hallicks Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 Seems like WWE always just to give it Brock until the end of the season, like Chelsea do with Hiddink, when a title run hasn't worked out that well or Vince shits himself about ratings (again). Also, the spectre of Raw vs Smackdown teams is looming large as we approach November, an idea that absolutely nobody in the world can possibly buy into as a decent reason to have a match. Reminds me of my kid playing wii tennis where she puts herself on both teams. How could anyone care about this? Both of these things have been done to death, with no sign of new ideas shaping up. So which one is less inspired? Or more creatively out to lunch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted October 18, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted October 18, 2019 Brock as champ isn't new and isn't creative but it's by far the best option they have. He's the ONLY star on the roster now Cena has gone and they've killed the rest. Every decent marquee match they have involves him. They have to do it. Blue shirts/Red shirts is dull and horrendous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted October 18, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted October 18, 2019 WWE is very creative. They just have no patience and there is to many people putting their ingredients into the pot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Kat Von D Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 I don’t see any problem with Smackdown vs Raw at Survivor Series. Loads of people complain that there is no reason for brand loyalty and why they would fight to prove they have the superior brand. Guys get competitive in five a side football even if their team was picked ten minutes before the game. If you are on a team you want that team to win, that is how sports work. Really doesn’t matter if you have been on that team five minutes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hallicks Posted October 18, 2019 Author Share Posted October 18, 2019 I think its supposed to matter to the people watching, not the people taking part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CL Punk Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 1 hour ago, hallicks said: I think its supposed to matter to the people watching, not the people taking part. I think it should matter to the people taking part or at least they should pretend it does, otherwise what are we watching for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hallicks Posted October 18, 2019 Author Share Posted October 18, 2019 22 minutes ago, CL Punk said: I think it should matter to the people taking part or at least they should pretend it does, otherwise what are we watching for? Sorry, I didn't word that well at all. It's supposed to matter to them, but it's about convincing the audience that it matters as well. So, all the ingredients that usually make you care about a wrestling match: compelling personal issue/grudge; title on the line; other consequences/stipulation; star power; and so on. In a thrown together Raw vs Smackdown 5 on 5 match, most of the time, you have none of these, but we're supposed to believe the outcome matters... Why? Its just a game of 5 a side with people that want to win but with nothing for the audience to be invested in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Kat Von D Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 Well the main story is that of competition, but they usually have other stories told within that structure. If the match is boring, it is because they haven’t layered it with other things which interest you. But Smackdown vs Raw is totally fine as concept to build off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gaffer Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 I wonder what WWE's creativity would be like unfettered from their corporate narcissism. The point isn't to recreate the tone and sensibilities of the Attitude Era, but rather to role play as if you were going out of business. Where do you start with all that potential? Before we even get started with the rest of the roster you have Brock Lesnar under contract in a company whose decided to be arsed for a change. And it's got to be long term arsed, too. That's the thing. WWE right now pop angles and matches like they're season passes for extra content in a video game. It's been the biggest effect of the Network that hasn't been talked about, in my opinion. Shit gets radically thrown up and out at a moments notice to bump a monthly sub in a way they never used to do with PPV. Best example off the top of my head is Reigns/Cena. You can reference me movie schedules or the time's they are a-changin' but fucking hell, if those two were the guys in 1997 you better believe you'd be waiting for months for that teased clashed. They'd find a way to make it so. It was a decent match, good build up promos, but more than that it was ultimately an incentive. Just like He's Never Done Wrong Goldberg or Best Option Lesnar or Always Had Bad Matches Anyway Undertaker. Just an incentive wheeled out to pop Network subs without a further thought to retention, like Raw's and PPVs did try to do in their best day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted October 19, 2019 Awards Moderator Share Posted October 19, 2019 6 hours ago, UK Kat Von D said: Well the main story is that of competition, but they usually have other stories told within that structure. If the match is boring, it is because they haven’t layered it with other things which interest you. But Smackdown vs Raw is totally fine as concept to build off I think the issue people have with it - certainly that I have - is that they don’t use it as a concept to build off, they think the premise is enough on its own. So people who were trying to kill each other in Hell In A Cell the previous month are suddenly working together because they happen to work the same night, and there’s no hint or inclination that they were ever enemies. Then the night after Survivor Series, it’s as if all that cooperation never happened either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted October 19, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted October 19, 2019 Nobody is paying to watch a bunch of lads play 5 aside. Terrible analogy, dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Arch Stanton Posted October 19, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted October 19, 2019 2 hours ago, tiger_rick said: Nobody is paying to watch a bunch of lads play 5 aside. Terrible analogy, dude. People absolutely would if it was top tier professionals in a competitive environment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Curious Orange Posted October 19, 2019 Share Posted October 19, 2019 Time to bring back the Guinness Soccer Sixes at the G-Mex in Manchester and have the annual Raw Vs Smackdown match there! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_3165 Posted October 19, 2019 Share Posted October 19, 2019 Their main issue is that they hot shot everything because they have no patience. They also have mental 50/50 booking so nobody can get over. They needed to plan a year ahead. But then with hours of TV every week its not surprising they resort to matches over and over again.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted October 19, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted October 19, 2019 3 hours ago, Arch Stanton said: People absolutely would if it was top tier professionals in a competitive environment. Not if they watched them play for 5 hours a week already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.