The General Wrestling Thread

[FedEx227]

At it's core though, I think his point is the biggest feds are terribly, terrible overbooked and overthought.

The basics of wrestling have been similar for the past 90 years, it's basic storytelling at it's core.

 

[BigBiss]

At it's core though, I think his point is the biggest feds are terribly, terrible overbooked and overthought.

The basics of wrestling have been similar for the past 90 years, it's basic storytelling at it's core.

that we can agree on, there is a fine line between boring booking and overbooking though

 

[FedEx227]

I think both organizations are overbooking.

WWE has a team of soap opera writers dissecting every minute of angles, promos, personalities, characters, etc. while at the same time Vinny Mac is changing every single thing 15 times.

TNA well c'mon it's Russo.

 

[EmpireWF]

WWE's even steven booking doesn't help matters, either.

 

[adembroski]

WWE's even steven booking doesn't help matters, either.

They're damned if they do, damned if they don't. Use shenanigans to protect the loser, it's even-steven booking and the E is afraid of clean wins. When someone does go over clean, the reaction is that the loser's buried and might as well be off TV for a month.

Example; classic formula for a 3-way feud is to have a paper-rock-scissors round robin... i.e. Cena beats Punk, Punk beats ADR, ADR beats Cena, all on consecutive nights leading into the PPV. You couldn't do that because after the FIRST friggin' show, "PUNK GOT BURIED!!!!"

So how do you get around it? Cena beats Punk because ADR interfered, Punk beats ADR because ADR gets pissy and walks the ramp, taking the countout, and ADR beats Cena because Punk distracted him.

Kind of a bad example because ADR is really nothing more than a heat magnet who's only involved so the fans can be split between Punk and Cena but still have someone to universally hate.

Tonight, excepting post-match shit, Punk went over ADR clean without a finisher, and I loved it, simply because I had no idea it was coming. Boot upside the head, ADR hits the floor, 3 count. The 900+ near falls in a lot of WWE matches do NOTHING for me because I know if it wasn't preceded by a finisher, it means nothing. This one threw me off. Minus the promos, it was an ok show. Everything related to Trips was horrid though.

Hell, I even saw a successful back body drop! I don't think I've seen one of those in 8 years. It's always boot to the head or sunset flip anymore. Cena appears to have dropped the Thesz press in favor of a much more realistic boxing combo that I kinda liked.

Shaemus had a REALLY bad spot in the battle royal where he failed to get over the ropes... I hate how they absolutely REFUSE to abandon a spot that didn't work out. Supposed to miss the brogue kick, get tangled up in the ropes, and fall over onto the apron. Instead he was sort of balancing himself on the ropes, trying pathetically to NOT look like he was falling over them on purpose. DROP THE SPOT, get there a different way, don't compound the problem by spending 10 minutes looking like a damn idiot! Sheamus is definitely my favorite in WWE, but that spot was horrid.

 

[EmpireWF]

Yep, Sheamus on the ropes brought some hahas.

A way to kill even steven booking is to not book all matches between main guys. No reason John Morrison should job in 2 minutes last week. You can use any number of guys who are barely on TV, if at all. It has the same effect.

Why bother having Ryder lose a title match to Ziggler, then immediately have Ryder pin Ziggler in a 6-man (after Mason Ryan turns face)? Nobody benefits.

Sure, it may hurt in the short term as you build guys up over time against "non-stars" or jobbers...but it will help. Guys like Ziggler, Swagger, Kingston, Sydal, Sheamus, Rhodes, etc. can come off looking like superstars. If you can do that, well, people won't tune out during their segments and maybe, JUST MAYBE, someday....one or two of them can actually become main eventers who can draw. It's worth a shot to keep the main event scene as fresh as possible over the years.

Look at Henry, a fucking bad ass right now. They've protected him for a couple months and he's the biggest bad ass they've had since Sheamus' big heel run. Sure, nobody is really going to pay to see Mark Henry in 2011...but it's the framework. Henry has been in the E on-and-off for 15 years with so many stop and start pushes, it's impossible to count. What if you give the logical booking to a younger guy who can go in the ring? GASP....they may get over!!!

It's not rocket science.

 

[adembroski]

Sure, it may hurt in the short term as you build guys up over time against "non-stars" or jobbers...but it will help. Guys like Ziggler, Swagger, Kingston, Sydal, Sheamus, Rhodes, etc. can come off looking like superstars. If you can do that, well, people won't tune out during their segments and maybe, JUST MAYBE, someday....one or two of them can actually become main eventers who can draw. It's worth a shot to keep the main event scene as fresh as possible over the years.

Another thing that bugs me... does the WWE not believe they can get someone over for just being a damn good wrestler? Wasn't that how RVD got over? Just great work in the ring? There is no reason certain people should be on the mic any more than absolutely necessary. Just give them chances to have great matches.

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

there is much more to booking them telling storys and puting worker a with worker b to get a good match

Elaborate.

Remember, I'm not talking about the exterior factors...I'm talking about the essence of it...which is simple story telling.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I think both organizations are overbooking.

WWE has a team of soap opera writers dissecting every minute of angles, promos, personalities, characters, etc. while at the same time Vinny Mac is changing every single thing 15 times.

TNA well c'mon it's Russo.

