Raw results 25/02

[Loki]

It just depends what sort of feud it is. Like with Angle and Benoit, they could wrestle every week and it only made the feud better, because the feud was about that ongoing competition. With some feuds though, it's the spectacle of the two in the ring, so they should meet as little as possible.

[Carbomb]

In the case of Rock and Triple H, it was probably down to Trips and DX doing something almost every week - I remember there being a lot of angles and promos. The problem with a lot of the feuds in WWE is that they're almost all matches and nothing else. Hence probably why people have enjoyed Cesaro/Miz so much.

[ColinBollocks]

Personally, I've yet to have my fill of Punk/Cena. It helps that when they're in a one on one environment nothing really gets near it, in terms of quality. I was a bit annoyed that Ryback's 'rise' and Cena's injury interfered with a lengthy Winter series.

 

I'd be happy if they kept it going as something to do during the Summer months.

[Carbomb]

I think I'd prefer it if they held off for a couple of years, to build towards a match based on "We've fought each other all these years, but never faced each other at WM - let's have one last match at WM, with the winner getting permanent bragging rights". Base it on the Rock/Austin XIX formula, but just with the one match.

[ColinBollocks]

Rock/Austin was a unique set of circumstances, though (post-WM 17). You had The Rock pissing off to do films for months, meaning they couldn't use him as much as they'd like, Austin even left for a period of time. WWE also had proper draws from WCW coming in and filling time by having 'dream matches' fighting their top blokes.

 

I'm not sure WWE have the luxury of holding that match off for long enough for that scenario to work.

[UK Kat Von D]

Thinking about it I would be happy to watch more Punk and Cena, on the condition there is actually a reason for it other than not having any other opponents

[King Pitcos]

I think I'd prefer it if they held off for a couple of years, to build towards a match based on "We've fought each other all these years, but never faced each other at WM - let's have one last match at WM, with the winner getting permanent bragging rights". Base it on the Rock/Austin XIX formula, but just with the one match.

 

Yeah, if they could keep away from each other until say WrestleMania 31, that could be a main event match. And it should. But instead, if they're having to feud every five or six months just out of lack of other opponents, then Cena vs Punk will never be special/rare enough to be worthy of that stage.

[Baz Windham]

They've managed it with Cena/Orton for a few years now (I know that was 17465 matches too late for you PITCOS) and they are/were both fairly big so hopefully they can do it for Cena/Punk for a good while to keep back any freshness it has. Of course Cena/Orton not wrestling has been helped because they've both been face pretty much since they last feuded.

[ShortOrderCook]

It's great when they manage to keep two great names apart for ages and they finally meet. It's a shame that is something that will barely ever happen now, but then also somewhat makes it all the more special when they do manage it. They did it TWICE with Undertaker and Michaels and the results were magnificent. They pretty much did it with Cena and Batista too. Just about the only thing that qualifies now is Cena vs Undertaker. I think they've crossed paths maybe twice since their initial 2003 run, at the MSG Raw and on one of the 3 hour Raw specials when they weren't all 3 hours and Teddy Long threw it together i think, because that's what he does. There's a definite feel that, that match needs to happen before Undertaker hangs it up and that the magic it would create simply has to be saved for WrestleMania XXX.

[PunkStep]

Brock VS Angle is another good one, SOC. WWE even hyped up a match between the two ages before Brock even debuted when running a feature on him (or development talent, I forget now) in WWE magazine. When he debuted, Angle was the man everyone wanted him to face, including me, and I nearly wee'd when they had their backstage chance 'bump into each other'. Can't remember when this was, Survivor Series 2002 perhaps?

 

Edit: on the other hand, TNA can really ejaculate prematurely with this sort of thing. How soon did they book Angle VS Joe? The first possible PPV?

[The King of Old School]

Taking this slightly off topic, but keeping it on topic aswell if you know what i mean.

 

But was this the start of a build up to a match between Sheamus/Barrett at Mania? If so, i mean what's the point? They must have faced each other around 20/30 times in the past 12 months, with Barrett winning none of them!

 

Also read somewhere that Jericho/Henry might be a undercard match for Mania.

[GPW Kristian Zane]

Brock VS Angle is another good one, SOC. WWE even hyped up a match between the two ages before Brock even debuted when running a feature on him (or development talent, I forget now) in WWE magazine. When he debuted, Angle was the man everyone wanted him to face, including me, and I nearly wee'd when they had their backstage chance 'bump into each other'. Can't remember when this was, Survivor Series 2002 perhaps?

 

Edit: on the other hand, TNA can really ejaculate prematurely with this sort of thing. How soon did they book Angle VS Joe? The first possible PPV?

Vengeance in July 2002

[ShortOrderCook]

Taking this slightly off topic, but keeping it on topic aswell if you know what i mean.

 

But was this the start of a build up to a match between Sheamus/Barrett at Mania? If so, i mean what's the point? They must have faced each other around 20/30 times in the past 12 months, with Barrett winning none of them!

 

Also read somewhere that Jericho/Henry might be a undercard match for Mania.

 

I find it incredibly shocking and baffling that WWE, the last few years seem to not have anything planned way ahead of time for 'Mania for a number of their top talent, outside of the major name part-timers. It's just madness, making the big plans for the part-timers is great and brings more attention, draws and focus for the show but surely with that you'll be wanting to establish your other guys on that same show for future years. We're not going to have Rock, Brock and 'Taker every year. That there is nothing big or obvious or exciting for Ryback, Sheamus, Big Show, Ziggler after their last 6 months or for Jericho, Henry, Barrett, Cesaro, Orton, The Shield, Sandow...yet Swagger has been brought back in and shoved into a World title program blows my mind really. I don't mind Del Rio and Swagger being put together, but i'm not crazy about it either. I get that it's to put Del Rio over and over big with the latinos, but it doesn't need to have Swagger challenging for the World title. I quite liked the idea of Ziggler vs Jericho for the World title on the show and Swagger vs Del Rio elsewhere on the card. If they insist on having the World title match open the show (which i quite like) then Ziggler-Jericho would make for a great opener.

 

It's amazing to me that they lack that long-term planning for such a vital part of their roster. And it's a massive shame for those who have put in awesome work over the last year that they don't get the chance to shine with something worthwhile and not just thrown together when there's going to be big names on the show. It must be a massive morale blow.

[wandshogun09]

It's great when they manage to keep two great names apart for ages and they finally meet. It's a shame that is something that will barely ever happen now, but then also somewhat makes it all the more special when they do manage it. They did it TWICE with Undertaker and Michaels and the results were magnificent.

 

Taker vs Michaels was the first thing that popped into my head reading this discussion as well. I was dying to see that match from about '95ish. I think I'd first thought about it during the KOTR tournament that year, where if Michaels had beat Kama (why the fuck was that booked as a draw by the way?) and Taker beat Mabel, they'd have met in the semis. Yeah, it would make little sense to have a match like Taker/HBK as anything but the finals, but I was 10. I didn't give it any more thought than 'imagine if that match happened'.

 

After that I was hoping it would happen during HBK's title run in '96. Then early '97 when all that Rumble-Mania craziness was going on and the Mania main event was up in the air. Finally, when Michaels cracked Taker with the chair at SummerSlam '97 and then turned heel, that opened the door. As it turned out, when they did it was the right time to do it. A babyface match in '96 would have been cool but it couldn't have matched the late '97 stuff when HBK was at the height of his prickishness and the perfect contrast to Taker's character.

 

I love that when they finally did meet, it more than lived up to my expectations and actually surpassed them. And like you say, even more mental is that they did it again a decade or so later.

[King Pitcos]

But was this the start of a build up to a match between Sheamus/Barrett at Mania? If so, i mean what's the point? They must have faced each other around 20/30 times in the past 12 months, with Barrett winning none of them!

I mentioned this earlier in the thread. Absolutely no intrigue to that match at all... And yet, what else are either of them gonna do at WrestleMania?

 

Taker vs Michaels was the first thing that popped into my head reading this discussion as well. I was dying to see that match from about '95ish. I think I'd first thought about it during the KOTR tournament that year, where if Michaels had beat Kama (why the fuck was that booked as a draw by the way?) and Taker beat Mabel, they'd have met in the semis.

To give Mabel the advantage over This Sabio Bega in the finals.