Paid Members air_raid Posted June 27, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted June 27, 2018 At least they let Alexa get through one entire episode of Raw as champion before they started beating her in non title matches. I really don't understand their fundamental lack of understanding that if you make your champions look weak, championships look weak. After MITB the story is that's Alexa's a crafty little cunt who screwed over two of the good guys and we can't wait to see her comeuppance. I've seen her get beaten 8 days later. What's the point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted June 27, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted June 27, 2018 (edited) On ‎6‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 4:46 PM, Yakashi said: You say the audience gets behind these people, but if you read Bryan’s book, business absolutely tanked with him on top. The trouble has always been that they eventually push the moves and flips guys that the TV fans want, then business tanks because the majority of fans don’t actually want to pay anything to see them, so they go back to Cena (and business goes back up a bit) and have the “we were right all along” self fulfilling prophecy scenario. Its actually the perfect time now (because nothing matters anymore after the mental TV rights money) to start trying some new guys though. Give Rusev a go. Try Balor. Bring up Adam Coles group and make a genuine killer heel faction like the shield. I don’t think anything will make a difference. But they can try. You're absolutely right, and I've made similar points myself about how the majority of the audience aren't as in to the Daniel Bryans and AJ Styleses of the world as the live crowds might make it appear, but I think my point still stands in terms of the live audience. I do find it surprising that WWE these days are so risk-averse. They've got big money TV deals, and don't have to worry so much about PPV buyrates now they've got the Network, you'd think it would be the perfect time to try new ideas and take some risks in terms of who they give opportunities to, or how they change up their storytelling, but the last few years they seem to have been playing it safer than any time I can remember since Hogan. Thing is, it's obviously working for them, as they're making ridiculous money, so why are they going to bother changing things just to appease people that insist they hate them but still pay for tickets to watch the show?  That said, I do find it interesting that the party line is "WWE is the draw, not any one superstar", yet we and they still put so much stock in who the champion is when considering why business is up/down. Edited June 27, 2018 by BomberPat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambulance Chaser Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 I honestly can't believe this 'Constable' Corbin is a real thing. I'm sat watching it in utter shock, and I shouldn't be, it's WWE. Fucking Constable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boytoy Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 Constable is such a peculiar word for the Americans to use it has to be some kind of rib. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambulance Chaser Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 It's like something off a Leslie Nielson buddy cop spoof, it's beyond mental. Why does he wrestle in a wedding suit, it's all hurting my brain I can't grasp it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merzbow Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 I read elsewhere that he looks like a mixologist at a hipster bar and I can't unsee that now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 15 hours ago, Supremo said: Such a waste. Especially when they're getting paid so much TV money and have so much time to fill. Just give them a hundred grand and tell them to make a month's worth of vignettes. It'd be awesome. That was kind of the mentality in WCW wasn't it? Â They'd throw crazy money at stupid ideas, and pretty much let talent do whatever they wanted with characters. It was entertaining at times, but messy. Here's the thing though - whilst we're all complaining about Vince's WWE (with some justification) from a creative point, you have to balance that with how crazily successful he is. Â The business has really turned around - incredible new tv deals, the WWE network which is an industry-leading example of how to monetise back catalogue and build a streaming service. Â He's got three successful touring companies now, running tv, house and PPV shows. We might think his decision making is suspect, but it continues to be an extraordinary success story - take something as perennially uncool and niche as men in pants hitting each other, and making billions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Supremo Posted June 27, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted June 27, 2018 (edited) Of course, from a success standpoint, WWE are essentially immune to criticism now. Although it could be argued that they've been successful in spite of their content - just being viewed as, "live sport,' was probably the biggest factor in getting those TV contracts - ultimately you're right in that you can't argue with the type of money they're going to be bringing in. Still, from a personal perspective, I just can't see the value in Matt Hardy if they aren't tapping into that daft universe he created. The buzz he managed to create for himself was the very reason they brought him back, and they must have seen the positive reviews the