Would Toning The Matches Down Make The Shocking Moves and Moments More Memorable?

[giblet55]

Two things happened yesterday that spawned this thread: 1. I watched an old school match from Japan where Big Van Vader and Bam Bam Bigelow faced the Steiner Brothers and 2. I read an interview with Triple H.

In his interview he discussed how the PG Era has helped the WWE make things fresh again. Since we've been stuck in a PG state for so long, any risky dialog or situations are shocking. He talks about how simple things like saying the word "ass," catches people off guard, but you would have heard it during the Attitude Era and it would have had little to no effect.

How does the Vader match tie into this? Well it got the old hamster runnin on the wheel pretty damn hard when I combined HHH's PG Era comments with the style of match I watched. It made me think, just like the PG Era toned things down to eventually open the door for risks again, could this work for the wrestling style as well?

Granted, this match took place in Japan and it's wrestlers were heavy hitters, but it was a semi slow and methodical match that told a story. There were a few moments where it blew your mind to watch old school Scott Steiner suplex an almost 400lb Vader into the ring.

My thought is, what if WWE toned back the flow of matches a bit, made them a tad bit more realistic. Limited some of the high-flying movesets not to cripple a highflyer, but make the moments they do leap that much more shocking. I'm not saying slow it down one hundred percent, but steer away from the onslaught of moves that a fan can predict and aim more for realism. For instance, in the last Raw main event, Swagger made how many people tap to the ankle lock? Almost the whole damn team...but did he attack their ankle? Did he target it the limb his finisher was meant for? Did he wear it down? Not really.

I feel like every match plays out the same way, where the face is owned for three quarters of the match, then he gets a second wind and picks up the win. Not that there haven't been good matches, I just don't feel a lot of them are logical. Opinions? Would toning the matches down make the shocking moves and moments more memorable?

I'll end this before I rant here forever, but I just think if they toned it back a bit, just for a short time...shocking moves and moments would feel that much more real and devastating.

 

[@smarkmouth]

I agree to an extent. In principle it's a good idea to slow down to punctuate the bigger spots. Still, I can't shake it out of my mind that this would feel counter productive to match quality. I'm not saying old school type match ups weren't good, but the WWE has since evolved. Maybe you're right though. When you're at the edge of a mountain, sometimes you have to go backwards to progress

I listened to a CM Punk interview on the Bill Simmons podcast where he had said something similar, but specifically in regards to hardcore matches. Punk said something along the lines of needing to tone down the danger in matches like Money in the Bank in order to make the highspots worth it. Years ago, Jeff Hardy Swanton Bombed Buh Buh Ray from a ladder through a table, and WWE has since tried to escalate from there. It's to the point where fans down react to "smaller" bumps, even though they can be just as dangerous.

I know I kinda talked myself in circles there, but I agree overall. Any kind of "slow down" would have to be very calculated, though.

 

[LegendKiller716]

I see where your coming from, but think about what your asking for. You want the WWE to tone down their matches and put out a bad product, and in return mediocre wrestling moments will seem great.

That's not good business. I think that WWE should be trying to raise the bar and let great moments be great.

Basically what your saying is a mid card guy from WWE should go to TNA because he will seem better in comparison, rather than trying hard to make it in WWE. It's the easy way out.

 

[Okay Fabian]

Interesting concept. Transferring the pulling back to PG rating to the in-ring aspects of wrestling.

I don't know that they should tone down every match 100% to mimic the old-school feel, but I think they could introduce the element of surprise back into matches. Nowadays moves like suplexes and bodyslams seem mundane and unimpressive, whereas years ago they could end a match. I'd like to see the so-called simple moves end matches when executed well and at the right time.

It's really interesting to go back and watch old matches because I'll see a move like an elbow smash from the top rope and think "Oh, he must be setting up for a finish" but then the elbow smash ends the match. It's interesting to see moves that are used today, but see the change in psychology that has happened. In reality, getting hit in the head with an elbow from the top rope would probably be enough to get a win.

When I first saw Sin Cara (Hunico) hit his Senton Splash into Moonsault combo for the win, I was underwhelmed. But then I looked at it in a different way (from an early 90s perspective). If Hogan's big boot put away the best of the day, then Cara's finisher should be able to put everyone away. It's just that there are many non-finishers and signature moves today that are much more spectacular than some of the finishers.

 

[giblet55]

I don't feel it would make for bad matches, but for more logical ones. I'm not saying completely slow it down, just tone down the high spots and big match moments. A great match moment can't truly occur if the individuals in the match are trying for too MANY big match moments. Even maximize the damage of a high spot to make it seem more devastating instead of linking three high spots together in succession.

For instance, let's say now Kofi would springboard off of the ropes onto R-Truth, then duck under a clothesline and kick him, then hit a missile dropkick, then go back to the ropes, and maybe get shutdown on his next move.

Instead, have Truth grounding Kofi, have Kofi hit Truth with a kick that stumbles him, then hit the springboard move, and have it send Truth to the outside or sell it as more devastating...if fans are expecting Kofi to hit as series of 4 high flying moves, how shocking is it? Its the same as the five moves of doom concept. You roll your eyes when you can predict where the match is going. Raising the bar too high leaves for nowhere to go and makes the product uninteresting anyways.

I'm not saying throw wrestler's styles out the window, but retool them so that a big moment move seems more devastating and almost match ending.

I liked how you said it Thrown, where fans are almost desensitized to the violence. They expect it, and predict it, but it's dangerous to a wrestler's career as well as life. If I like a guy, I'd like him to tell a story and entertain me for as long as his body provides, not try to shock me with 4 or 5 shocking moments in one match that end up seeming routine and shaving a year or more off of his career. Because once you start shocking a fan four or five times in one match, they expect 6 the next time, then seven...see Mick Foley.

 

[Papa Zapatista]

The whole PG era is an attempt to attract the children of Golden Era/Attitude era fans, so that they can enjoy a wrestling product together. Once these innocent naive Cena/Orton fans get a bit older, they can switch to a more risque format to keep them interested as teenagers.

But I really think WWE needs this "reality era" as a transition. Let's face it, every a-hole in the world thinks their life is important enough to advertise on Facebook, Twitter, or reality TV. It's a generational trend, and probably the future for entertainment. WWE needs to work the same magic they did with Punk and run off a bunch of shoots, keep people guessing, let events in real life shape storylines, etc.

You can transition from the fairy tale Supercena to CM Punk's bitchfest rants to both men clobbering each other in the parking garage until they are a bloody mess. That's not exactly what I'm asking for, but it's a general outline for the future. Ease into another edgy era, and keep the PG parts that worked. WWE needs to evolve, not totally repeat.

 

[FlairFan2003]

Television is the biggest problem - When shows were taped and you didn't have monthly pay per views you drew out stories/feuds longer to increase house show business. You also put very few main event caliber matches on TV, again to increase house show atendance.

The advent of Monday Nitro vs RAW changed that, first by Niro giving us main event matches with Hogan, Flair, Savage, Sting etc on a weekly basis, then by increasing the level of beatdowns, heel turns, etc, both to increase ratings but also to spike monthly PPV buyrates, which would become a huge revenue stream for wrestling companies.

ECW pushed things further, unable to come up with WCW's star power or WWE's financial reach, they promoted largely unknown stars in specialty matches, all with a "hardcore" edge to them, to draw attention away from The Big 2. It created a niche and for awhile worked.

We all know how oversaturated the product got in the late 90's, the Hogan Heel Turn, advent of NWO, DX, Attitude Era, etc.

Both major companies, plus ECW, pushed the envelope so much so fast to stay ahead of each other that wrestling fans got burned out. I can't even remember half the stuff that went on, it got so ridiculous for awhile, Kurt Angle spraying milk on people, Austin beating up Vince in the hospital, WCW squandering Hollywood Hogan vs Goldberg on free TV, etc. If anything I remember the shocking moments back in the 80's much better because the product moved at a slower pace, so those moments were fewer and farther in between. Flair turning on Dusty and breaking his leg in the cage, Savage dropping the time keepers bell on Steamboat's throat, Andre turning on Hogan and siding with Heenan, The Horsemen beating up a crippled Magnum TA at ringside in his first public appearance since his near fatal car accident to stop Dusty from pinning Tully Blanchard, those moments stood out more because such things were unexpected, they didn't happen as often.

Going PG does in a sense help make similair moments more surprising now, but fans are desensitized to the regular PG programming because they were so overloaded with crazy stuff all the time from 3 different companies in the 90's.

 

[Dagger Dias]

I don't see any harm in toning down the matches a little more. Trips made some valid points about having to scale back in order for pushing the envelope to have any effect. If the matches are held to a lower quality and if there is going to be a title switch or a huge moment then either one will feel like a bigger deal because we would have grown used to matches that are not a big deal. One thing is certain though.... If they toned down matches then it should only be on the tv shows. PPV matches need to remain held at a higher standard of quality.

 

[frostbite2819]

The whole PG era is an attempt to attract the children of Golden Era/Attitude era fans, so that they can enjoy a wrestling product together. Once these innocent naive Cena/Orton fans get a bit older, they can switch to a more risque format to keep them interested as teenagers.

But I really think WWE needs this "reality era" as a transition. Let's face it, every a-hole in the world thinks their life is important enough to advertise on Facebook, Twitter, or reality TV. It's a generational trend, and probably the future for entertainment. WWE needs to work the same magic they did with Punk and run off a bunch of shoots, keep people guessing, let events in real life shape storylines, etc.

You can transition from the fairy tale Supercena to CM Punk's bitchfest rants to both men clobbering each other in the parking garage until they are a bloody mess. That's not exactly what I'm asking for, but it's a general outline for the future. Ease into another edgy era, and keep the PG parts that worked. WWE needs to evolve, not totally repeat.

run off a bunch of shoots?
there have been three 'legit' (lol) worked shoots in wwe in the last ten years-paul heyman, joey styles, and punk.
the reason they were so effective is they were far and few between.
if it happened every week it would get boring and i can see a thousand people complaining about it on here within a month.
thats why punk is already getting stale, he needs to move past the expectations for him to shoot off every week, and just entertain us now.
when shane douglas started shooting on wwe and wcw in 94 or 95, it was new, fresh, and exiting. but it got old, and quick.
same with wcw's weekly shoots in late 2000 and tna's in 2010-2011.
you run out of things to shoot about and then you still gotta wrestle.

and the wrestlers dont need to tone it down, they are already toned down.
unlike previous era's, 95% of wwe's roster is trained in a specific wwe style, which is toned down by nature, which already makes the big spots bigger.
see sheamus and sin cara at MITB this year. taker/hhh at mania. things are fine the way they are, if you want crappy shoots and meaningless 'big spots' just watch tna.

 

[Paralyzer Z]

Hasn't that what both WWE and Tna done into the past 5 years along.

I vastly remember that the biggest high spot on last weeks raw as the shooting star press, and in seconded place was...... a jumping forearm? WWE has slowed it down already, you don't see Phoenix splashes or double rotation moonsaults as a finishers. You see kofi Kingston adding theatrics to very simple moves.

Tna has done this as well. The spots in previous ultimate X matches are far more dangerous than in the recent ultimate X matches. Neither company needs to tone it down and go back to 5-minutes of an standing armbar. They have toned it it down enough and are where they need to be

And believe it or not this coming from a spot mark who loves flips or "moves" as some fools have called complex maneuvers.