'Overbooked' seems to have become the blanket term for anything badly booked. There is no reason you can't have multi layered booking that makes sense. Gabe Sapolsky at his peak...nothing on any show was ever throw away. Every result mattered and advanced the story. But it all made sense.

The problem with the WWE is they have incredibly simplistic booking that makes very little sense.

Why are these arch rivals agreeing to team together?

Whyshould the heel tag team champs be used to put over the babyface hero in a handicapped squash, when you have a dozen jobbers to choose from to do the same thing?

Nobody does simple like Cornette. Go watch SMW tapes. You see every angle, every turn, every result from a mile away. But its all logical. Easy stroies like larry is talking about. Cornette is what the WWE needs, but he's a loon and can't get along with anyone.

TNA I guess you can say overbooks, but really its just Russo trying to fool everyone and be clever like its 1999. Again, the issue is it makes little sense because the characters lack proper motivation for their wacky actions. TNA is like two kids playing with wrestling figures in the backyard, topping each other with wacky angles.

Both groups run too many angles. Verne Gagne ran like one tv angle per year. But now these guys have boxed themselves into a corner. You have to have an angle every segment. Why do you think they run out of fresh ideas and recycle the same shit?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Remember watching Superstars and Wrestling Challenge years ago? Squash....squash.....squash....interview....squash.....HOLY SHIT! BORIS ZUKHOV ATTACKED NIKOLAI VOLKOFF WITH HIS BOOT! The Bolsheviks are HISTORY!

They would run a few angles per year, and you would go apeshit over a lower mid carder turning babyface.

Less is more.

 

[Bigpapa42]

Completely agree on less is more. Both the WWE and TNA have completely abandoned the idea of moderation. They have forgotten or don't care that when anything becomes frequent and common, it completely loses its impact.

Why it is impossible to remember any given John Cena promo, especially since he's pretty good on the mic? Because he comes out and cuts nearly the same "good" promo every week for the past 5 years. Why does it have zero impact when a heel interupts an authority figure trying to make an announcement? Because it happens every time? Why does Randy Orton losing his shit mean nothing? Because it he does it every two weeks.

TNA is even worse. Last year, when the WWE was first making an obvious effort to ensure there was zero blood, TNA went all in to show they were "different" by having everyone bleed all the time. They had Ric Flair bleeding on fans, Knockouts bleeding, even the commentary crew bladed for a few shows to feel like part of the team. If you want to make something loses its meaning and value, have it happen all the fucking time... that's not hard to figure out but TNA completely misses that concept.

 

[EmpireWF]

Things changed once they had to do live TV every Monday night. Had to one-up WCW for years and now they have no competition to one-up so they're just in the mud. Stuck in neutral for almost 10 years. Not a good look.

 

[BigBiss]

Elaborate.

Remember, I'm not talking about the exterior factors...I'm talking about the essence of it...which is simple story telling.

you cant take the "exterior factors" out, how you deal with them and work with them are just as inportant as the story you are telling

 

[EmpireWF]

Random variables I can think of any booker must deal with...

-Whether the worker can 'connect' with the crowd
-Injuries
-Misc. (arrests, suspensions, car accidents, mouths off to a drug test administrator, etc.)
-How well two particular guys work together (for example, Shawn hated working with Kennedy towards the end of his WWE run....then again, Orton has said publicly he doesn't like working with Mark Henry, so...)
-Whether Wrestler A can get over through no support from the booker (if he does, you have to do something with him, no?)
-TV/PPV commitments/schedule
-The worker's contract
-What the end game is of a particular storyline (is it to get a babyface over? to turn a heel or babyface? etc.)

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Random variables I can think of any booker must deal with...

-Whether the worker can 'connect' with the crowd
-Injuries
-Misc. (arrests, suspensions, car accidents, mouths off to a drug test administrator, etc.)
-How well two particular guys work together (for example, Shawn hated working with Kennedy towards the end of his WWE run....then again, Orton has said publicly he doesn't like working with Mark Henry, so...)
-Whether Wrestler A can get over through no support from the booker (if he does, you have to do something with him, no?)
-TV/PPV commitments/schedule
-The worker's contract
-What the end game is of a particular storyline (is it to get a babyface over? to turn a heel or babyface? etc.)

The "end game" should be determined first, and you work backwards from there.

It's obvious that TNA comes up with stories, has no idea where they are going, and not the first clue how it is going to finish.

For that matter, the WWE is the same way, except I think they actually know where they want things to go initially, but then change their minds 1,000 times.

The day he won it, Vince Sr told Superstar Billy Graham the exact date & location he would be losing the WWF Title, 18 months later.

 

[BigBiss]

If there not biting on the "end game" do you keep pushing and hope they come around, or do you change things up?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

If there not biting on the "end game" do you keep pushing and hope they come around, or do you change things up?

quite the dilemma

 

[BigBiss]

quite the dilemma

thats a common one, now what if Wrestler A dislikes Wrestler B, or when wrestler C comes out of leftfield and takes the world by storm.

 

[EmpireWF]

Or if wrestler A refuses to work with wrestler B because he slept with A's lady friend...

 

[BigBiss]

Or if wrestler A refuses to work with wrestler B because he slept with A's lady friend...

or as we like to call them in the "Buisness" "Rats" #insidertermeveryoneknows