotions bring in for tours), it'd get stale at some point. Especially if they didn't do any "50/50" booking and the same guys won every match.

[PilotMan]

I used to love the Demolition jobber squash matches.

[CU Tiger]

Interesting point I havent read yet.

Shane claims to have something on Vince and wants Raw.
Vince said specifically "I'll give you what you want if you agree to 1 more match."

He doesn't say "If you win 1 more match"

Just wonder if that doesnt set up a whole new angle. Taker dominates and Shane becomes the absentee GM and we have an old story line reborn.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by molson

Undertaker v. Sheamus would be an OK match

Yeah, sorry, I didn't write that very clearly. I meant you do Shane vs. Sheamus (or whoever).

[molson]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

Yeah, sorry, I didn't write that very clearly. I meant you do Shane vs. Sheamus (or whoever).

Oh, OK, big difference. Ya, Shane v. anybody is intriguing for me, just because he's something different. Though I do wonder what Undertaker's take on all of this is going to be, I guess he's supposed to be on RAW next week. I'd love to see more twists and turns before Mania - instead of what we've had the last 10-15 years, which is everything locked in by February and then a lot of stalling until Mania.

[murrayyyyy]

But they have a roster full of jobbers by using 50/50 wrestling. Ignoring the fact that the Main title holder didn't wrestle on the PPV and you used the Tag Team champs/Authority goons in a segment to promote the Edge and Christian show. That's 8 of your top tier one or two guys not participating. You then set up a WTF 6 man tag with Ryback-Show-Kane against everyone except Wyatt. That match is a prime example of 50/50 wrestling as they lost the next night in match 2.0 on RAW.

There were 5 men's matches on the PPV. Do you believe that the WWE is only that deep right now or that lazy right now. It has to be too lazy. One of hte matches involved guys who are basically jobbers in Social whaterever vs R-Truth and Goldust.

Here's a list of guys who they could job or help to build up singles/tag teams to keep things fresh on the roster right now with new matchups:

Usos, Dudleys, Neville, Breeze, Sin Cara, Henry, Swagger, O'Neil, Stardust, Konner, Vicktor, Goldust, Miz, R-Truth, social outcast (4), Darren Young, Los Matadors, Fandango, Sandow and Ryder.

This leaves "top level":
Brock, Taker, HHH, (cena, seth, Orton hurt), Reigns, Ambrose, Owens, Wyatt family (4), New Day (3), Styles, Owens, Jericho, Kalisto, Zigz, Kane, Ryback, Show and League of Nations (4).

That's 25 top level guys and they can't figure out how to keep a 3 hour show that starts off with 20 of talking fresh? That's on them. That's not even counting the 26 guys or the 3 major injured guys. Or the Divas division which has to have about a dozen women on the roster. Over 70 people and that is the PPV/road to Mania RAW you got. Repeat matches...

[molson]

But without "50/50" booking, either the Wyatt's or Show/Kane/Ryback has to dominate that feud. So one of those groups isn't in your "top level" anymore if they lose every match.

And that's OK, if the company wants to really make a decision to push one of those groups and demote the other. And there are feuds where that's a good thing to do (especially if one of the sides is leaving the company or turning heel). But if it's every time, or almost every time, you're demoting lots of guys that you might need later. I think there'd be a lot more complaints about guys being "buried" if the feuds were one-sided. Guys like the Wyatts, Jericho, Kane, Ryback, Owens, etc, would have to lose a lot more often, which would damage their value as "top level" guys. That's why wrestling promotions used to utilize a lot more cheating/count-outs/run-ins than they do now. Decisive wins meant more when they were more rare.

[molson]

That's 25 top level guys and they can't figure out how to keep a 3 hour show that starts off with 20 of talking fresh?>

3 hours every week (plus Smackdown and PPVs) is way too much to stay fresh. Even when you play TEW you can see how quickly things get repetitive unless you're always bringing in new talent.

How many guys can say, Dean Ambrose really feud with that he hasn't already? Most are way below him. With less 50/50 booking, even more guys would be way below him, because more of the Wyatt/Ryback types would be losing 1-sided feuds. And those 1-sided feuds make it harder to suddenly "promote" guys into an Ambrose feud.

Before the static roster era, promoters would bring in new guys specifically to feud with guys they had, to keep things fresh. When it's a static roster, everything has to be recycled. It's one weird example of how there was seemingly more ADD in pro wrestling years ago, where promoters were constantly worried about guys overstaying their welcome. Now, a guy like Ziggler can be on the roster almost 10 years, and wrestle literally hundreds of TV/PPV matches, against mostly the same guys, over and over again. Ideally, IMO, he would have gone away for a few years in there so he could come back more fresh. Like get rid of a guy with a losing record, and bring in Ziggler who would win a bunch at first, and then you have the illusion that the main roster guys win more than they lose, when in reality, with a static roster, the overall record has to be .500.

[JonInMiddleGA]

[quote=PilotMan;3085411 where he can use other guys finishers [/QUOTE]

Did I dream it or wasn't Shane involved with MMA in some capacity (office, not in-ring) during his absence?

Could that lead to using Taker's MMA choke finisher against him?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

Even when you play TEW you can see how quickly things get repetitive unless you're always bringing in new talent.

This, way more than people might think at first blush.

I have something around 125 guys on the main roster alone with my long-running sandbox game, and I acquire everybody with a pulse ... and still face persistent issues with the feeling of very stale booking.

The real-life WWE problem, in part, is that quite a few of the undercard guys that Murrayyyy mentioned simply aren't interesting enough to nearly enough people to put on Raw. And with ratings being an issue for long stretches over the past couple (several?) years, the margin for error is slimmer than it used to be, even for them.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

The real-life WWE problem, in part, is that quite a few of the undercard guys that Murrayyyy mentioned simply aren't interesting enough to nearly enough people to put on Raw. And with ratings being an issue for long stretches over the past couple (several?) years, the margin for error is slimmer than it used to be, even for them.

But how can they be interesting if they are never put on TV? They spent almost on hour with the Shane thing and I haven't heard anyone who says god I want to see him wrestler.

Personally you know what I was a tad bit excited about coming out of the PPV? I thought New Day-League of Nations was on for Mania. They came out and did their insult thing and obviously the League would jump them the next night on RAW because this is what would have happened in Mid-South, NWA, WWF... but nope. Neville and the Lucha Dragons... The WWE had a chance for something fresh going into Mania and shit on it with the same thing different week. I'm almost 99% sure it's going to be Usos-New Day @ Mania.

To me the Summer of Cena was fun. It gave different people the chance to wrestle Cena and perform on a new stage and it worked. I looked it up and here's the list (and why I thought it was refreshing): Ambrose, Stardust, Barrett, Kane, Zayn, Neville, Ryder, Cesaro, Rusev, Woods, Big E, Zigs (Owens and ADR have to be in that list somewhere also). That took place for 5 months. It didn't have to be top guys ever week but it was refreshing instead of Orton-Sheamus for the 1000th time.

If the WWE did this with let's say their US and Inter title holders then the show wouldn't seem stale (or at least to me). The roster is big enough to make this happen.

[Suicane75]

They've so ingrained their business model that I doubt they'll change unless things get cataclysmic. It'd be nice if they turned Smackdown into NXT and did an honest to goodness brand extension. Giving wrestlers 3-4 months off each year wouldn't be a bad thing either.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

But how can they be interesting if they are never put on TV?

Some of them, honestly, no amount of TV is ever going to make them more than they are. And that's basically roster filler.

They spent almost on hour with the Shane thing and I haven't heard anyone who says god I want to see him wrestler.

This is one of the problems WWE (or any company) has today: there's hardly anyone who says "I want to see him wrestle" about ANYBODY. Aside from the IWC/smarks, the average viewer doesn't really seem to give a crap who is in the ring or what they do.

I don't know if there IS "an answer" to be honest (this was an entire lunch time conversation with my home-from-school-sick kid today).

We don't have uber main eventers 'cause of .500 booking ... but who really wants a return to winning streaks built on beating jobbers on TV?

We don't have enough TV time to go around because rosters are too large ... but we complain about stale booking & repeat matchups.

We complain that everyone takes losses ... but where's the fun in never being surprised by an outcome?

My own thought, which might not work any better nor would it play well in the back, is that the mention of the Japanese touring model earlier might be the route to try. Put a limited number of people on TV in key spots on the card for 2-3 month cycles. Let them work limited house shows, fill those house shows (which feel utterly disconnected from TV to me anyway) with the guys not doing TV. Half the TV roster sticks around for the next cycle, swap in fresh(er) faces with a mixture of established names brought back from the house show roster and maybe a couple of guys who stood out in the midcard/filler matches during the last cycle. Repeat.

And even with THAT approach, a year or so goes before you're right back into the same matches we feel like we've already seen enough times.

Aside from that grander strategy thought I want to throw in one other thing that came up in my household discussion. The reaction to Reigns should probably be a warning to the WWE, because it isn't just about Reigns -- he doesn't suck nearly bad enough to draw the heat he's getting, he just doesn't -- the fans could (and likely would) shit on any number of guys the exact same way. Today's Roman Reigns could be Kevin Owens/Sammy Zayn/et al tomorrow.

edit to add: My closing thought in the household discussion was that we're probably lucky that we haven't returned full blast to the "cartoon days". And given the bizarre nature of the Lucha Underground premise yet it's getting decent response from the IWC, maybe that's what's next.

[Toddzilla]

The IWC

Still waiting for Johnny B. Badd to thrown them an R.S.P-W. frisbee

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Some of them, honestly, no amount of TV is ever going to make them more than they are. And that's basically roster filler.

This is one of the problems WWE (or any company) has today: there's hardly anyone who says "I want to see him wrestle" about ANYBODY. Aside from the IWC/smarks, the average viewer doesn't really seem to give a crap who is in the ring or what they do.

But the same can be said back in "the day". If your day was Georgia Championship then you know about "Hard Work" or "Jet riding" or "Space mountain" etc...

If your day was NAO and DX or Stone Cold and the Rock it was still is mostly about what they did on the mic. They had a lot more backstage segments which could be pre-taped but they seem to have gotten away from that.

Now it's all very scripted G rated. I will say it was weird to have an F Bomb and blood (even though in packet form) on a RAW. Is it a sign of them giving up and starting a new era?

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

My closing thought in the household discussion was that we're probably lucky that we haven't returned full blast to the "cartoon days". And given the bizarre nature of the Lucha Underground premise yet it's getting decent response from the IWC, maybe that's what's next.

I do like LU but have to remind myself, it's a lot easier to edit things and have the one hour show compared to the 50 hours of WWE programming a week.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

But the same can be said back in "the day". If your day was Georgia Championship then you know about "Hard Work" or "Jet riding" or "Space mountain" etc...

You hit a key point on this in your next post: the sheer number of hours being produced today.

The other big difference from that era to this one is the length of the storylines then vs now. Some of the GCW era storylines played out like they were written by George R.R. Martin.

[CU Tiger]

One other key difference is the shrinking earth phenomenon.

My wrestling hey day was the late 80s NWA ->WCW.
i remember the first time I found a Pro Wrestling Illustrated magazine, and I bought quite a few. There were the arena report page. You would read recap after recap of the EXACT SAME RESULTS.

At first I thought it was some typo(I was probably 8). Then as you get older you realize they worked up a show and then took it around the country for a month to 20 venues. Rinse and repeat. Since these were televised you could always draw a live audience because no one knew it had happened last night in some town 100 miles away.

Today if you tried anything similar between message boards and smart phones and youtube it just wouldnt work. Then again I think the live audience is a very small, even insignificant< amount of the total revenue stream to the point where I dont think WWE would care beyond the marketing.

[molson]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

This, way more than people might think at first blush.

I have something around 125 guys on the main roster alone with my long-running sandbox game, and I acquire everybody with a pulse ... and still face persistent issues with the feeling of very stale booking.

Ha, ya, I remember when I had my TEW WCCW dynasty here, I booked a feud to go on for a few months, and someone asked me if there was a penalty for repeating matches. I thought, shit, I'd love to mix it up, but I only have about 4 guys over enough to give me a good main event match with David Von Erich, so I needed to stretch things out.

In real life, the obvious response is "build more stars", but the only way to do that is to have a midcard guy decisively win some feuds against those top 3-4 contenders you have, and knock them down a notch. And that can make things worse. Now instead of 3-4 top contenders, you have maybe 2 top contenders, one recently-elevated mid-carder who may or may not flop, and another guy who just lost a big feud to the mid-carder. Soon you have a 10-15 "top guys", all of whom have lost feuds to others in recent memory, and aren't really big stars.

Bringing in someone new was always the answer in TEW, and the answer in most of wrestling history. But that is really difficult for the WWE in modern times when they're the only big game in town. NXT could really help though.