Ultimate Deletion received, I just can't understand why they only did it as a one-off. Of course, you don't want a repeat of WCW where millions are spent on badly-lit junkyard brawls that achieve nothing, but the Broken/Woken Universe is a proven commodity. If you aren't willing to give Matt some freedom to make some silly, fun vignettes, then why employ him at all? There are a million guys better than him if all he's going to be is a boring, one-note midcarder. Watching their (incredible) Network documentary really hammered it home. It's such a fun gimmick that created a tonne of buzz. The potential is there for him to make Raw a thousand times more enjoyable if given the chance to. Even if ends up with Michael Cole apologising beforehand, it's got to be better than the same boring, one-note characters having the same crap matches over and over until the end of time. Can anyone on the planet really be excited by the prospect of another few months of him and Bray tagging together? It's going nowhere. Edited June 27, 2018 by Supremo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted June 27, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted June 27, 2018 20 minutes ago, Supremo said: Of course, you don't want a repeat of WCW where millions are spent on badly-lit junkyard brawls that achieve nothing, but the Broken/Woken Universe is a proven commodity. If you aren't willing to do give Matt some freedom to make some silly, fun vignettes, then why employ him at all? There are a million guys better than him if all he's going to be a boring, one-note midcarder. The Network is what makes this even more baffling - TNA were willing to ride the publicity of the Final Deletion to such an extent that they gave up an entire episode to a "Hardy Compound"/"Broken Universe" show, but WWE don't even have to take anything like that kind of risk, they don't even necessarily have to put the "Broken Universe" stuff on TV - they can give Matt a platform to produce semi-regular content on the Network, and just point people in that direction. In other respects, though, I find it interesting that as the main TV product becomes ever more predictable and risk averse, what they do outside of that is more tailored towards a "hardcore" audience than anything else, and tries more new things than they'd ever normally do - pre-Network, we'd have never seen anything like NXT, the UK brand, the Mae Young Classic, the Cruiserweight Classic, and so on. It seems like they know they can put that sort of stuff on the Network and get their money out of the "indie" crowd every month regardless of what they put on TV, so don't have to worry too much about throwing them a bone on RAW and Smackdown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King of Old School Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 33 minutes ago, Supremo said: Â If you aren't willing to do give Matt some freedom to make some silly, fun vignettes, then why employ him at all? I'd guess because that way he isn't doing it elsewhere to create a buzz outside the company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FourtyTwo Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 2 hours ago, BomberPat said: they can give Matt a platform to produce semi-regular content on the Network, and just point people in that direction. If this happens, King Maxel has to go 2-0 in his career! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 WWE have created a “Strowman Argument” They don’t move the goalposts, they take a main debate point, make it shit, and still win the argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted June 27, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted June 27, 2018 7 hours ago, BomberPat said: The Network is what makes this even more baffling - TNA were willing to ride the publicity of the Final Deletion to such an extent that they gave up an entire episode to a "Hardy Compound"/"Broken Universe" show, but WWE don't even have to take anything like that kind of risk, they don't even necessarily have to put the "Broken Universe" stuff on TV - they can give Matt a platform to produce semi-regular content on the Network, and just point people in that direction. It's almost as if the people that oversee Network exclusive stuff, which is fantastic - like other parts of their empire such as NXT - and the people with the biggest influences over what an episode of Raw should look like, have completely different ideas about what good wrestling content looks and feels like to wrestling sports entertainment fans universe members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted June 28, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted June 28, 2018 10 hours ago, air_raid said: It's almost as if the people that oversee Network exclusive stuff, which is fantastic - like other parts of their empire such as NXT - and the people with the biggest influences over what an episode of Raw should look like, have completely different ideas about what good wrestling content looks and feels like to wrestling sports entertainment fans universe members. Which is probably true to an extent, but people producing Network content also have fewer external pressures from advertisers, shareholders, TV networks, sponsors, and so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted June 28, 2018 Share Posted June 28, 2018 Triple H has often been clear in interviews that NXT has a very different audience and remit than Raw, presumably to manage expectations for when he takes over Raw and doesn't turn it into NXT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts